HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2015-08-24 Item 4D - Discussion - 2015 Comprehensive Plan AmendmentsCOUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
Initials
Meeting Date
Prepared by
Alayars review
Council review
07/27/15
RF�v}
08/10/15
CO
❑ Motion
Mtg Date
❑ Resolution
Mtg Date
08/24/15
CO
Award
12 Public Hearing
❑ Other
R1lg Daf
A1tg Da
Arts_ Date
MIg Duce 8/10/15
ITEM INFORMATION
ITEM No.
103
STAFF SPONSOR: NORA GIERLOFF
ORIG NAI, AGENDA DATE.: 7/27/15
AGENDA ITEM TI'IIE 2015 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
C: I G oRY Discussion
4*/15
❑ Motion
Mtg Date
❑ Resolution
Mtg Date
[] O d/,z v ce
Mfg Date
■ Bid
Award
12 Public Hearing
❑ Other
R1lg Daf
A1tg Da
Arts_ Date
MIg Duce 8/10/15
SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Major ❑ HR DCD U Finance ❑ Fire ❑ IT
■ P&R ❑ Police ❑ PIV
SPONSOR'S The City is completing its phased periodic review and update of its Comprehensive Plan as
SUMMARY required by the Washington Growth Management Act. The Planning Commission has
reviewed the elements to be considered in 2015, and has sent its recommendations on the
Tukwila International Boulevard District, Housing, Residential Neighborhoods, Vision,
Introduction, Map Legend, Glossary to the City Council for action. The Council is being
asked to review the elements and hold a public hearing on 8/10/15.
Rlii'1E\vED BY ❑ CO\V Mtg. ❑ CA&P Cmtc
❑ Utilities Cmte ❑ Arts Comm.
DATE:
❑ F &S Cmte
❑ Transportation Cmte
Comm. ❑ Planning Comm.
CHAIR:
II Parks
COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SroNsoR /ADM
CoMM1Tim
N. Department of Community Development
No Committee Review
COST IMPACT 1 FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$
Fund Source:
Comments:
MTG. DATE
RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
7/27/15
Forward to work sessions and public hearing
8/10/15
Forward to next Committee of the Whole Meeting
MTG. DATE
ATTACHMENTS
7/27/15
Informational Memorandum dated July 15, 2015 with associated materials
* *Please Bring your Comprehensive Plan binders and materials **
€18/I[]/15
* *Please Bring your Comprehensive Plan binders and materials **
08/24/15
Informational Memorandum dated 8/18/15, with puhlir eminent matrix
* *Please Bring your Comprehensive Plan binders and materials **
103
104
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Haggerton
Committee of the Whole
FROM: Jack Pace, Director Department of Community Development
BY: DCD Staff
DATE: August 18, 2015
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Review and Adoption Schedule
ISSUE
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) deadlines for all jurisdictions to submit their
Comprehensive Plan updates are October 15, 2015 for a draft and December 31, 2015 for an
adopted plan. Compliance with the PSRC deadlines is necessary to receive Plan certification,
and maintain eligibility for grants during the 2016 cycle. Staff has been in regular contact with
PSRC staff, and they are aware of Tukwila's consistent progress.
BACKGROUND
The City Council is currently completing the final portion of a multi -year review and update of the
City's Comprehensive Plan. In order to meet the requirements of the State Growth
Management Act, and also to have the updated Comprehensive Plan certified by the Puget
Sound Regional Council, the City must complete its review, adopt and submit the final
Comprehensive Plan in 2015.
2015 City Council involvement in the Comprehensive Plan update has included the following:
January & February – Joint City Council /Planning Commission TIB Visioning Meetings
March & April —Joint City Council /Planning Commission Work Sessions on Housing and
Residential Neighborhoods Elements
July & August —Work sessions /review for Introduction, Vision, Glossary, Land Use Map,
Tukwila International Boulevard, Housing, Residential Neighborhoods
August 10, 2015 — Public Hearing
DISCUSSION
Upcoming events and deadlines for Comprehensive Plan review and adoption are listed below:
• Work Session: August 24, 2015
• Work Session: September 14, 2015 (if needed to complete review and finalize
document text)
• Format /Produce Document: Requires approximately 4 weeks (Alternatively, the finalized
Comprehensive Plan can be adopted as text with final formatting done after the
document has been adopted.)
• Adopt document: no later than final 2015 Council meeting (December 14)
FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A
105
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
Council is requested to complete its review, finalize the remaining language and adopt the
Comprehensive Plan by the end of 2015.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Vision, Introduction, Glossary, Land Use Map Legend Comment Matrix & Comment Letters
B. Tukwila International Boulevard District Element Comment Matrix & Comment Letters
C. Housing Element Comment Matrix & Comment Letters
D. Residential Neighborhoods Element Comment Matrix & Comment Letters
E. General Comment Matrix & Comment Letters
H:11 InfoMemo 8- 19- 15.doc
106
Vision, Introduction, Glossary and Land Use Legend
Issues Matrix
Row
#
Page #
Comment
(language changes in strikeout /underline, recommendation
in bold)
Exhibit #/
Date /Source
Staff comment /analysis /options
INTRODUCTION
1
p.1
2nd Paragraph, 2nd sentence -- Acknowledge that Tukwila
was welcoming individuals from other lands prior to the
1995 Comp Plan adoption.
Pam Carter, letter to
City Council, 8/10/5
Staff Recommendation: Revise wording as follows -- Tukwila continues
to be enlivened by an influx...
2
p.2
2nd Paragraph - -Add specific statement of consistency with
multi- county planning policies
Staff edit for PSRC
certification report,
8/11/15
Staff Recommendation: Add the following wording - -A malor
emphasis of the GMA is the coordination and consistency of local,
regional and state planning efforts. This includes consistency with
adopted multi- county planning policies, including VISION 2040, and
county -wide planning policies.
3
p.2
4th Paragraph - -add "multi- county"
Staff edit for PSRC
certification,
8/11/15
Staff Recommendation: Add the following wording: Tukwila's
Comprehensive Plan, however, is more than a response expressed in
the Growth Management Act, multi- county policies, and the King
County policies implementing it regionally.
4
p.4
Top of page -- Capitalize "District"
Pam Carter, letter to
City Council,
8/10/15
Staff Recommendation: Revise wording as follows -- Tukwila
International Boulevard District...
5
P.5
2nd paragraph - -- Certain elements are no longer needed per
updates that have been made in the Plan. Add wording to
reflect deleting the discussion of "Obstacles to the Plan"
section and the Annexation and Maintenance of the Plan
elements.
Staff edit , 8/17/15
Staff Recommendation: Add the following: During the 2015
Comprehensive Plan update, the introductory "Obstacles to Plan
Achievement" section, as well as optional Annexation and
Maintenance of the Plan elements were deleted as they have
accomplished or are covered in other parts of the PIan.The issues
discussed in the "Obstacles to Plan Achievement" have been
addressed in a positive and action - oriented manner through policies
and strategies in the "Community Image and Identity" and "Roles and
Responsibilities" elements. Proposed annexations have been largely
accomplished, and remaining annexation - related issues are
addressed through policies in the Community Image and Identity, and
Tukwila South elements. Policies that pertain to revising and
updating the Comprehensive Plan have been codified in Tukwila
Municipal Code chapter 18.80
6
p.5
2nd to last paragrah, 1st sentence - -Which "five areas ?"
Pam Carter, letter to
City Council,
8/10/15
Staff Recommendation: Clarify this and add wording for PSRC.
Delete sentence #1- - "The majority of the City's jobs and housing are
or will be located with the five following areas which are the focus of
the City's planing efforts."
Revise sentence #2 to read as follows: "Tukwila will plan capital
improvements and services to achieve its vision and goals, with
sufficient capacity for growth targets in housing and employment
through the planning period to 2035."
7
p.6
Last sentence -- Correct date is "2011," rather than "2012."
Staff edit, 8/17/15
Staff Recommendation: Revise to say: The Plan has been kept current
with specific annual updates as well as more comprehensive review in
2004 and in a phased review from 2011 through 2015.
VISION
8
p.1
First sentence -- Change wording for clarity
Pam Carter, letter
to City Council,
8/10/5
Staff Recommendation: Revise to read "We seek to enable our
residents to appreciate, participate in and enjoy the many benefits of
a healthy, thriving natural environment.
9
10.3
Page 3, 2nd paragraph, 4th Sentence -- Encourage
participation of "newer" as well as "long- term" residents,
and acknowledge their contributions to the community.
Pam Carter, letter to
City Council, 8/10/5
Staff Recommendation: Simplify and revise to read "We encourage
the social and civic engagement of all community residents, who are a
tremendous resource and have much to contribute."
GLOSSARY
10
p.2
Concurrency -- change "meet" to "meeting"
Pam Carter, letter to
City Council,
8/10/15
Staff Recommendation: Revise to read: " Concurrency: Concurrency
means that streets, sewer, water and surface water facilities or the
funds required for the improvements_ meet the City's adopted
standards that are in place at the time they are needed.
11
Add a definition of "Historic Preservation"
Joan Hernandez,
email to DCD staff.
8/17/15
Staff Recommendation: Include a definition of Historic Preservation
with elements from comment and King County:
"Historic Preservation means safeguarding the existence and
appearance of historically significant elements of the community and
the area, such as buildings, sites, objects, districts and landscapes,
archaeological resources and traditional cultural places to help
maintain historic, architectural, and aesthetic character and heritage,
and provide a sense of place and continuity."
OBSTACLES TO PLAN ACHIEVEMENT
W: \Long Range Projects \2014 CompPlanUpdate \CITY COUNCIL \TIB Housing NH July August 2015 \CC Hearing -- 8.10.15 \Intro, Vision, Glossary, Legend -- Matrix-- .xls107
12
Delete this discussion from Comp Plan.
Staff edit, 8/17/15
Staff Recommendation -- Delete. These issues are fully addressed in a
positive, actionable manner in the "Community Image and Identity"
and "Roles and Responsibilities" elements. See wording in
"Introduction" , Row 5 above.
LAND USE LEGEND
13
p.1
Mixed Use - Office -- Clarify punctuation, format for second
sentence
Pam Carter, letter to
City Council,
8/10/15
Staff Recommendation -- Revise to read: Mixed -Use Office: "...These
uses and densities are modified where covered by the Tukwila South
Overlay."
14
P.3
The Urban Renewal Overlay District is not listed in the
Special Overlays section
Staff edit, 8/17/15
Staff Recommendation -- Include a new section: Urban Renewal: An
overlay area which applies the Tukwila International Boulevard
Revitalization and Urban Renewal Plans. The intent is to promote
community redevelopment and revitalization, and to encourage
investment that supports well - designed, compact, transit - oriented
and pedestrian - friendly residential and business developments to
activate the community along Tukwila International Boulevard.
108 WALong Range Projects \2014 CompPlanUpdate \CITY COUNCIL \TIB Housing NH July August 2015 \CC Hearing -- 8.10.15 \Intro, Vision, Glossary, Legend -- Matrix - -.xlsx
Puget Sound Regional Council
PSRC
August 11, 2015
Rebecca Fox, Department of Community Development
City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 98188
Subject: PSRC Comments on Draft Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Elements
Dear Rebecca,
Thank you for providing an opportunity for the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) to review a draft
of the housing and Tukwila International Boulevard District elements for the City of Tukwila 2015
Comprehensive Plan update. We recognize the substantial amount of time and effort invested in this plan,
and appreciate the chance to review it while in draft form. This timely collaboration helps to ensure
certification requirements are adequately addressed and certification action can be taken by PSRC boards
after adoption.
PSRC reviewed and commented on the draft transportation, capital facilities, utilities, natural
environment, shoreline and urban center elements in 2013. This review addresses only policies and
provisions in the housing and Tukwila International Boulevard District elements.
In addition to the many outstanding aspects of the draft plan that we noted in our previous letter, other
noteworthy aspects include:
• A thorough housing needs assessment, which provides a multilayer analysis of the current and
future housing needs for the city. Additionally, the key findings from the needs assessment have
been thoughtfully analyzed and translated into priority issues for the city.
• Inclusion of actionable implementation strategies for each housing goal.
• Policies in the International Boulevard element that emphasize innovative economic development
strategies and commitment to equitable development in the transit station area.
The draft comprehensive plan advances regional policy in many important ways. There are some items,
however, that should be considered before the plan elements are finalized:
• As a signatory to the Growing Transit Communities (GTC) Regional Compact, the City of
Tukwila has an opportunity to demonstrate a commitment in its comprehensive plan to promoting
thriving and equitable transit- oriented development. The city addresses this commitment in the
Tukwila International Boulevard District element and includes policies that support the intent of
the Compact. The plan could be further strengthened by including policies or discussion that
specifically addresses transit - oriented development in the housing element.
• The plan horizon year appears to be misstated in Housing Policy 3.1.1. Prior to adoption, the city
should review plan elements to ensure a consistent horizon year throughout.
• The city should consider developing a timeline for or prioritization of strategies in the housing
element to support timely and effective implementation.
PSRC has resources available to assist the city in addressing these comments. We have provided links to
online documents in this letter, and additional resources related to the plan review process can also be
found at http:/ /www.psrc.org/growth/planreview /resources /.
109
Thank you again for working with us through the plan review process. There is a lot of excellent work in
the draft and we are available to continue to provide assistance and additional reviews as the plan moves
through the development process. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact me
at 206 - 464 -6174 or LUnderwood- Bultmann @psrc.org.
Sincerely,
Liz Underwood- Bultmann
Associate Planner
Growth Management Planning
cc: Review Team, Growth Management Services, Depailinent of Commerce
2
110
August 10, 2015
Dear Tukwila City Council,
I would like to express my support for the Draft Comp Plan Elements that are the subject of tonight's
public hearing. I am not speaking on behalf of TIBAC; these are my personal remarks.
Below are my general comments on each element, followed by specific recommendation for changes.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer my comments.
Sincerely,
4115 S. 139th St.
Tukwila, WA 98168
Tukwila International Blvd. Element
1
I am pleased that the draft you are considering very closely matches the vision developed by TIBAC. We
spent two years discussing, reconsidering, and ultimately adopting The Boulevard: Our Vision for the
Future which we presented to the Tukwila City Council a little over three years ago in April 2012. I ask
that you reread the faux article Small City Realizes Big Dream (see page 4 of this letter) that came out of
our 2008 training with the Pacific Institute. Then ask yourselves if this Comp Plan will help make this
vision a reality.
I've also included a map to show you how close together the Village and TOD Nodes are. It is imperative
that the City acts quickly to adopt zoning or a master plan for both areas. It would be a shame if a
desirable development went to another city (Renton, Kent, etc.) because we were dragging our feet.
As you review your draft, remember that unless specified, the goals and policies pertain to the entire TIB
District which includes quite a lot of residential neighborhoods.
Page 4 — Figure 1
I have some concerns about the boundaries of the Tukwila Intl. Blvd. District. The northern
portions of the District (north of S. 139th and S. 140th Sts.) do not really have a relationship to TIB as they
are separated from TIB due to their topography. The western portion is on a hillside and only one street,
S. 132nd St., provides access to TIB. To the east, only S. 130th St. provides access to the residential area
that is below TIB. By comparison, the neighborhoods east of 42nd Ave. S. are more directly affected by
conditions along TIB, yet are not part of the District.
Perhaps I don't understand the reason for including these areas in the District.
Page 12 — Goal 8.2
I support using nodes of more intensive development. As TIBAC began work on its TIB vision, we
came to the realization that different areas, which we called segments, had distinct characteristics.
111
2
Page 13 – Figure 2
This figure clearly shows the relationship and general location of the two nodes. However, it is
also important to see how close together the two nodes are. Please see my Figure 1 at the end of this
letter. Note that the SRO property south of SR 518 is within a %z mile of the light rail station.
Page 15 — Implementation Strategies, Village Node, 2nd bullet
I agree the URO boundaries should be adjusted to facilitate development. I encourage you to
take the 1/2 mile radius into account when revising the boundaries.
Page 16 — bullet above the sidebar box
I'm not sure what a conference /training center would bring to the Village Node. My experience
is that attendee's meals are catered, and they leave the center immediately after the meeting. What we
need is more activity on the street and patrons for our local businesses.
Page 16 — TOD Node, 1st bullet
It is vitally important that you develop a vision and master plan for this area so the City is ready
if a developer comes along. Someone could be looking to do a development outside of but near to
Seattle. If we don't have zoning, etc. in place, that person would just go to another city such as Renton
or Burien where it's easy to determine what type of development would be allowed.
Page 18 — Land Use Outside the Nodes
Note that unless otherwise specified, these policies are for the entire TIB District outside of the
nodes.
8.2.10 — I don't believe that opportunities for retail should be expanded into the residential
neighborhoods of the District.
8.2.11 — Light industrial may be appropriate on commercial properties along or near TIB, it is not
appropriate in residential neighborhoods.
8.2.12 — I support this policy and would remind you that most areas outside the nodes where
multifamily housing will be built are not on TIB. In other words, they may be on side streets off of
TIB.8.2.14 — TIB between S. 128th and S. 137th Sts, with the exception of the Sierra Sue Apartments,.
is not predominantly residential in use or character. So this statement should be rewritten to apply
to the residential neighborhoods away from TIB.
Pages 18 & 19 — Policy 8.2.15
I support this strategy to explore other zoning for these parcels such as the former Bernie &
Boys site. At TIBAC we had a lot of discussion about these parcels. We noted that: "For most of this
segment, the topography limits the amount of developable property that accesses the Boulevard, and
most of the single - family homes are grade- separated from the Boulevard. For those reasons, we support
a compatible mix of businesses and residential development."
I would also encourage you look at the sentence about affordable housing then read the
strategy on the top of page 21. If housing were to be developed on any of these parcels, I wouldn't have
a problem with ground floor living units. In fact, requiring retail or office on the ground floor would
almost ensure that housing would not be built on any of these parcels.
112
3
Page 19 — Policy 8.2.18
Gateways should also include the name of the district as mentioned in the first Implementation Strategy
as shown on page 35. They could also include banners. So revise this to read. "Use architectural and
landscape elements along with signage and banners to mark transitions..."
Page 21 — bullet
This strategy should be removed. Remember, it applies to the entire TIB District including the area
outside the nodes. We have many stand -alone apartment buildings, such as both Samara buildings, with
ground floor living units.
Page 23 — Policy 8.4.2
The last line has a typo: "tothe" needs a space inserted.
As an example of a continuous building wall with off - street parking, see my Figure 2. It shows an L-
shaped building with parking behind and alongside building. (Google Street View gives a much better
view than my photo.)
Page 31 — first bullet
See my Figures 3 and 4 for examples of woonerfs in residential areas.
113
4
SMALL CITY REALIZES BIG DREAM
• REALIZATION OF 15 YEAR VISION CREATES NEW LLNh FOR TUKWILA CITIZENS
BY I.M. SURPRISED
SEATTLE (AP) Tukwila, a diverse, historic city in Washington State celebrated the grand opening of
Tukwila Village — an innovative, visionary community gathering place. The key strategies for including all
members of the community in the development process have become a national model.
Tukwila's many positive attributes attract people from all walks of life, and from all over the world. The city is
centrally located with great access to all types of transportation, plane, train, automobile and pedestrian. It is the
home to the largest shopping center on the West Coast with cutting edge retail shops. A jewel in the scenic
Northwest, there are splendid views of Mount Rainier from many areas in the city. Tukwila also has an exten-
sive park system with hundreds of miles of bike/walking trails, an international soccer complex, aquatic center
and world class convention center. Several high -tech industries specializing in everything from bio -tech and
health care to aerospace and global communications have chosen to locate in the city. These companies rely on
Tukwila's diverse population to staff their businesses. There are more than 64 languages spoken in the city's
schools. The sign entering the city expresses this diversity "We Welcome the World ".
On Wednesday, September 15, Governor Gregoire will recognize the resourcefulness of the Tukwila Mayor and
City Council with the JFK Excellence in Government Award for its innovative community driven transforma-
tion of a former highway corridor into a high quality urban boulevard. In addition the American Institute of Ar-
chitects awarded the prestigious Thomas Jefferson Award for Public Architecture to the city for the quality of its
aggressive mix of residential /neighborhood design and shopping environment. A soft wheel trolley now serves
the new residents and employees in the area connecting them to the local light rail, businesses, neighborhood
parks and services. Moderate income high - amenity housing has increased by 30% in the last four years and local
jobs on the boulevard have increased by 50 %. Despite initial resistance among core constituencies in the city,
new municipal offices built in the area kicked off and supported the transformation.
"We love the new location of City Hall across from Tukwila Village ", said Mrs. Barbara Bean owner /operator
of the new Boulevard Coffee Shop. "The Boulevard Coffee Shop is percolating. People can't stop talking about
the Boulevard and are waiting for vacancies in the many properties. The real estate market here is booming."
The other citizens in the area echo Mrs. Bean's sentiments:
"I'm really excited about the new Swedish bakery."
"The entertainment options are great, international films and live theatre."
"The Boulevard has created a positive attitude in the minds of tourists."
"I love Tukwila."
In a surprise move announced earlier today Deja VU Showgirls acquired ownership in Cowgirls Espresso. As
part of the merger the new corporation, Deja vu Cowgirls, will be closing their operations in Tukwila and relo-
cating to a new property now under construction in Bellevue.
Three years ago the corner of 144th and Tukwila International Boulevard was a vacant lot. Now it's a center for
the community of Tukwila, providing government and commercial services in close walking distance to Tuk-
wila's residential neighborhoods. Investors from India, China and Canada to name a few are realizing what local
investors have known for years. The once tarnished reputation of what was known as Highway 99 has been re-
placed with pedestrian- friendly storefronts, new multi - family and single - family housing. What this journalist
has discovered is that it's not the beautiful landscaping, charming shops or diverse ethnic restaurants that have
changed this boulevard, the driving force of this change has been the residents themselves.
TIBAC created this vision as part of our Pacific Institute trainings, in July 2008.
114
5
Figure 1
Green circle 1/ mile radius
Blue circle '/2 mile radius
The general rule of thumb is that most people are willing to walk 1/4 to catch transit. Usually 1/2
mile is the furthest people will walk to transit.
Note that S. 146th St. (the south side of Saar's market) is approximately I/2 mile from the light rail
station.
115
Figure 2
Central Avenue Plaza in Kent on Central Ave S. just south of its intersection with W. Smith St.
Figure 3
Woonerfs where users share the street without boundaries such as lanes and curbs
116
Figure 4
6
7
Housing Element
I strongly support this element's emphasis on a diversity of housing choices. Not everyone wants a 3
bedroom, 2 bath with a large yard. Young techies go for small apartments or condos. Some empty
nesters want to stay in their current homes, some want smaller houses with smaller yards, others want
to rent an apartment while they use their equity to fund world travel. Different choices for different
folks. I was very surprised to see the strong support for housing diversity shown at The Community
Conversations held last year. Good design guidelines and good design review makes all the difference.
I understand you face conflicting demands — better /more low- income housing, more middle- & higher -
income housing to provide a balance, no more big houses, no two -story houses, no more density, a
requirement to accommodate more housing units, etc. There is no way to do all of this and keep
everyone happy.
Please keep in mind that ADUs are a great solution for accommodating an older relative or even a young
family member because it allows them to live independently while being close enough for you to keep
an eye on them.
Don't be afraid of change because if you require new housing to match what already exists, we won't
get any new development. No one is building 1960s ramblers today.
Page 3 — Home Ownership Options
Delete "hoping to 'age in place. "' because the current range of housing options doesn't
accommodate seniors who are looking for other types of living units, not just seniors who want to
remain in their own homes. In fact, since much of the City's single - family homes are one - story, many
seniors are able to remain in their homes as they age, if that is their choice. What we lack is other types
of housing that seniors can move to if they choose to give up their large homes with large yards.
Page 4 — Policy 3.2.1
I would not support changing the wording of this policy as "diverse" is the right word. Diversity can refer
to many attributes, not just racial diversity. I have heard people say they chose to live in Tukwila not just
because of its multi - cultural flavor, but because of the variety of homes in our neighborhoods. They do
not value uniformity. The policy as written supports a diversity of housing in our neighborhoods.
Page 5 — Implementation Strategies
First bullet — remove "attached" from the description of ADUs. Judging from the public
response at last year's two Community Conversations, residents support allowing detached ADUs if they
are done carefully. See Figures 5 & 6 where the 3rd photo (counting down) shows a detached ADU in the
side yard and the 8t" photo shows a single -story cottage in the rear yard. The example they didn't like
was the 5th photo, a bright blue, three -story tower in the side yard. I believe that good design, adequate
parking, etc. is more important than whether or not the ADU is attached to the main house.
Second bullet — remove both instances of "limited" in this strategy. The previous
demonstration project limitations were overly cautious and restrictive. If we continue in this vein, we
will have the same results, no cottage housing, etc. I believe the City should develop codes for these
housing types rather than limit them to demonstration projects. Other cities have allowed them for
many years. Tukwila should note their lessons learned and adopt realistic, workable regulations.
117
8
Sixth bullet — I believe the wording recommended by the Planning Commission should be
retained. This would give the City control over the locations of affordable housing so it is not clustered
into a ghetto. By specifying the type and characteristics of the housing, as well as the location, Tukwila
would be assured that affordable housing is attractive and integrated into our community.
Page 9
Policy 3.6.2 — Revise the sentence so it reads: "Encourage long -term residency by providing a
range of home ownership options suitable for people in all stages of their lives." This would mean small
rental units for busy, young singles, larger houses for families, and smaller homes for looking to simplify
and downsize.
Implementation Strategies — add a new strategy: "Develop relationships with existing
homeowner and neighborhood associations." The fifth bullet talks about helping to develop
associations, but there are at least several current homeowners associations in Tukwila. The City would
not want to provide on -going support to these groups but should definitely develop relationships with
them.
118
71ccessory Units
Unidadnde hccnodu •
uaw7ada �,raada ah
• .•• • . • .
:i• • *i •
Figure 5
cceSSOrY UnitS
•
•
Gud labaad Go ko dhapun
Unldades de ACCesorfa • Aia411 ul
unuAVada sIYaada ah - +y+';. ++•,
G GH .t
Figure 6
9
119
10
Residential Neighborhoods
Compliments to whomever developed the map of neighborhoods on page 4. Well done!
I would like to add a word of caution about neighborhood councils as they exist in some cities. They
often become mini - planning commissions with the power to nix projects because they are focused only
on their neighborhood and their narrow interests. Contrast that to our Planning Commission and City
Council who take a more holistic view on what is best for the city overall. In some cities, a neighborhood
council would have prevented Tukwila Village from being built. It is great to get neighborhood input,
that should be done, but the Council and the Planning Commission should be the ones making the
decisions.
Page 6 — Noise Abatement
I challenge you to cover the Noise Abatement title with your finger, and then carefully read this
paragraph. Did you get the sense that this is about protecting neighborhoods from noise? Does it even
mention noise? Maybe all it needs is to replace "encroachment" with "noise ". It definitely needs
something to make clear that the topic is focused on protecting neighborhoods from noise including
auto traffic, airports, and light and heavy rail.
Page 8
Policy 7.2.4 — The suggested change to "Use new development to foster..." doesn't seem quite
right to me. I'd suggest revising it to read: "New development should foster a sense..."
Fifth bullet — This could be a little clearer. Would sidewalks be required only in the specified
areas? Or does it mean that the LID option would only be available in specified areas? If it is the latter,
then I would revise to read: "Require sidewalks adjacent to all new development. Develop criteria to
offer an alternative option for participation in a no- protest LID."
Page 9 — Second bullet
"maintain" should be "maintains"
Page 10 — Implementation Strategies, Eighth bullet
These strategies are to support the goal of neighborhood sustainability by continuing
enhancement and revitalization of residential neighborhoods to encourage long -term residency and
environmental sustainability. Therefor an implantation strategy that focuses on new single - family
homes is incomplete. It should be revised to include other types of housing as in: "Development of a
variety of new housing including single - family homes as well as townhomes, etc."
Page 11 — First and second bullets
I do not support requiring landscape planters on residential streets. Personally, I like them but
have several reasons for my opposition. Homeowners often neglect them, leaving a weedy or bare patch
between the street and the sidewalk. They don't fit the current pattern in much of our residential
neighborhoods. This is a major change in policy; it is not something the City has usually required. If you
must keep the landscape planters, I'd suggest revising it to say: "Require sidewalks and, where
appropriate, landscape planters for both sides of residential streets and where appropriate on 2 -lane
street improvements."
120
11
Page 12 — Implementation Strategies, Third bullet
This bullet conflicts with Housing Element Policy 3.1.2 which calls for exploring adopting smaller
lots sizes in residential neighborhoods. I support changing "Revise" to "Explore" in order to align it with
the cited housing policy. I would revise it to read: "Explore maintaining standard minimum lot size of
6,500 SF but allowing smaller lot sizes subject to ..."
Page 15 — Policy 7.5.1
Make this clearer by revising to say: "...one- quarter mile of residential areas to those
neighborhoods with ..."
Page 16 — Goal 7.6
This goal and accompanying policies were written when Southcenter Blvd. was the name of the
street east of 1 -5. The street to the west of 1 -5 was called South 154th Street. These policies are
appropriate for the area east of 1 -5, but do not pertain to the western portion of the street. For instance,
in the west Southcenter Blvd. does not "act as a buffer to the low- density residential neighborhoods to
the north." Just to be clear, Southcenter Blvd. is the road between City Hall and 1 -405 that continues
west and goes under 1 -5 all the way to the city limits at International Blvd. Therefore, the goal and
policies should be rewritten so that it is clear they are for only the eastern portion of the road. The
second implementation strategy should be deleted as the street lies outside of the area covered by the
Southcenter Plan.
Glossary
Page 2 — Concurrency
"meet" should be changed to "meeting" so the sense of the sentence is that facilities meeting
standards are in place at the time needed. It would read: "...facilities, or the funds required for the
improvements, meeting the City's adopted ..."
Land Use Map Legend
Page 1 — Mixed -Use Office
It's a little hard to read the revised punctuation, but the first sentence should end with a period
after "residential uses." Then to match the pattern used in the LDR and MDR definitions on the same
page, the next sentence should begin: "These uses and densities ..."
Vision
Page 2 — Pride of Place, We Value Our Environment, 15t sentence
The sentence needs revised by inserting "in" after "participate" and replacing "from" with "of"
so it reads: "... residents to appreciate, participate in, and enjoy the many benefits of a healthy,..."
Page 3 — We Seek To Provide Opportunities For Residents, 4th sentence
I believe we should also encourage the engagement of people who are not long -term residents.
The sentence should be revised to read: "We encourage the social and civic engagement of both our
long -time and newer residents who together are a tremendous resource and have much to contribute
to our community."
121
12
Introduction
Page 1 — Introduction, 2 "d paragraph, 2nd sentence
This sentence needs revised as Tukwila was already welcoming refugees to our community prior
to 1995. In the 1980s Southeast Asians arrived in Tukwila. Following them, our community saw Poles,
Russians, Mexicans, Central Americans, and Somalis arrive to begin their new lives in the United States.
So the 2 "d sentence should read, "Tukwila continues to be enlivened by an influx..."
Page 4 — top of page, #2
"District" should be capitalized so it reads: "...reinvigorate the Tukwila International Boulevard
District both ..."
Page 5 — 2 "d to last paragraph, 15T sentence
This refers to five areas but does not identify them.
122
TO: TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL August 16, 2015
RE: PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS
I apologize that I needed to leave the August 10 Public Hearing before my name was called to
testify.
I also attended the Planning Commission Public Hearing on June 25, 2015. I was able to testify
at that time and my comments appear in the June 25, 2015 Minutes of the Planning
Commission meeting. The Planning Commission members seemed receptive to the request I
made in my public comments and the Planning Commission Minutes reflect that
"Commissioner Hansen requested a place holder in the matrix to incorporate language" that
had requested. Unfortunately, I did not see my comments listed in the Matrix that the Council
received. Therefore, I planned to attend the Council Public Hearing to repeat my request. I
appreciate Council President Kruller announcing that with the Council's concurrence, written
public testimony will be allowed through August 17th. My comments appear below:
I am very supportive of the Community Image and Identity language in Chapter One of the
Comprehensive Plan. I especially like Goal 1.3 "A heritage conserved and interpreted so that
Tukwila's citizens recognize connections with the past and celebrate the diverse cultures
represented in the community." And, I very much appreciate the following policies being
incorporated into the Comp Plan:
Policy 1.3.1 Identify and protect historically significant properties, structures and sites, in
either their present or a nearby location, as determined in a City -wide survey and designation
process.
Policy 1.3.2 Provide prominent public art and interpretive markers at highly visible locations,
explaining the history of the Interurban Trolley, the Green /Duwamish River, Duwamish Hill
Preserve, and other important buildings, sites, events or persons.
Policy 1.3.3 Establish a process for providing Incentives and designation certain structures as
landmarks.
And I very much appreciate the following Implementation Strategies in the Comp Plan:
• Contract with King County Landmarks Board for historic preservation services
• Develop and implement a historic resources designation procedure and program to
ensure that these sites continue t be part of the community.
• Seek certified Local Government status to secure funding and technical assistance for
historic preservation.
• Develop incentives, such as fee waivers or code flexibility, to encourage preservation of
historic preservation.
123
Although I do appreciate the language included in the above policies and
implementation strategies in the Community Image and Identity Section of the Comp
Plan, I would appreciate it if there could be some language in the Housing and
Residential Neighborhood Elements section that cross - references readers to the
language that refers to historic preservation in the Community Image and identity
Section. Readers reading the Housing and Residential Neighborhood Elements may not
realize that historic preservation is addressed separately in the Community Image and
Identity Section.
Also, I would like to see Historic Preservation added to the Glossary and defined as:
"Historic Preservation means safeguarding the existence and appearance of historic
elements of the community, it preserves the historic, architectural, and aesthetic
character and heritage of a community or area, and helps to provide a sense of place
and continuity."
Thank you for allowing me to submit my written comments to be included in the 2015
Public Comments for the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update.
Joan Hernandez
15224 Sunwood Blvd.
Tukwila, WA 98188
124
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Obstacles to Plan Achievement
OBSTACLES TO
PLAN ACHIEVEMENT
These are obstacles that can prevent the community from achieving the
vision expressed in this Plan:
Inadequate Communication and Citizen Involvement
Citizens are often not sufficiently informed about our community, may not
identify with the community, and may not participate in community
decisions and in caring for each other.
Diffused Responsibilities
0
Responsibility for decision making, capital improvement progr
provision of services is diffused among many public a l s, privat
vendors, volunteer agencies, and individual citize
creativity, effectiveness, and efficiency, this dif
accountability and coordination more difficult.
Overwhelming and Unrespo ernment
oducing
Citizens often find it difficult to i erstand t ultitude of technical public
issues and procedures. Gover ► ent encies have often not sufficiently
clarified issues, responded to c . - con ns in layman's language, and
encouraged them to be • -� • d • e ► , on making.
Narrow Short -Ter
ests That Harm the Community
Governmen ofte •active rather than proactive. Citizens and businesses
often giv t. little at ntion to preserving our environment. Some
busin • s fo u.o► heir own success while using methods which may
har r .ublic - are. Of particular concern are unsavory businesses,
which ma arm young people and generate crime. Special- interest politics
distort the p tical process.
Insufficient Money to Provide Desired Services
As populations and expectations increase beyond available revenues, many
desirable projects and programs are delayed. Neighborhoods lack needed
amenities. Economic development is inadequately organized and focused.
December 5, 2005 11
125
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Obstacles to Plan Achievement
Increasing Transient Nature of
Some Residential Neighborhoods
Some of our residential neighborhoods have a high turnover rate. This
contributes to problems in our schools, lack of community identity and
involvement, high crime rate, and deteriorating housing.
4)
12 December 5, 2005
126
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
MAINTENANCE
OF THE PLAN
PURPOSE
Embodied in the Growth Management Act's new framework for land use
planning and regulation are the concepts of consistency and concurrency.
The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires local land use plans to be
consistent with each other, and with those of adjacent jurisdictions.
Development regulations must also be consistent with land use pl
Under the GMA's requirements for concurrency, supporting faci ' • s an
services must be available when development occurs, and loc ctions
must ensure the "timely financing of needed infrastructure" ( .5 -1 ' 5-
010).
To achieve these mandates, Tukwila's land use an . b aciliti plans
must be developed in an integrated planning eff. T stem
Plan, Sewer System Plan, Surface Water Mana.e' e lan ansportation
Improvement Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, Shoreline asteirProgram and
Parks and Open Space Plan will need to e closely matched to the
Comprehensive Plan and its implements egulat. ns.
However, these plans cannot anticipate all o changes in development,
local needs and community values tlt will occur over the 20- to 30 -year
planning period. Growth in the region adjacent jurisdictions will also
have unanticipated, cumulative e n response, local land use and
public facilities plans ev
Tukwila's public facilities • : e periodically updated as required by state
statute. To ensue consisten and concurrency, this section of the
Comprehensive Plan ovides for the review, monitoring and updating of
Tukwil lause pl s.
The policies and implementation strategies in this section respond to the
requirements of the GMA. The GMA requires that the Comprehensive Plan
provide for an "ongoing process of evaluation to ensure internal and
interjurisdictional consistency of comprehensive plans and continuous
consistency of development regulations with such plans" (WAC 365 -195-
630 (1)).
The GMA recognizes that, periodically, development regulations need to be
updated. As regulations must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,
Maintenance of the Plan
December 2008 179
127
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Maintenance of the Plan
some changes in the Plan may be needed. The GMA also states that
amendments to the Plan shall not be considered more frequently than once
every year, except in cases of emergency or to adopt or amend the shoreline
master program, to adopt a subarea plan, to amend the capital facilities
element if concurrent with the adoption of the City budget, to resolve an
appeal filed with a Growth Management Hearings Board or court, or in other
instances as specified in the state legislation (RCW 36.70A.130). Otherwise,
the specific content and form of the annual review, including provisions for
public involvement, should be established in the development relations.
GOALS AND POLICIES
Goal 16.1
A Comprehensive Plan and develo
reviewed and updated as approp
changes in community needs, a
accomplishing the goals and poli
Plan.
ent r - _ lations that are
ord - to respond to
ns e progress toward
e Comprehensive
Policies
16.1.1 Create • e - cedure for annually processing
Com . -hensi Plan amendments that shall provide for the
follows
An application process where any proponent may
formally request a Comprehensive Plan or development
Tgulation change from the City.
A docketing system to track and list requested changes.
Public notice of requested changes, with opportunity for
the submission of written comments.
Preparation of a staff report and recommendation on
each requested change that contains the following
sections:
• Request
• Background
• Impact to Comprehensive Plan, development
regulations, and surrounding properties
• Alternatives
• Appropriate code citations
• Other relevant documents
180 December 2008
128
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Council receives the staff report prior to the meeting in
which the request is to be considered. Council
considers the request. Proponent is allowed to make a
presentation. Appropriate City staff are present as
subject matter experts.
Council review results in one of three decisions:
• Refer request to the Planning Commission for further
review and recommendation to the City Council,
where the request and Planning Commission
recommendation are reviewed prior to a public
hearing to be held by the City Council. The Council
then deliberates and rejects, modifies, or approves
the request depending on whether:
1) the issue is adequately addressed in the P
2) a public need exists;
3) the request is the best means for
public need; and
4) the proposed change will be et benej the
community.
• Defer further City Council ' . sis ati r one
or more years to allow the . rth time to
evaluate the impact o , { t `., ` the existing
Comprehensive Pl. - i;, t
• Reject the request.
Maintenance of the Plan
ci
IMPLEMENTAT ' 1 S TEG S
• Periodic r
and po
♦ Periodic r
tions r
mprehensive Plan designations
by RCW 36.70A.
on of implementing development
we to City's long -range plans.
December 2008 181
129
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Maintenance of the Plan
4)
182 December 2008
130
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ANNEXATION
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Annexation Element is to ensure a smooth transition
from county to city jurisdiction when unincorporated land is annexed to the
City. The goal and policies in this element establish a framework for
addressing public services, infrastructure, and utility extension and
interjurisdictional issues.
Annexation of unincorporated land adjacent to the City benefits the
residents, and property owners. Property owners and residents glYacc
to urban services provided by Tukwila, such as enhanced police and fire
protection and building and land use controls. For the City, annexation
yields benefits that include the ability to control new development, thery
ensuring ease of future maintenance; control of impac at their source; and
the ability to extend its boundaries in a logical, servjg - ted n i�her
ISSUES
The Town of Tukwila, occupying less th . a squ. mile, was incorporated
in 1908. Until 1987, the community gre .w .ut steadily through a
series of annexations that, save dIthe South . er shopping and industrial
area, were small, already urbanized areas. Then, between 1987 and 1993,
major annexations of larger urbanized areas nearly doubled the City's size
and more than tripled i • I, latie City now encompasses over
5,510 acres.
Annexationd
In accordance with the Growth Management Act and King County planning
policies, Tukwila has established potential annexation areas. The following
criteria were applied in an examination of adjacent unincorporated areas to
identify ptial annexation areas:
• Logical and historical community identification and affiliation
with Tukwila
• Financial and technical ability of the City to provide municipal
services
• Logical service areas through vehicular accessibility, public safety
response, and utility construction
Annexation
December 2008 65
131
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Annexation
• Physical boundaries such as waterways, topography, watersheds,
and freeways
• Protection of critical and resource areas significant to a particular
jurisdiction, including opportunities for open space corridors
between urban areas
• Logical boundaries, eliminating unincorporated islands
• Presence of special- purpose districts and the cond'
annexation area's urban services infrastructure
This process identified the potential annexation are
shown on the following map. (Figure 9) dcli‘
Boundary Adjustments
Tukwila's growth through petitioned ne •ns has created certain
boundary anomalies:
• City of Seattle: e . der co. i, ration between Tukwila and
Seattle in the K' Con •rt area, in which the boundary
crosses Inters - 5 .re th once and splits certain industrial
properties, creat . nu.' .er of jurisdictional issues, including
police r
• City of s to A portion of the northeast boundary between
kwila an ' ton crosses and recrosses the Burlington
No ' ern Railway right -of -way.
SeaTac: On the southwest, the boundary between
'la and SeaTac crosses Interstate 5 and other streets in
everal places, creating difficulties for the reasonable provision of
services.
Tukwila, Seattle, Kent, Renton, SeaTac and their citizens will need to
egotiate the issues and challenges of these border anomalies. (Figure 9)
66 December 2008
132
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Annexation
7/017:4
Potential Annexation
Area
Future Boundary
Adjustment Areas
Figure 9 - Annexation and Boundary Adjustment Areas
KENT
December 2008
67
133
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Annexation
GOAL AND POLICIES
Goal 6.1
A logical and serviceable municipal boundary.
Annexation Area Policies
6.1.1 Freely make available to persons and areas within the City's
annexation and minor boundary adjustment areas,
information related to Tukwila's taxes or services, with each
annexation process emphasizing public information and
clear communication among the Tukwila community, City
government, and the area undo corderation.
AP
6.1.2 Work with King County and other local jurisdictions to
coordinate services to identified areas.
6.1.3 Consider the annexation boundary as the extent of
Tukwila's anne ion ea.
6.1.4 I n accordan wheCountywide Planning Policies for
King Go e�nd in the interest of providing effective public
services, wor with affected citizens and property owners
and the neighboring cities of SeaTac, Kent, Renton, and
Seattle to develop interlocal agreements providing for
mutually agreeable processes to adjust border anomalies.
Public Services Policy
Ensure annexations do not detract from adopted level of
service standards.
Planning and Zoning Policy
6.1.6
Ensure that zoning proposed for an annexation area is
consistent with Tukwila's adopted Comprehensive Plan and
other land use requirements.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
♦ Establish mutually agreed upon development standards with
King County for proposed development within potential
annexation areas.
♦ Review neighboring jurisdictions' Comprehensive Plans
68 December 2008
134
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Interjurisdictional Policies
6.1.7 Establish appropriate interlocal agreements that provide
solutions to regional concerns, including but not limited to
water, wastewater, storm and surface water drainage,
transportation, parks and open space, development review,
and public safety.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
♦ Interlocal agreements with neighboring jurisdictions and
negotiation with property owners to eliminate boundary
anomalies
♦ Coordination with city's annexation area
6.1.8 Allow existing public services for utilities outside."ity limi
when there is a need created by boundary adjustments
between Tukwila and adjacent jurisdictions or when suc
temporary service is necessary because of an emery
Annexation
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
♦ Initiate discussions and negotiations with adjacent and
regional jurisdictions to establish mechanisms and
procedures to resolve in jurisdictional concerns
(<,
December 2008 69
135
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Annexation
4)
70
136
December 2008
Tukwila International Boulevard District Element - PC Recommended Draft, Version 8.18.15
Issues Matrix 8.18.15
Row
#
Page #
Comment
(language changes in strikeout /underline, recommendation in
bold)
Exhibit #/
Date /Source
Staff comment /analysis /options
General Comments in Support for TIB District Element
1
TIB Element
Supportive of goals and policies in the TIB District Element.
Supports making TIB District vibrant, as envisioned in the
Element.
B. Meredith,
Forterra; CC public
hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
2
TIB Element
Likes the support for additional activity in the TIB area.
Especially notes sidewalks on 42nd Ave - sometimes uses this
street to walk to the light rail station.
S.Kruize; email sent
8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
General Comments
3
TIB Neighborhood
Security and affordable housing are important for the
community and neighborhood. Proud of TIB neighborhood
where she lives.
N. Wagafe; CC public
hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
4
Sidewalks
Sidewalks are critical for making community.
B.Wu; CC public
hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
The draft element addresses the importance of sidewalks in linking the community
to TIB and to other activity centers.
5
Increasing Density
& Crime
Concerned about increasing density on TIB - may cause an
increase in crime.
D.Puki; CC public
hearing, 8.10.15
Staff Response: City is currently taking considerable efforts to decrease crime and
increase safety in the TIB area. Adding housing, stores, services and offices along
TIB, particularly in the ground floor spaces of buildings, will bring more eyes on
the street" and help reduce crime.
Vision
6
Vision, Goals &
Policies
Pleased that the draft TIB District Element very closely matches
the vision developed by TIBAC (see comment letter for TIBAC
vision). We spent two years discussing, reconsidering, and
ultimately adopting The Boulevard: Our Vision for the Future
which we presented to the Tukwila City Council a little over
three years ago in April 2012. Ask yourselves if this Comp Plan
will help make this vision a reality.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
7
Throughout element
City has limited funds to cover many competing needs and
projects. Need to take a look at the cost of policies and
proposed implementation measures.
K.Hougardy; CC
worksession, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: No action at this time.
The Comprehensive Plan is meant to be part aspirational and part directive,
providing a vision for the community and associated guidance for public and
private actions over the next 20 years. It is intended to be the basis from which
capital improvements, projects and programs can be identified and developed over
time. Once the plan is adopted, staff can bring forward a list of implementation
projects to be considered along with associated costs. Using that list, combined
with the Comp Plan goals and policies, available funds & resources, and other
input, Council can determine which projects, if any, to include in the City's CIP.
8
Pg 4, Fig 1. TIB
District Boundary
Map
The northern portions of the District (north of S. 139th and S.
140th Sts.) do not really have a relationship to TIB as they are
separated from TIB due to their topography. The western
portion is on a hillside and only one street, S. 132nd St.,
provides access to TIB. To the east, only S. 130th St. provides
access to the residential area that is below TIB. By comparison,
the neighborhoods east of 42nd Ave. S. are more directly
affected by conditions along TIB, yet are not part of the District.
What is the reasoning for including these areas in the District?
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15;
K.Hougardy; email
dated 8.12.14
Staff Response: The TIB District boundary was initially taken from the TIB boundary
set in the 1997 Pacific Highway Revitalization Plan: SR 599 to the north, 42nd Ave S
to the east, S. 160th St to the south, and the City limits to the west. During the 2015
joint City Council /Planning Commission worksessions, excluding the area north of
130th along TIB was discussed, as the zoning /uses north of that (C /LI & MIC) were
very different from those to the south. Continued discussion at the PC meetings
resulted in the boundaries in the PC- recommended draft element, including the
expansion of the boundary from S. 130th St north to S 126th St so that it included
the upper corner of the Riverton neighborhood.
The area mentioned in the comment is somewhat disconnected from TIB. See
attached map. One option for consolidating similar areas is to move the northern
boundary further south on TIB, to the Regional Commercial zoning straddling the
corner of S. 139th/140th & TIB. Moving south from there, the west boundary could
follow the Medium & High Density Residential (MDR & HDR) zoning boundaries to
Military. To the east, follow S. 140th St eastward to 42 Ave 5, and continue south
from there.
It should be noted that the Residential Neighborhoods Element will still be the
primary guide for land use in the Riverton and Cascade View neighborhoods.
If this boundary change is made, the following would need to be revised or deleted:
Under the Land Use Outside the Nodes section - they refer to parcels that would
fall outside the TIB District. :
- (p. 18) policies 8.2.14 & 8.2.15 - revise
- (p. 20) the 1st bullet under Implementation Strategies - delete
- (p. 20) the last implementation strategy bullet referring to the possible location of
the northern gateway for the District - revise.
Under Walkability & Connectivity Section:
- (p. 31) 2nd Implementation Strategy bullet re: adding stairs connecting Southgate
Creek to TIB - delete. FYI, this would be generally covered in Parks Element.
9
Pg 5, Vision
Statement
2nd paragraph - aspirational Vision statement. Some text is not
formatted correctly.
Staff edits; 8.17.15
Staff Recommendation: Format entire 2nd paragraph using italic font.
10
Pg 12, Land Use,
Goals
Goal 8.2. I support using nodes of more intensive development.
TIBAC came to the realization that different areas had distinct
characteristics.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
W: \Long Range Projects \2014 CompPlanUpdate \CITY COUNCIL \TIB Housing NH July August 2015 \CC Hearing -- 8.10.15 \TIB District Comment Matrix_8.10.15.xlsx
137 1
11
Land use /Nodes
Concept
Wants to preserve the single family neighborhood. Concerned
about expanding MDR & HDR zoning from TIB into single family
neighborhoods.
D.Puki and B.Wu; CC
public hearing,
8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
Staff Response: If the City wants to create a transit - oriented development node at
the light rail station, it should consider planning for higher densities /intensities
within a 1/2 mile walking distance of the station. This could include allowing higher
densities in areas currently zoned for lower density residential uses. However, this
level of detail and analysis should occur at the implementation phase, after this
Element is adopted. At that time, discussions should include where & when higher
densities should be allowed, and focus on how to sensitively transition the form &
scale of more intensively developed areas to adjacent single family neighborhoods.
Also, note that the preservation and enhancement of single - family and stable multi-
family neighborhoods is called for in Residential Neighborhoods Element Policy
7.1.1.
12
Pg 13, Fig. 2 TIB
District "Node
Concept"
c.,,.
This figure clearly shows
of the two nodes. However,
close together the two nodes
the SRO property south
rail station.
The general rule of thumb
waik 14 to catch transit.
walk to transit.
Note that S. 146th St. (the
approximately 'A mile from
The figure below shows:
- Green Circle 1/4 mile radius
- Blue circle 1/2 mile radius
t < 1q1
the relationship and general location
it is also important to see how
are. See Figure below. Note that
of SR 518 is within a'A mile of the light
is that most people are willing to
Usually 1/2 mile is the furthest people will
south side of Saar's market) is
the light rail station.
Rt< t. !; - s. t1N. . t'!
1 j(I s
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Comment Noted. No change requested.
FYI, walk distances of up to a half -mile for light rail and quarter -mile for
generally accepted as baseline standards. The figure below was created
Right Size Parking analysis. The lighter color shading shows 1/2 mile
distance from the light rail station.
I !
S 148th St
bus are
for the
walking
TAC
•
.•
a , . n '
5 150th St
no 4
,�,,, <. _,
5
<
uTM
;EAT AC PARK
PLAY FIELDS
S 152nd 'St
,ten
a i )i 4• t �'
e : 1 ■' .. -
s ,.'n. a L u
Sea Ire
is
b
I
, IR! _
...ii, t;:;
w- - = ,. `a
at
- - SP 61114 7 _
•
�4.. 6 ,6cirk ST ••e = .1
a
u .
s
• T4,
1
67.181
r P l
/ !\ 11 I •,.ne FT Wa Skin gto, a
i1�
•
„ `
-
x 'KE7 '■
t °
P
._,?ter
„y,
O N
a [ ■
r.
aru+i \
.
13
Pgs 14 -16, TOD Node
policies &
implementation
strategies; and Pgs
19 -20, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
policies
The area within walking distance from the Tukwila light rail
station could provide housing for more people who want to
take advantage of: 1) the easy commute via light rail & buses to
downtown & other areas of King County, 2) Westfield
Southcenter Mall, 3) SeaTac Airport, and 4) easy access to 1 -5, 1-
405, and Hwy 518. More people residing in the area will also
help to revitalize retail stores along TIB.
City needs to allow an increase in density within current high
density zoning. Current zoning allows only 21.5 units /acre with
two parking spaces required per unit. New development on
these properties with such limits are not financially feasible due
to high land costs per unit and the lowest rental rate within King
County.
C. Kim; CC public
hearing, 8.10.15, and
letter received
8.12.15.
Commented noted. No changes required.
Policy 8.2.4 and suggested implementation measures designate the TOD Node area
for a more intensive, transit - oriented mix of uses, and encourages the use of
incentives for an increased height allowance. The current draft also recommends
raising maximum heights outside of the nodes, in the areas currently zoned
Regional Commercial (RC) and Neighborhood Commercial Center (NCC). Exploring
the use of height incentives in these areas is also encouraged.
Goal 8.5 and the associated policies and implementation measures call for
exploring and establishing lower parking requirements for uses in proximity to light
rail and transit, and looking for other ways to accommodate parking requirements,
such as through cooperative parking agreements and on- street parking.
Any rezoning of properties would take place after the draft element is adopted, and
would include significant community involvement.
14
Pg 15,
Implementation
Strategies, Village
Node, 2nd bullet
I agree the Urban Renewal Overlay (URO) boundaries should be
adjusted to facilitate development. I encourage you to take the
'A mile radius into account when revising the boundaries.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
This relates to an implementation strategy, and would occur after the draft TIB
District Element is adopted.
15
Pg 16,
Implementation
Strategies for Village
Node, bullet above
the sidebar box
I'm not sure what a conference /training center would bring to
the Village Node. My experience is that attendee's meals are
catered, and they leave the center immediately after the
meeting. What we need is more activity on the street and
patrons for our local businesses.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
As background, this was included in the consultant recommendations (at the
2.25.15 joint CC /PC worksession on the draft TIB District Element) as a strategy to
create a community "third place” at the Village Node.
Staff Recommendation: Revise the implementation strategy bullet to read "Explore
options for a traditional anchor (j-e, e.g., a store or conference /training
grocery
center), as well as the potential for attracting or facilitating an unconventional
anchor.... ".
W:\.1oyange Projects \2014 CompPlanUpdate \CITY COUNCIL \TIB Housing NH July August 2015 \CC Hearing -- 8.10.15 \TIB District Comment Matrix_8.10.15.xlsx 2
16
Pg 16,
Implementation
Strategies, TOD
Node, 1st bullet
It is vitally important that the City develop a vision and master
plan for this area so the City is ready if a developer comes
along. Someone could be looking to do a development outside
of but near to Seattle. If we don't have zoning, etc. in place, that
person would just go to another city such as Renton or Burien
where it's easy to determine what type of development would
be allowed.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
This relates to an implementation strategy, and would occur after the draft TIB
District Element is adopted.
17
Pg 18, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
policies
Note that unless otherwise specified, these policies are for the
entire TIB District outside of the nodes.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Staff Response: Comment noted. These policies are intended to apply to parcels
close to the TIB corridor. It is assumed that the Residential Neighborhood Element
would address land use in the Cascade View and Riverton neighborhoods
(Residential Neighborhoods Element Policy 7.1.1 calls for preserving & enhancing
single family neighborhoods) . Consequently, the TIB District element can be
considered an "overlay" to those areas, primarily concerned with linking these
neighborhoods to the services, activities and resources in proximity of the TIB
Corridor. The TIB District goals and policies are also focused on creating sensitive
transitions between the higher density commercial /mixed use development along
TIB and the adjacent single family homes (e.g., Policy 8.2.13).
If the TIB District boundary is tightened, and the master planning & zoning is
completed for the remainder of the District along TIB (assuming a 1/2 mile walking
distance from the light rail station and 1/4 mile walking distance from S. 144th /TIB
intersection), there may not be much remaining between the nodes for these
policies to address. However, until implementation occurs, and /or if
redevelopment takes place in phases, then these policies can be used to guide
development.
Staff Recommendation: Revise this section's title to clarify where these policies are
applicable: "Land Use in Commercial and Multifamily Areas Outside the Nodes."
18
Pg 18, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
Policy 8.2.10
I don't believe that opportunities for retail should be expanded
into the residential neighborhoods of the District.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Staff Recommendation: No change required.
See above comment - this policy applies to commercial and multifamily properties
outside the Nodes.
19
Pg 18, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
Policy 8.2.11
Light industrial may be appropriate on commercial properties
along or near TIB, it is not appropriate in residential
neighborhoods.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as follows: "On commercial properties along or near
TIB, aAllow those types of industrial uses that require hands -on labor and operate
in such a manner that no nuisance factor is created and the scale of such activities
does not conflict with the TIB District vision of a walkable, pedestrian- oriented
neighborhood."
20
Pg 18, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
Policy 8.2.13
I support this policy and would remind you that most areas
outside the nodes where multifamily housing will be built are
not on TIB. In other words, they may be on side streets off of
TIB.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
21
Pg 18, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
Policy 8.2.14
TIB between S. 128th and S. 137th Sts, with the exception of the
Sierra Sue Apartments,. is not predominantly residential in use
or character. So this statement should be rewritten to apply to
the residential neighborhoods away from TIB.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Staff Response: Delete this policy. Preservation of single - family neighborhoods is
reflected in Policy 7.1.1 in the Residential Neighborhoods Element: "Maintain a
comprehensive land use map that supports the preservation and enhancement of
single - family and stable multi - family neighborhoods; eliminates incompatible land
uses; and clearly establishes applicable development requirements through
recognizable boundaries.
Note, if the TIB District Boundary is tightened, then the residential neighborhoods
between S. 128th and S. 137th Streets would fall outside of the District, and this
policy should also be deleted.
22
Pg 18, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
Policy 8.2.15.
I support this strategy to explore other zoning for these parcels
such as the former Bernie & Boys site. At TIBAC we had a lot of
discussion about these parcels. We noted that: "For most of this
segment, the topography limits the amount of developable
property that accesses the Boulevard, and most of the single -
family homes are grade- separated from the Boulevard. For
those reasons, we support a compatible mix of businesses and
residential development."
I would also encourage you look at the sentence about
affordable housing then read the strategy on the top of page
21. If housing were to be developed on any of these parcels, I
wouldn't have a problem with ground floor living units. In fact,
requiring retail or office on the ground floor would almost
ensure that housing would not be built on any of these parcels.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
However, if TIB District boundary is tightened, this policy would be deleted as it
would fall outside of the District.
23
Pg 19, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
policies
Want a policy added to encourage aggregation of small
commercially -zoned parcels fronting TIB for redevelopment.
A.Ekberg; CC
worksession, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Add the following Policy - Encourage the aggregation of
commercially zoned properties fronting TIB with adjacent commercially zoned
properties to enhance the opportunities for redevelopment.
Add the following Implementation Strategy to support this policy: Explore
incentives, programs, and regulations that could be used to encourage parcel
aggregation.
24
Pg 19, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
Policy 8.2.18.
Gateways should also include the name of the district as
mentioned in the first Implementation Strategy as shown on
page 35. They could also include banners. So revise this to read.
"Use architectural and landscape elements along with signage
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested: "Create gateways to provide a sense
of arrival at the north and south edges of the TIB Corridor. Use architectural and
landscape elements, along with signage and banners, to mark transitions and
entrances into and within the TIB District ...."
and banners to mark transitions..."
W: \Long Range Projects \2014 CompPlanUpdate \CITY COUNCIL \TIB Housing NH July August 2015 \CC Hearing -- 8.10.15 \TIB District Comment Matrix_8.10.15.xlsx
139 3
25
Pg 20, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
Implementation
Strategies
The area will remain as is without much improvement unless
the City further reduces prostitution and drug traffic along TIB.
Closure of Deja Vu around 150th St, which has been a magnet
for prostitution and related criminal activities, will help greatly
to reduce criminal activities.
C. Kim; CC public
hearing, 8.10.15, and
letter dated 8.12.15.
Staff Response: A version of the following policy was in the "old" Transportation
Corridors Element but was deleted because the City has adopted regulations
governing the location of adult entertainment uses. If desired, the following
implementation strategy could be added back to the "Land Use Outside of Nodes"
Section: Explore appropriate actions for the City to take to pursue amortization of
non - conforming adult entertainment uses, such as purchasing leases.
26
Pg 20, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
Implementation
Strategies, Last
bullet
Re: gateway locations. If the TIB District Boundary is tightened,
the possible northern gateway location mentioned here would
fall outside the District.
Staff edits; 8.17.15
Staff Response: If the boundary changes, revise the implementation strategy as
follows: "Identify appropriate locations for a gateway on the north and south end
of the TIB District corridor. Consider thc City owned on thc southwest
vacant parcel
of thc intersection of 37th Ave S. and TIB as a location on thc north
,idc .ateway
27
Pg 21, Land Use
Outside the Nodes,
Implementation
Strategies, Bullet at
top of page.
This strategy should be removed. Remember, it applies to the
entire TIB District including the area outside the nodes. We
have many stand -alone apartment buildings, such as both
Samara buildings, with ground floor living units.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
This implementation strategy is intended to apply to multifamily buildings adjacent
to TIB with ground floor living spaces. The Planning Commission's concerns were
related to the livability of these spaces, including safety & privacy, along a street
with higher vehicle and foot traffic.
Staff Recommendation: Revise the implementation strategy as follows: Explore
Identify design standards that can be used to ensure thepolicics to address
tr tment andprivacy, safety, and livability of ground floor living spaces along TIB
to make them consistent with thc vision for thc TIB District.
28
Pg 24, Urban Form,
Policy 8.4.2.
The last line has a typo: "tothe" needs a space inserted.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise the last line in Policy 8.4.2 as suggested: "...adjacent
to the front sidewalk."
29
Pg 24, Urban Form,
Policy 8.4.2.
As an example of a continuous building wall with off- street
parking, see my Figure 2. It shows an L- shaped building
parking behind and alongside building.
Figure: Central Avenue Plaza in Kent on Central Ave S. just
of its intersection with W. Smith St.
III 1,,:_
NIKIERM .-
� J ►i3. - }rte
with
south
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change requested.
30
Pg 25, Urban Form,
Implementation
Strategies, last
bullet.
Given the competition for parking in the vicinity of the TIB light
rail station, on both sides of International Blvd. /TIB, it may be
premature to consider removing parking minimums. It may be
more appropriate to consider parking maximums as a transition
to a less auto - centric, more pedestrian oriented district.
J.Scorcio,
Community & Econ.
Development
Director, City of
SeaTac; letter dated
8.17.15
Removing parking minimums was a consultant recommendation at the 2015 joint
City Council /Planning Commission worksession.
Staff Recommendation: Revise this implementation strategy as follows: In the TIB
District, explore the feasibility of various ways to manage parking, including
removing parking minimums and allowing the market to determine parking need,
and setting parking maximums,.
31
Pg 26, Urban Form,
Implementation
Strategies, 1st bullet,
last sub - bullet.
SeaTac supports the implementation strategy "Coordinate
parking standards with the City of SeaTac to ensure
conformity ", and believes based on recent discussions among
our respective Council members that there are other areas
where our two cities could coordinate, including some elements
of street scape design on Military Road.
J.Scorcio,
Community & Econ.
Development
Director, City of
SeaTac; letter dated
8.17.15
Comment of support and possible future coordination is noted.
32
Pg 26, Urban Form,
Implementation
Strategies
Add implementation measure about preparing a feasibility
study for a parking structure.
A.Ekberg; CC
worksession, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Add the following Implementation Strategy: Prepare a
study investigating the overall feasibility of developing a public parking structure
within the TIB District, including identifying potential sites.
33
Pg 31, Walkability &
Connectivity,
Implementation
Strategies, 1st bullet.
See figures below for examples of woonerfs in residential areas.
Figures: Woonerfs where users share the street without
boundaries such as lanes and curbs.
P.Carter; CC public
hearing and letter
dated 8.10.15
Staff Recommendation: Add these figures to the draft TIB District Element as
examples of woonerfs.
_.ur_.
4! "1'Jowl S "�j p,,C T��, r.
• is sr � 3 _ slow
`! , _ - -. 1 . _— sue.
—
a
34
Community &
Character section,
pg. 32
The City talks about trying to build community. Should have an
international festival in the TIB area celebrating the
multicultural diversity of the District.
P. Larson; CC public
hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted. No change required.
Pg, 32, Goal 8.7 and associated policies under "Community & Character" call for
similar activities that promote and build upon the multicultural character of the TIB
District.
35
Public & Private
Investment section,
Add policy statement indicating Tukwila will be flexible in
considering different types of uses or development that may
A.Ekberg; CC
worksession, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Add the following new Policy to page 38, under the topic
area Public and Private Investment , Goal 8.10: The City shall remain flexible in
pg. 37
not have been considered in the goals and policies.
considering and responding to emerging development opportunities in the TIB
District.
W:\J,ofaange Projects \2014 CompPlanUpdate \CITY COUNCIL \TIB Housing NH July August 2015 \CC Hearing -- 8.10.15 \TIB District Comment Matrix_8.10.15.xlsx 4
• View`�� .
Elementary]
School,
SeaTac
Community.
'�C Center
142nd'pj
Tukwila International Blvd
Zoning & Urban Renewal Area
immum
17■I.fr
TIB Urban Renewal Overlay District
Commercial Redevelopment Areas
LDR Low Density Residential
MDR Medium Density Residential
HDR High Density Residential
MUO Mixed Use Office
0 Office
RCC Residential Commercial Center
NCC Neighborhood Commercial Center
RC Regional Commercial
CLI Commercial Light Industrial
MIC /L Manufacturing Industrial Center /Light Industrial
MIC /H Manufacturing Industrial Center /Heavy Industrial
44t ,S.tr
Si1.4t
. Southcenteralvd
Path: H:Waps\Rebecca \TiD Zoning & Urban Renewal Overlay mxd
141
1 42
From: sandra kruize [mailto:sandrakruize@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 4:44 PM
To: Laura Benjamin
Subject: Re: Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing - August 10, 2015
Dear Laura,
Thank you very much for informing me more specifically. I was looking for more "nuts and bolts." This
confirms my reading of an affirmatively worded plan for LDR neighborhoods; and, I will look for a notice of
when codes will be evaluated in support of this plan.
I did look at the International Blvd. map for the noted area updating. It looks excellent on paper to
acknowledge the need to support more activity. Especially, I note the sidewalks on 42nd ave. I live near the
Link Rail station and participate sometimes in the walk on 42nd ave to the station.
I can't attend tonight, but please pass my comment, if possible.
Thanks,
Sandra Kruize
On Monday, August 10, 2015 10:22 AM, Laura Benjamin <Laura.Benjamin a(TukwilaWA.gov> wrote:
Mrs. Kruize. Thank you for checking -in regarding the updates to the Residential Neighborhoods Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan aims to create lasting value in the Tukwila community be
creating a vision for how it will manage growth and development over the next 20 years. The Plan acts as a
guide for the regulations the City adopts, including revisions to the zoning code. I have copied the draft Goal,
Policies, and Implementation Strategies that pertain to compatibility in single - family neighborhoods, including
the size and height of homes (see below). These policies will act as a guide for revising the zoning code, which
will get into the "nuts and bolts" of capability such as the maximum height in the LDR zone, and massing of
larger homes. The zoning code update is scheduled to begin in 2016.
As mentioned in previous emails, the City Council is holding a public hearing on the updates to the Tukwila
International Boulevard District, Housing, and Residential Neighborhoods elements of the Comprehensive Plan
this evening, August 10th at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Residents are encouraged
to share their thoughts on the draft updates. You may also submit written comment by 5: 00 p.m., today,
August 10tH
Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.
Best,
Laura
Laura Benjamin
Assistant PlannerlCity of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100ITukwila, WA 98188
206. 433. 7166ILaura .Benjamin(a�TukwilaWa.gov
Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice.
Goal 7.4 Neighborhood Development
Tukwila's residential neighborhoods have a high - quality, pedestrian character with a variety of housing options for
residents in all stages of life.
Single - Family Residential Development Policies
7.4.3 Support single - family residential in -fill housing that is in harmony with the existing neighborhood as a means
of achieving adequate, affordable, and /or diverse housing.
7.4.4 Encourage single - family residence design to foster a sense of safety and security.
7.4.5 Develop neighborhood- specific single - family regulations that encourage compatibility with the existing scale of
residential structures in the neighborhood, provide an appropriate relationship of lot area, building scale, and building
siting, and maintain a sense of community (e.g. mature trees, pedestrian scale, sensitive transition between public and
private spaces).
Implementation Strategies
143
• Revise development regulations at the neighborhood level to reflect the historic development patterns of
neighborhoods and to develop regulations that best fit the unique development characteristics of neighborhoods.
• Develop a process for residents to participate in developing regulations for individual neighborhoods.
• Revise code to maintain standard minimum lot size of 6,500 SF but allow smaller lot areas subject to design
standards that mitigate the potential negative impacts of smaller lots.
From: sandra kruize [mailto:sandrakruize@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2015 2:17 PM
To: Laura Benjamin; Rebecca Fox
Subject: Re: Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing - August 10, 2015
Thank -you for the reminders you sent to me. I did, last week, read the updated comprehensive plan related to
residential neighborhoods, specifically how new housing would fit in to the size of existing homes and the
character of existing low density neighborhoods. I had been active in wanting change toward compatibility as it
pertained to size and height in comparison with other houses.
I apologize if I am being opaque or lax, but I couldn't find any references to planned changes. What I was able
to find was that house size would be one half the size of the lot and that it should be in character with the
existing neighborhood.
I didn't see any reference to height; and, this was a critical issue in my past involvement. I can't comment on
changes without going back to what the codes were at that time and comparing them to the recommended
changes.
Can you please clarify this for me. Will there be change to size and height codes in LDR neighborhoods as
related to compatibility issue. If so, please compare.
Thank -you so much,
Sandra Kruize
On Monday, July 20, 2015 1:36 PM, Laura Benjamin < Laura.BenjaminATukwilaWA.gov> wrote:
Comprehensive Plan Update
City Council Public Hearing on the Tukwila International Boulevard District, Housing, and Residential
Neighborhoods Elements
August 10, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. in Tukwila City Hall — Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Blvd.
July 27, 2015 — Work Session: Prior to the hearing, the City Council will hold a work session on July 27, 2015 at 7:00
p.m. in Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Blvd. to review the Planning Commission recommended drafts of the
updated Introduction, Vision, Glossary, and Land Use Map Legend of the Comprehensive Plan. Community members are
invited to listen and observe the work session.
July 28, 2015 — Work Session: Prior to the hearing, the City Council will hold a work session on July 28, 2015 at 5:30
p.m. in Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Blvd. to review the Planning Commission recommended drafts of the
updated Tukwila International Boulevard District Element, Housing Element, and Residential Neighborhoods Element.
Community members are invited to listen and observe the work session.
August 10, 2015 — Public Hearing: The Tukwila City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday August 10, 2015 on
the proposed updates to the Tukwila International Boulevard District Element, Housing Element, Residential
Neighborhoods Element, Introduction, Vision, Glossary, and Land Use Map Legend of the Comprehensive Plan.
You are invited to share your ideas on proposed policy changes that will affect future development.
What: Tukwila City Council hearing
When: Monday August 10, 2015 — 7:00 p.m.
Where: Tukwila City Hall — City Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila
Comments: You are invited to comment on proposed changes to the Tukwila International Boulevard District Element,
Housing Element, Residential Neighborhoods Element, Introduction, Vision, Glossary and Map Legend of the
Comprehensive Plan at the public hearing or submit written comments by 5 p.m. on the day of the hearing, August 10,
144
2015. After receiving public comments, the City Council will review comments and make revisions as needed, with final
action during Fall, 2015.
Review materials: See the draft elements at http:// www. tukwilawa .qov /dcd /dcdcompplan.html, under the "Meetings &
Events" tab, or at the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100; Tukwila, WA 98188.
August 24, 201 — Council Review: The City Council will discuss public hearing comments and make revisions as needed
for the Tukwila International Boulevard District, Housing, Residential Neighborhood elements, and the Introduction, Vision,
Glossary, and Land Use Map Legend of the Comprehensive Plan on August 24, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers,
6200 Southcenter Blvd. Community members are invited to listen and observe the review session.
For more information: Contact Rebecca Fox at 206 - 431 -3683, or at CompPlanUpdate @TukwilaWA.gov
You are receiving this email because you have expressed interest in the Comprehensive Plan update.
145
From: Nora Gierloff
To: Lynn Miranda; Laura Benjamin; Rebecca Fox
Subject: FW: Some questions for the matrix
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:19:18 PM
More for the matrix
From: Kathy Hougardy
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:07 PM
To: Nora Gierloff
Cc: Kate Kruller; Laurel Humphrey; Pam Carter (pmcarter @jps.net)
Subject: Some questions for the matrix
Hi Nora,
Here are some questions for the Matrix. You may already have them, but just in case, I'll list them
here.
Could we put some more parameters around "affordable housing ?" What does that look like? For
me, the term is too general for me to get a sense of what our goals are.
Does affordable housing include home ownership? What are some examples of that?
Is the plan for us to add affordable rental housing, increasing our total percentage of rental
properties in Tukwila, or to replace existing substandard rental housing as the opportunities arise?
I do have some concerns about stability of our neighborhoods and the effects on our schools, if we
increase the total percentage of rentals in the city.
I think it would be helpful to be more specific regarding the term "diversity in housing stock."
What happens if we don't meet the Growth Management Act goals or other similar goals from
county, state and federal government agencies?
A comment was made at the Public Hearing expressing concern regarding the boundaries of the TIB
redevelopment area. Do you have background on why the decision was made to set the boundaries
to include large areas of Cascade View and Lower Riverton?
Comments were made about community outreach. Would it be appropriate have another outreach
to the community regarding the final version of the housing /TIB /neighborhood elements of the
comprehensive plan, due to its impact on our residents?
I may have some more questions; I'll e -mail them if and when I do. I'm at City Hall and left my Comp
plan book at home. When I review it I may think of something else.
Thank you!
Kathy Hougardy
146
Kathy Hougardy
Tukwila City Council
206 - 571 -0007
147
To Council Members of City of Tukwila.
R C VED
AUG 12 2015
Community
Development
My name is Chul Kim. I have purchased 40 units apartment located at 3721 S 152nd St.,Tukwila
in 1982 from a builder during lease up phase after the buildings were just completed.
After I purchased the property in 1982 I found the area along the International Blvd.,
northward, deteriorated steadily by becoming corridor of drugs and prostitutions. Thus, the
property could not attract high quality tenants especially with the Rainbow Trailer Court, which
looks like a slum, located just north of the property.
Fortunately for the area Tukwila Light Rail station opened several years ago. Also, city has
closed down three motels near S. 144th Street which should help to reduce criminal activities
along the International Blvd. Even though many four to six story apartments went up and more
are on the way near Othello and Columbia City light rail stations, after the Tight rail went into
operation, I do not see any changes near walking distance from the Tukwila Light Rail station.
The area within walking distance from the Tukwila light rail station could provide housing for
more people who want to take advantages of
1. Tukwila Light Rail Station with major Metro Transit buses which provide easy commute
to down town Seattle and large areas of King County.
2. Westfield Soundcenter Regional Shopping Center
3. Seatac Airport
4. Easy access to 1 -5, 1 -405 and Hwy 518.
More people residing within the area will also help to revitalize retail stores along the
International Blvd. However, the area will remain as is without much improvement unless city
undertake the following steps.
1. Further reduce prostitution and drugs traffics along the International Blvd.
Closure of Dejavu Show Girls around S 150th Street, which has been a magnet for prostitution
and related criminal activities, will help greatly to reduce criminal activities. Also, closing or
relocating the Rainbow Trailer park and other properties which looks like slum will be helpful.
2. Allow increase in density within current High Density Zoning
Current high density zoning allows only 21.5 units per acre with two parking spaces required
per unit. New developments within the high density zoned properties with such limits are
financially not feasible due to high land cost per unit and the lowest rental rate within King
county. Thus, city need to allow higher density than currently allowed to make it financially
feasible for developments.
L 13 7 a../6.,
148
4800 South 188th Street
SeaTac, WA 98188 -8605
City Hall: 206.9734800
Fax'. 206.973.4809
TDD: 206.973.4808
Mayor
Mia Gregerson
Deputy Mayor
Tony Anderson
Councilmembers
Barry Ladenburg
Kathryn Campbell
Terry Anderson
Dave Bush
Pam Fernald
City Manager
Todd Cutts
City Attorney
Mary Mirante Bartolo
City Clerk
Kristina Gregg
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
August 17, 2015
SUBJECT: Comments on Draft Comprehensive Plan Elements
Ms. Rebecca Fox
Senior Planner
Tukwila Planning and Recycling
6300 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila WA 98188
Dear Rebecca,
The City of SeaTac appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft
Tukwila International Boulevard (TIB) District Element, the Housing Element, and
the Residential Neighborhoods Element of Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan update.
Overall we find these draft elements to be well thought out policy documents,
consistent with regional plans and policies, that should set the stage to move your city
forward into the future.
We would however like to offer comments on a couple of points:
• Regarding implementation strategies under Policy 8.5.2 (TIB District
Element), given the competition for parking in the vicinity of the TIB light rail
station, on both sides of International Boulevard/Tukwila International
Boulevard, it may be premature to consider removing parking minimums. It
may be more appropriate to consider parking maximums as a transition to a
less auto - centric, more pedestrian oriented district.
• We support the implementation strategy on page 26 to "coordinate parking
standards with the City of SeaTac to ensure uniformity," and believe based on
recent discussions among our respective Council members that there are other
areas where our two cities could coordinate, including some elements of street
scape design along Military Road.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. We look forward to
working with you.
149
If you have any questions, please contact Senior Planner Michael Scarey at
msearey@ci.seatac.wa.us.
Sincerely,:
Joseph Scorcio, AICP
Community and Economic Development Director
150
Housing Element - Planning Commission Recommended Version 6.26.15
Revision Matrix 8.19.15
Note: Comments listed without an exhibit reference were delivered verbally during the public hearing on 8.10.15.
GENERAL COMMENTS
Row #
Page #
Comment
Exhibit # /Date /Source
Staff comment /analysis /options
1
NA
Households in the Somali
community are larger, averaging
6 to 8 people per household. This
should be incorporated into
policy decisions.
Hamdi Abdulle, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted. Implementation Strategies
under Goal 3.2 inlcude language to develop and
maintain housing that meets the needs of the
communiyt, including household size.
2
NA
Does affordable housing include
home ownership? What are
some examples of that?
Email from CM
Hougardy, dated 8.12.15
See attached Housing Element Definitions
handout.
3
NA
It would be helpful to be more
specific regarding the term
"diversity in the housing stock"
Email from CM
Hougardy, dated 8.12.15
See attached Housing Element Definitions
handout.
4
NA
It would be helpful to have
defintions and more information
on the terms "affordable
hsouign ", "diversity of housing ",
and "diversity."
CP Kruller, Council
discussion, 8.10.15
See attached Housing Element Definitions
handout.
COMMENTS ON GOALS /POLICIES /IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
Row #
Page #
Comment
Exhibit # /Date /Source
Staff comment /analysis /options
5
p.1
Extrapolate Tukwila's growth rate
from 2031 to 2035 and show
there is still sufficient housing
capacity.
Letter from WA State
Department of
Commerce, dated
7.22.15
Originally, the GMA mandated Comprehensive
Plan updates were to be completed by 2011,
with a 20 year planning horizon of 2031.The
state pushed back the completion date to 2015
and has asked that the planning horizon be
pushed back to 2035. As the other elements use
the horizon year of 2031, staff used this date for
the Housing Element to maintain consistency.
However, a few sentences can be added to show
that Tukwila can meet both the 2031 and 2035
growth rate housing capacities. Staff
Recommendation: Revise as suggested. New
language in the second paragraph of Purpose to
read "By 2035, Tukwila is projected to
accommodate an additional 768 households
and 2,480 new jobs, for a total of 5,568 new
households and 17,980 new jobs over the next
twenty years. Tukwila's zoning can
accommodate this projected growth as the City
has capacity for over 6,000 new housing units."
6
p.1
Revise last sentence of second
paragraph to focus on quality
housing for all income levels.
CM Robertson, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Sentence now reads "These steps are necessary
to plan for growth that will ensure the
sustainability and vitality of the existing housing
stock, to reduce barriers that prevent low and
moderate income households from living near
their work or transit, and to preserve housing
that is affordable for all eme households,
including low income households."
151
7
p.2
Include more information on
what is meant by "affordable
housing ". Include examples of
different types /prices of housing
affordable to different
incomes /professions.
CM Quinn, Council Work
Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Include new information as an informational side
bar. Side bar text to read "Total housing
expenditures in excess of 30 percent of
household income are considered "excessive"
and viewed as an indicator of a housing
affordability problem. This definition of
affordability was established under the United
States National Housing Act of 1937. Average
housing costs -- $1191 for monthly rent of $992
for monthly housing payments for a three
bedroom unit -- in Tukwila are affordable to
households making at least 80% AMI, about
$33,120 annually or $16.56 per hour. Many of
the common occupations in Tukwila pay less
than $16.56, these include: cashiers: $13.55;
childcare workers: $11.59; food service
workers: $12.25; and retail salesperson: $15.28.
Occupations that provide a wage needed to
afford market rate housing include book
keeping clerk: $20.53; medical assistant:
$18.75; machinists: $25.82; and painters:
$19.86." Note there will also be an informational
sidebar with information on the King County
Affordable Housing Targets.
8
p.2
Put more parameters around
"affordable housing." What does
that look like? Term is too
general to get a sense of what
our goals are.
Email from CM
Hougardy, dated 8.12.15
See definition /additional information in Row 7.
Also, see Housing Element Definion handout.
9
p.2
Revise last sentence under
Housing Affordability to clarify
what is meant by "adequate
quantity." Suggest referencing
King County affordable housing
targets.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Sentence now reads "Relying on market forces
to provide affordable housing for very -low
income residents will not provide adequate
quantity, as defined by King County affordable
housing targets, of quality affordable housing."
10
p.3
Delete "hoping to 'age in place "'
from Home Ownership Options.
The current range of housing
options does not accommodate
seniors who are looking for other
types of living units.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Staff Recommendation: Include additional
language to reflect that housing options should
accommodate seniors who wish to 'age in place'
and those who wish to move to other types of
living units. Last sentence in Home Ownership
Options to read "This range of housing options
does not accommodate residents in all stages of
life, including young adults, multigenerational
families, and older adults hoping to "age in
place ", and older adults looking to downsize."
11
p.3
Do not support lowering the
minimum lot size in single - family
neighborhoods. Suggest revising
City's lot size to meet King
County minimum of 7,200 sf.
David Puki, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
12
p.3
Lot size has changed since
purchased property in Allentown.
Originally platted 3,000 sf lots do
not meet the current 6,500 sf lot
minimum in LDR zone.
Pat Malara, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
13
p.3
Strongly support reduced lot size
from 6500 sf to 6000 sf.
Email from Hyojin
Whitford, dated 8.16.15
Comment noted.
14
p.3
Need to keep the current ratio of
multifamily and single - family
dwellings to mitigate transiency.
Instead of building more
apartments, need to upgrade
existing to better meet residents'
needs.
Email from Jenny
McCoy, dated 8.13.15
Housing Element policy language does not
specify amounts of multifamily or single - family
housing. The zoning code regualtes the density
and lot size of single and multifamily housing
that can be constructed in different residential
zones. Maintenance and rehabilitation of
existing multi - family housing is addressed in
Policy 3.4.2.
152
15
p.3
Concern as to how our current
schools accommodate Tukwila's
students, and whether this has
been considered. Many of
Tukwila School District's
elementary schools are at
capacity. If the City plans to allow
more apartment buildings, multi-
family residences, or even single-
family homes, we will need
somewhere to put the children
that inevitably come with new
housing.
Email from Brenda
Schenck, dated 8.16.15
The City is in regular communication with
Tukwila School District (TSD) and has shared the
Housing Background Report, including growth
projections, and the draft Housing Element with
TSD staff. In the coming months, pursuant to a
King County policy directive, the City will be
reaching out to the five school districts serving
Tukwila residents (Tukwila, Highline, Renton,
Seattle, and Kent) regarding school capacity and
housing /population growth. Comment noted.
16
p.4
Need to link the two
Implementation Strategies under
Goal 3.1 to show that the first
strategy on input from residents
and property owners will be
followed by Council review and
potential action.
CM Quinn, Council Work
Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Second Implementation Strategy now reads
"Following the public input process, consider
flexible zoning standards to allow prevailing lot
size to remain and smaller lot sized to be
allowed i-# as decided by Council decision.
Establish parameters for design characteristics
such as height, lot coverage, home design
features, and setbacks."
17
p.4
Need to clarify "if desired" to
reflect that a change in lot sizes is
a Council policy decision.
CM Robertson, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Revision in Row 16 addresses this comment.
18
p.4
Affordable housing acts as a
driver for economic
development. Support policies
and implementation strategies to
provide affordable housing for all
residents.
Marty Kooistra /Housing
Development
Consortium, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
19
p.4
Affordable housing is the most
important issue in the Latino
community. Need for more
affordable apartments with 3+
bedrooms.
Reina
Blandon /Community
Connectors, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
20
p.4
Affordable housing is very
important.
Naimo
Wagafe /Community
Connectors, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
21
p.4
Support Goal 3.2 and Policy 3.2.2
and corresponding
Implementation Strategies.
Development incentives
encourage high quality affordable
housing. Well built, solidly
managed affordable housing can
promote community cohesion.
Alyssa Mehl /Bellwether
Housing, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
22
p.4
Support Goal 3.2, 3.3, 3.5, and
3.6. Support a more diverse
range of housing, specifically
cottage housing. Project to
develop owner - occupied homes
affordabele to moderate and low -
income households at the United
Methodist Church property is not
feasible under current zoning
code.
Graydon
Manning /Homestead
Community Land Trust,
Council Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
23
p.4
Do not support changing the
wording of this policy (3.2.1) as
"diverse" is the right word.
Diversity can refer to many
attribute, not just racial diversity.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted.
24
p.4
Support policies that are
equitable and promote
affordable housing.
Becca
Meredith /Forterra,
Council Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
153
25
p.4
Clarify if plan is to add affordable
rental housing, increasing our
total percentage of rental
properties in Tukwila, or to
replace existing substandard
rental housing as the
opportunities arise. Concern
about stability of neighborhoods
and the effects on schools, if
increase the total percentage of
rentals in the city.
Email from CM
Hougardy, dated 8.12.15
Draft policy language supports the creation of
new owner occupied and rental housing that is
affordable to a range of incomes, as well as
improving the existing affordable housing so that
it may maintain its affordability while providing a
higher quality living space. Bellwether Housing
analyzed data on their affordable rental
properties and found lower turnover rates for
low- income renters living in quality affordable
housing.
26
p.4
Affordable housing includes
permitting mother -in -law
apartments. My husband and I
will be retiring and being able to
rent our basement will make our
mortgage payment more
affordable as we anticipate a
reduced income at time of
retirement.
Email from Jenny
McCoy, dated 8.13.15
Comment noted.
27
p.5
Reword Policy 3.2.6.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Policy 3.2.6 now reads "Strive to make
alternative and affordable housing options
available for residents currently living in
substandard housing, such as pre -HUD code
mobile homes."
28
p.5
Include detached accessory
dwelling units as a housing option
to explore allowing in single
family zones.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Implementation Strategy now reads "Allow an
attached or detached accessory dwelling unit,
..."
29
p.5
First bullet under Implementation
Strategies, removed "attached"
from description of ADUs. Public
response at the Community
Conversation events showed
public support for detached ADUs
if done carefully.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Revision in Row 28 addresses this comment.
30
p.5
ADUs are a great solution for
accommodating an older relative
or a young family member
because it allows them to live
independently while being close
enough for you to keep an eye on
them.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted.
31
p.5
The last sentence under the first
Implementation Strategy should
be a stand alone Implementation
Strategy.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
New Implementation Strategy now reads
"Promote mixed -use developments with ground -
level commercial space and residences at and
above the street level in specified areas."
32
p.5
Revise 6th bullet under
Implementation Strategies on
development statements to
include a variety of incomes and
different types of developers.
CM Robertson, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Implementation Strategy now reads " Develop
specific statements regarding location, type, and
characteristics of desired housing affordable to a
variety of incomes to local for - profit and non -
profit developers."
33
p.5
Sixth bullet under
Implementation Strategies,
wording recommended by the
Planning Commission should be
maintained. By specifying the
type and characteristics of the
housing, as well as the location,
Tukwila will be assured that
affordable housing is attractive
and integrated into our
community.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted.
154
34
p.5
Trailer homes in the TIB area
should be relocated.
Chul M. Kim, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15; Letter
dated 8.12.15
Policy 3.2.6 addresses substandard housing,
including mobile homes. Comment noted.
35
p.5
Second bullet under
Implementation Strategies,
remove both instances of
"limited." The previous
demonstration project was overly
cautious and restrictive. If we
continue in this vein, we will have
the same results, no cottage
housing.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
The now expired Housing Options Program (TMC
18.120) was intended to be a limited, pilot
program. Many cities have demonstrated
success with a limited demonstration /pilot
cottage housing program, and then renewed and
revised the program using lessons learned to
expand the program and to promote successful,
compatible development. Staff
Recommendation: Keep as is.
36
p.5
As a signatory of the Growing
Transit Communities Regional
Compact, the City of Tukwila has
the opportunity to demonstrate a
commitment in its compehensive
plan to promoting thriving and
equitable transit - oriented
development. The plan addresses
this committment in the TIB
District element and could be
further strengthened by including
policies or discussion that
specifically address transit-
oriented development in the
Housing element.
Letter from Puget Sound
Regional Council (PSRC),
dated 8.11.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise Implementation
Strategy (third bullet) under Goal 3.2 to
specifically address transit - oriented
development. Implementation Strategy now
reads "Explore increasing density in areas
supported by transit to ehance transit - oriented
development, and /or in proximity to high -
employment areas."
37
p.6
Policy 3.3.3, clarify how "very-
low, low- and moderate - income"
are defined.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Policy 3.3.3 now reads "Continue supporting
very -low, low- and moderate income housing, as
defined by King County income levels, to
address the countywide need by supporting
regional affordable housing development and
preservation efforts."
38
p.7
Include new Implementation
Strategy to reflect current
Council work to adopt healthy
housing code (National Healthy
Housing Standard) in addition to
the International Property
Maintenance Code.
CM Seal, Council Work
Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
New Implementation Strategy now reads
"Explore adoption and enforcement the
National Healthy Housing Standard."
39
p.7
Too many Tukwila residents
occupying apartments with
deplorable living conditions.
Before any plans are adopted to
add more apartments in Tukwila,
the existing apartments should
be brought to acceptable living
conditions.
Email from Brenda
Schenck, dated 8.16.15
Goal 3.4 addresses improving Tukwila's housing
stock. Comment noted.
40
p.8
Revise 2nd Implementation
Strategy on partnerships with
non - profits to allow for more
flexibility.
CM Robertson, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Implementation Strategy now reads "Explore
partnerships with non - profits to facilitate the
purchase and upgrade of poorly maintained
rental- housing."
41
p.8
Need additional policy language
to support the development and
preservation of housing to attract
young families to Tukwila.
CM Robertson, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Keep as is. Goal 3.5 and
Policy 3.5.1 addresses this by encouraging a
variety of housing for people in all stages of life,
including young families.
42
p.8
Support Goal 3.5 as it opens the
door to opportunities and
provides framework for policies
and tools to bring opportunities
and investment to the city.
Keri Williams /Enterprise
Community Partners,
Council Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
155
43
p.8
Strongly support emphasis on a
diversity of housing choices.
Strong support for housing
diversity shown at Community
Conversations held in 2014.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15; Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
44
p.9
Revise Implementation Strategy
on first time homebuyer
programs to allow for more
flexibility.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Implementation Strategy now reads "Encourage
provide and help market private and public
assistance and education for first time
homebuyers."
45
p.9
Mobility is of great concern in the
Tukwila School District. During
the 2014 school year, there was a
turnover of 49.72% of students.
Mobility impacts student who
leave and who stay. Need for
housing for families to stay in
Tukwila.
Mary Fertakis /Tukwila
School Board, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Information on student mobility is included in
the Housing Background Report. Goal 3.6:
Increase long -term residency in the City includes
policy language to encourage long -term
residency. Mobility is a multifaceted issue that
should be addressed in a variety of ways,
including but not limited to housing. Comment
noted.
46
p.9
Revise Policy 3.6.2 so it reads
"Encourage long -term residency
by providing a range of home
ownership options suitable for
people in all stages of their lives."
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Minor language change to be consistent with
wording of Goal 3.5. Policy 3.6.2 now reads
"Encourage long -term residency by providing a
range of home ownership options for persons in
all stages of life."
47
p.9
Add a new Implementation
Strategy, "Develop relationships
with existing homeowner and
neighborhood associations." The
fifth bullet talks about helping to
develop associations, but there
are several current homeowners
associations in Tukwila.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
New Implementation Strategy to read "Develop
relationships with existing homeowner and
neighborhood associations."
156
2015 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE: HOUSING ELEMENT DEFINTIONS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING- Total housing expenditures in excess of 30 percent of household
income are considered "excessive" and viewed as an indicator of a housing affordability problem. This
definition of affordability was established under the United States National Housing Act of 1937.
Housing that is considered affordable depends on household income and needs. There is no set price,
size, or type of affordable housing.
• A household earning less than 30% area median income (AMI) earns $19,990 or less per year,
and can afford to spend about $500 on monthly housing costs. This includes full -time minimum
wage workers.
• A household earning between 30 -50 % AMI earns between $19,991- $33,100 per year, and can
afford to spend about $670 on monthly housing costs. This includes childcare workers, file
clerks, and home health aides.
• A household earning 50 -80% AMI earns between $33,101 - $52,939 per year, and can afford to
spend $1,070 on monthly housing costs. This includes auto repair mechanics, social workers,
and dental assistants.
• A household earning between 80 -100% AMI earns between $52,940 - $66,174 per year, and can
afford to spend about $1,500 on monthly housing costs. This includes paralegals, nurses, and
postal mail carriers.
• A household earning the King County AMI of $66,175 or more, can afford to spend about
$1,800+ on monthly housing costs.
Affordable housing can promote long -term residency for renters. According to the National Apartment
Association 2013 report, the turnover rate for subsidized affordable units is about half of the rate for
market rent units.
Affordable housing extends to home owners and renters. A variety of affordable housing developers and
financiers help moderate and low- income families to own a home.
Recently completed rental and owner - occupied subsidized affordable housing
8/13/2015
W: \Long Range Projects \2014 CompPlanUpdate \CITY COUNCIL \TIB Housing NH July August 2015 \Housing Aff & Diversity
Handout.docx
157
HOUSING DIVERSITY- Housing diversity refers to the range of housing options available to
residents.
• Diverse, affordable housing is critically important to the health and wellbeing of children and
families. When housing needs are appropriately met, children are more likely to be healthy and
perform well in school, and parents are more likely to be productive members of a strong
workforce.
• A diverse housing stock is linked to home ownership. Larger, detached single - family homes are
often at prices out of reach for moderate - income families. Townhomes, duplexes, and tri -and
four- plexes offer alternative home ownership options, often at lower prices than single - family
homes.
• Housing diversity is also related to housing accessibility. Housing accessibility is a very important
consideration for the elderly as well as for other individuals with disabilities.
• Housing diversity can be achieved through a multi - directional approach that includes both new
development and rehabilitation.
Examples of different types of housing
PE /10 ED SOGLE-FAMILT
i4g1MEtt
GUPLEx
0CSJIR7YARL3 NCIALOGll
AP, IUME T ccuRT 7"9-EX
PLEk
-411551N6
�I
TOLLIM401SE
\
Diagram of Missing Middie Housing Types. Source: Q'pticos Design, ira�
DIVERSITY - Broadly speaking, diversity is a range of different things. In regards to community
diversity, diversity is often defined as individuals and systems responding respectfully and effectively to
people of all cultures, languages, classes, races, ethnic backgrounds, disabilities, age, religions, genders,
sexual orientation and other factors.
8/13/2015
W: \Long Range Projects \2014 CompPlanUpdate \CITY COUNCIL \TIB Housing NH July August 2015 \Housing Aff & Diversity
Handout.docx
158
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
1011 Plum Street SE • PO Box 42525 • Olympia, Washington 98504 -2525 • (360) 725 -4000
www.commerce.wa.gov
July 22, 2015
Ms. Rebecca Fox
Senior Planner
City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
RE: Proposed amendment to the periodic update of the city's Housing Element and Residential
Neighborhoods Element of the comprehensive plan as required by RCW 36.70A.130
Dear Ms. Fox:
Thank you for sending Growth Management Services the proposed amendments to Tukwila's
comprehensive plan that we received on June 17, 2015, and processed with Material ID No.
21351. We have reviewed your submittals and offer the comments below for your
consideration.
We especially like the following:
• The Housing Element recognizes the need to address the lack of affordable housing for
residents earning less than 30 percent AMI and not relying on market forces to provide this
housing.
• The Implementation Strategies under the Goals and Policies section, Goal 3.1 in the Housing
Element considers flexible zoning standards to allow prevailing lot size to remain and
smaller lot sizes to be allowed if desired.
• The policies and strategies under Housing Goal 3.2 provide flexibility in the types of housing
that might be developed as well as preserve existing housing.
• The Implementation Strategy to explore increasing density in areas supported by transit or
in proximity to high- employment areas is one of the principles of Smart Growth and will help
prevent growth into natural areas or other areas of the city.
• In the Residential Neighborhoods Element, the topic of code updates to address short -term
vacation rentals and other economic uses in residential areas was listed as an
Implementation Strategy and makes a lot of sense. MRSC has some good examples of how
other jurisdictions are handling this issue. The website can be accessed at:
http://mrsc.org / Home / Research - Tools/ Ask -MRSC- Archives /Planning.aspx #Request -for-
information-on- other - cities - that - allow.
159
Ms. Rebecca Fox
July 22, 2015
Page 2
• The link between Goal 7.3.2 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through land use strategies
that promote a mix of housing, employment, and services at densities sufficient to promote
transit and alternatives to auto travel and the Implementation Strategies that require capital
improvements and investments, should promote the funding to implement this goal.
• The strategy to revise development regulations to create an incentive rather than
disincentive to share access roads is a nice addition.
• Moving Goal 7.6: Southcenter Boulevard from the Transportation Corridors section of the
Comprehensive Plan to the Residential Neighborhood Element is a good fit.
We have concerns about the following that you should address before you adopt your plan
amendments:
• While the letter from your attorney from Kenyon Disend did a good job defending the 2031
Growth Targets included in the Housing Report which was the basis for the updated Housing
Element, Growth Management Services recommends that Tukwila extrapolate the
jurisdiction's growth rate from 2031 to 2035 which is the comprehensive plan horizon year,
and show that there is still sufficient capacity. As noted in the attorney's letter, there are
several methods for achieving this. County -wide (GMA and CPPs), only 3.2 percent additional
capacity is needed. This additional information could be included as a new paragraph within
the element, as a footnote, or a new paragraph in the background report. The intent is to
show there is adequate space and capacity for the incremental increase in population.
Congratulations to you and your staff for the good work these amendments represent. If you
have any questions or concerns about our comments or any other growth management issues,
please contact me at joyce.phillips@Jcommerce.wa.gov or 360.725.3045. We extend our continued
support to the City of Tukwila in achieving the goals of growth management.
Sincerely,
Joyce Phillips, AICP
Senior Planner
Growth Management Services
JP:lw
cc: Jeffrey Wilson, AICP, Senior Managing Director, Growth Management Services
David Andersen, AICP, Eastern Region Manager, Growth Management Services
Ike Nwankwo, Western Region Manager, Growth Management Services
Lynn Kohn, Senior Planner, Growth Management Services
160
From: Nora Gierloff
To: Laura Beniamin
Subject: FW: public comment on comp plan FW: rezone lot size
Date: Monday, August 17, 2015 11:17:02 AM
From: Laurel Humphrey
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 11:12 AM
To: Council Members; Nora Gierloff
Subject: public comment on comp plan FW: rezone lot size
From: ppinsic9090 [mailto:ppinsic9090 @hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 10:09 PM
To: CityCouncil
Subject: rezone lot size
hi
im hyojin whitford who lives in 12217 46th ave s. tukwila.
i strongly urge you to reduce lot size from 6500sqft to 6000sqft.
beacause i want my property value back which was used be 4 lots.
the city has been working on comprehensive plan including renew TIB, housing and
neighborhood elements.
now its the time to concern new lot size
then upgrade the community value.
thank you for reading my email & your time.
best regards,
hyojin whitford
161
From: Nora Gierloff
To: Laura Benjamin
Subject: FW: Input on Comprehensive Plan
Date: Friday, August 14, 2015 8:53:49 AM
For the matrix.
From: Jenny McCoy [mailto:jenmccoy54 @gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 6:02 PM
To: Nora Gierloff; CityCouncil
Subject: Input on Comprehensive Plan
I was unable to attend on Monday evening. I have two comments regarding housing:
1. We need to keep the current ratio of multifamily dwellings to single family dwellings to
mitigate against a too transient population. Instead of building more apts, we need to
upgrade the ones we already have to better meet our residents needs.
2. I believe that part of affordable housing includes permitting mother -in -law apts. My
husband and I will be retiring within 10 years and being able to rent out our basement
will make our own mortgage payment more affordable as we anticipate having a
reduction in income at the time of retirement.
Thank you for soliciting my input.
Jenny McCoy
14202 56th Ave S
Tukwila, WA 98168
162
From: Nora Gierloff
To: Laura Benjamin; Rebecca Fox
Subject: FW: Comprehensive Plan: Comments Following August 10 Mtg.
Date: Monday, August 17, 2015 9:47:12 AM
For the Matrix
From: Brenda Schenck [mailto:brenda.schenck @gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 8:46 PM
To: CityCouncil; Nora Gierloff
Subject: Comprehensive Plan: Comments Following August 10 Mtg.
I attended the Council meeting on August 10 hoping to have some questions answered about
the Comprehensive Plan, specifically as it relates to housing development in the city. Going
into the meeting, I had several concerns. I decided not to comment because I felt that I hadn't
educated myself adequately to comment, and hoped that my concerns would be addressed
during the meeting.
The first concern was addressed by our high school principal, Pat Larson. We have entirely
too many Tukwila residents occupying apartments with deplorable living conditions. Before
any plans are adopted to add more apartments in Tukwila, the existing apartments should be
brought to acceptable living conditions. There was discussion regarding intimidation of
renters by managers when tenants bring problems to their attention, so I won't go into that
here, but there is a lot of work to be done, especially with apartments on the west side of
International Blvd.
The second concern I have is related to how our current schools accommodate Tukwila's
students, and whether that has been considered. I work at Tukwila Elementary, and we are at
capacity, and it's my understanding that Cascade View is as well. Portables have already been
brought in at Foster and Showalter. If the City plans to allow more apartment buildings,
multi - family residences, or even single - family homes, we'll need somewhere to put the
children that inevitably come with new housing. I went to Southgate Elementary school, and
find it ironic that back in the day we had five elementary schools and not nearly the
population. (I realize that the issue of schools does not rest solely with the City, but it's a very
important factor when considering growth.)
I have lived in Tukwila for 47 of my 50 years. My husband and I both attended Showalter and
graduated from Foster. We chose to buy a home in Tukwila and raise our four children here
because we love Tukwila. I wouldn't trade the experience of living here through the continued
changes we've seen in our community, or raising our kids in this unique city. But it is
heartbreaking when I think about the number of families who have moved away from
Tukwila, people who are our friends, because of perceptions that Tukwila is rampant with
crime, the schools are sub -par, and that we are in 'the hood.'
My hope is that these words from the Comp Plan will remain at the forefront of decision -
making when it comes to development in our city:
7.3.1 Maintain a comprehensive land use map that supports the preservation and
enhancement of single - family and stable multi - family neighborhoods...
163
Respectfully,
Brenda Schenck
5647 S 150th Pl.
Tukwila, WA 98188
164
Residential Neighborhoods Element - Planning Commission Recommended Version 6.26.15
Revision Matrix 8.19.15
Note: Comments listed without an exhibit reference were delivered verbally during the public hearing on 8.10.15.
GENERAL COMMENTS
Row #
Page #
Comment
Exhibit # /Date /Source
Staff comment /analysis /options
1
NA
Seattle being a Sanctuary City by
definition encourages the good,
the bad and the ugly with respect
to human behavior, contributes
to Tukwila woes of transitory
residents, crime, affordable
housing, etc., because such
transcends Seattle's city limits
and spills over into Tukwila and
other small cities. Hope Tukwila
is being compensated
accordingly, Seattle is.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
Comment noted.
2
NA
My hope is that these words
from the Comp Plan will remain
at the forefront of decision -
making when it comes to
development in our city. 7.3[1].1
Maintain a comprehensive land
use map that supports the
preservation and enhancement
of single - family and stable multi-
family neighborhoods...
Email from Brenda
Schenck, dated 8.16.15
Bold added by Ms. Schenck. Comment noted.
3
NA
Want to ensure that preservation
of single - family neighborhoods is
adequately addressed in policy
language.
CM Hougardy, Council
Discussion, 8.10.15
Goals 7.3. and 7.4 include language to preserve
and enhance single - family neighborhoods. Single -
family neighborhood preservation can also be
supported through zoning code revisions.
4
NA
This confirms my reading of an
affirmatively worded plan for LDR
neighborhoods and I will look for
notice when codes will be
evaluated in support of this plan.
Email from Sandra
Kruize, dated 8.10.15
Comment noted.
5
NA
It is great to have neighborhood
input, but the Council and the
Planning Commission should be
the ones making the decisions.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Comment noted.
COMMENTS ON GOALS /POLICIES /IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
Row #
Page #
Comment
Exhibit # /Date /Source
Staff comment /analysis /options
6
p.1
Add footnote with definition of
sustainability to provide more
context on what is meant by
"neighborhood sustainability."
CM Quinn, Council Work
Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Include an informational
sidebar to highlight what is meant by
sustainability. Footnotes have not been used in
other elements and should keep a consistent
format. Informational sidebar to read
"Sustainability is often defined as "meeting the
needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own
needs." This encompasses environmental,
social, and economic factors such as air and
water quality, access to living wage jobs, and a
social network among neighbors. A sustainable
neighborhood provides housing, resources, and
amenities that benefit residents and create a
sense of community for generations to come."
7
p.2
Refugee and immigrant
resettlement in Tukwila is not
new. It has been occurring for
several decades and was
addressed in the 1995
Comprehensive Plan
Pam Carter, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
165
8
p.2
I appreciate the historic
preservation language included in
the policies and implementation
strategies in the Community
Image and Identity element. I
would appreciate if there could
be some language in the Housing
and Residential Neighborhoods
elements that cross - references
readers to the language that
refers to historic preservation.
Readers may not realize that
historic preservation is addressed
separately in a different element.
Letter from Joan
Hernandez, dated
8.16.15
The format of the Comprehensive Plan strives to
focus on topics in one element, rather than
including a topic in multiple elements. This is
acknowledged in the Purpose section which
reads "This element focuses on land use and
development of residential neighborhoods.
Additional aspects of residential neighborhoods
are found in other elements of the
Comprehensive Plan, including: Community
Image and Identity, Utilities, Transportation, and
Parks, Recreation, and Open Space." St,,
Recommendation: Keep as is.
9
p.3
Last sentence in Residential
Neighborhoods and Land Use
should be included as a goal.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Add new goal, to follow Goal 7.2, under
Neighborhood Quality, and will tie into Policies
and Implementation Strategies with 7.2. New
Goal 7.3 to read "Stabilize residents and
support opportunities for improved educational
attainment, employment, engagement,
economic security, and personal safety."
Numbering of subsequent goals will be revised,
i.e. existing Goal 7.3 is now 7.4, etc.
10
p.4
Neighborhoods map should not
include In which Tukwila
neighborhood do you live ?"
CM Hougardy, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
New map will be included in final, formatted
document.
11
p.5
Need to clarify what "these
goals" refers to.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Sentence to now read "In developing the
policies to meet there goals for this element,
the following issues were identified for Tukwila:"
12
p.5
Need to clarify "Neighborhood
Quality." Description of the issue
focuses on access and non-
motorized connectivity. Heading
should reflect this focus.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Heading to "Neighborhood Quality
now read
Access"
13
p.6
Heading "Noise Abatement"
should be changed to reflect
narrative.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Heading to now read "Noi °^ batcmcnt
Compatible Land Use"
14
p.6
"Noise Abatement" title does not
match the paragraph.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Addressed by revision in Row 9.
15
p.7
Tukwila's neighborhoods need
more sidewalks. Sidewalks help
to create community and safety
since people are outside talking
to each other.
Barbara Wu, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Policy 7.2.2 addresses improving public
infrastructure, with an emphasis on sidewalks,
to an equivalent level of quality in all
neighborhoods. Implementation Strategies
include exploring innovative financing options
for the construction of sidewalks. Comment
noted.
16
p.7
The sidewalk needs to be
extended on Macadam, between
the Baptist church and the
Winter Garden. Many children
walk on this street and it is
unsafe.
Barbara Wu, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Implementation Strategies under Goal 7.2
include continuing to implement the City's Walk
and Roll Plan, and Safe Routes to School, both of
which prioritize pedestrian safety for children.
Comment noted.
17
p.8
The term "urbanization" is not
reflective of the type of
development that occurs in
Tukwila.
CM Robertson, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Policy 7.2.4 to "Use
now read urbanization and
new development to foster a sense of
community and replace lost vegetation and
open spaces with improvements of at least
equal value to the community."
166
18
p.8
Policy 7.2.4., suggest change to
use new development to
foster..." doesn't seem right.
Suggest revising to "New
development should foster a
sense..."
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Addressed by revision in Row 14.
19
p.8
Policy 7.2.6 should include all
aspects of neighborhood quality,
not just focus on noise and odor.
CM Seal, Council Work
Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Policy 7.2.6 to now read "Strict code
enforcement of policies for neighborhood
quality, especially regarding noisc and odor."
20
p.8
Fifth bullet under
Implementation Strategies
should be clarified. Unclear if LID
is required in specific areas, or an
option in specific areas. Revise to
read "Require sidewalks adjacent
to all new development. Develop
criteria to offer an alternative
option for participation in a no-
protest LID."
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Policy language should be flexible to allow for
development of an effective residential LID
program. Staff Recommendation: Keep as is.
21
p.8
Add Policy 7.2.7 Establish a
community Good Neighbor
Policy. Sociability needs
encouragement.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
The idea of a "good neighbor policy" is
addressed through out the Comprehensive Plan
as numerous elements strive to foster positive,
healthy interactions among residents and
among communities across the region. The
Roles and Responsibilities element fosters
positive interactions between the City and
community members. The Community Image
and Identity element fosters positive
interactions internally and externally. The Parks,
Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) fosters
healthy, positive interactions. It is also
addressed in Residential Neighborhoods in
regards to how the built environment can foster
social interaction and community cohesion. Star
Recommendation: Keep as is.
22
p.9
Add new Implementation
Strategy to reflect current
Council action to develop and
implement a foreclosure registry
program.
CM Quinn, Council Work
Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
New Implementation Strategy under Goal 7.2 to
now read "Explore development and
implementation of a foreclosure registry
program."
23
p.9
Need language to clarify that
signage should be developed in
areas where it is most
appropriate.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Implementation Strategy to now read "Develop
neighborhood signage in multiple languages to
foster a sense of community in residential areas,
where appropriate.
24
p.9
Implementation Strategy, 14th
bullet, discourages individuals
from learning English. Spend the
money on teaching them English
and encourage assimilation.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
This Implementation Strategy is consistent with
the community vision to be "the city of
opportunity, the community of choice" and is
also consistent with Goal 5: Positive Community
Image and Identity in the Strategic Plan.
Comment noted.
25
p.9
Second bullet, "maintain" should
be "maintains"
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested to
fix typo. Implementation Strategy to now read
"Apply the tree code to require site design that
minimizes the removal of significant trees and
maintains appropriate tree canopy standards."
26
p.9
Support Goals 7.3 and 7.4
Graydon
Manning /Homestead
Community Land Trust,
Council Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
167
27
p.10
First Implementation Strategy
under Goal 7.3, after protect, add
and preserve" to the sentence.
We should maintain our
residential areas and avoid
commercial rezoning of such
land.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Additional language is in keeping with the intent
of the policy to enhance and revitalize
residential areas. Implementation Strategy now
reads "Continued emphasis on existing land use
patterns to protect and preserve residential
uses."
28
p.10
These strategies support the goal
of neighborhood sustainability.
An Implementation Strategy that
focuses on new single - family
homes is incomplete (8th bullet).
It should be revised to include
other types of housing as in "
Development of a variety of new
housing including single - family
homes as well as townhomes,
etc."
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Listing specific types of housing may not provide
future flexibility to develop housing that meets
community and market needs. A "variety of
housing" broadens the focus from single - family
homes without being prescriptive. X7;:7-111
Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Implementation Strategy under Goal 7.3 to now
read "Development of a variety of new housing,
including single - family homes.
29
p.11
Need language to clarify that
landscape planters should be
required only where appropriate.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Implementation Strategy to now read "Require
sidewalk and landscape planter for both sides of
residential 2-
streets and where appropriate on
lane street improvements, where appropriate.
30
p.11
Need language to clarify that
landscape planters in front of
multi - family developments
should be required only where
appropriate. Many existing
planters are poorly maintained
and do not add value to the
streetscape.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggest.
Implementation Strategy to now read "Require
sidewalk and landscape planters in front of all
multi - family developments, where appropriate."
31
p.11
Do not support requiring
landscape planters on residential
streets. Homeowners often
neglect them. This is a major
change in policy; it is not
something the City has usually
required. If the policy must be
kept, suggest revising to say
"where appropriate."
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Addressed by revisions in Rows 27 and 28.
Comment noted.
32
p.11
Add "way- finding" to Policy 7.4.3
as a tool to encourage resident
identification with the
neighborhood.
CM Quinn, Council Work
Session, 7.28.15
Staff Recommendation: Keep as is. Way- finding
is addressed in Transportation Element Policy
13.6.9 which reads "Provide way- finding along
roads, sidewalks, and trails to direct non -
motorized travelers to trails and destinations."
33
p.11
Clarify what is meant by "valued
natural and historic features" in
Policy 7.4.2.
CM Hougardy, Council
Work Session, 7.28.15
This is a policy carried over from the 1995
Comprehensive Plan. The intent of this policy is
to promote residential development that does
not take away from natural and historic features
that have shaped Tukwila. Staff
Recommendation: Revise as suggested. Policy
7.4.2 to now read "Ensure residential
development, when applicable, reflects high
design in harmony with identified, valued
features of the natural environment and historic
development."
34
p.12
Policy 7.4.6 -Add language to
provide more incentives and
inducements for residents to
upgrade and maintain homes and
yards.
CP Kruller, Council Work
Session, 8.3.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Policy 7.4.6 to now read "Support a residential
rehabilitation program that provides assistance,
inducements, and incentives for residents to
upgrade and maintain safe, attractive homes
and yards."
168
35
p.12
Policy 7.4.7 -Add language to
include usage in addition to level
of activity to help ensure that
home occupations are
compatible in residential
neighborhoods.
CM Robertson, Council
Work Session, 8.3.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Policy 7.4.7 to now read "Allow home
occupations as accessory uses if they have a
level of activity and usage compatible with
single - family structures and residential
neighborhood goals."
36
p.12
First bullet under Implementation
Strategies - Term "historic
development patterns" may be
misleading as it is unclear what is
meant by historic development.
Remove the work "development"
to help clarify.
CM Ekberg, Council
Work Session, 8.3.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Implementation Strategy to now read "Revise
development regulations at the neighborhood
level to the historic development
reflect
patterns of the neighborhood..."
37
p.12
Third bullet under
Implementation Strategies,
requires more definition of how
mitigation of potential impacts of
smaller lots will be accomplished.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
As mentioned in the Preface to the Plan,
implementation strategies are representative
approaches to policy implementation aimed at
achieving goals. The specific tools to mitigate
the potential impacts of develop of smaller lots
will be reviewed, including public comment and
potential Council action, during a zoning code
update process scheduled to begin in 2016.
Comment noted.
38
p.12
Third bullet under
Implementation Strategies, revise
language to clarify that the
Implementation Strategy is an
option to be explored.
CM Robertson, Council
Work Session, 8.3.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Implementation Strategy to now read "Explore
Revise code revisions to maintain standard
minimum lot size of 6,500 SF but allow smaller
lot areas subject to design standards..."
39
p.12
Third bullet under
Implementation Strategies,
conflicts with Housing Element
Policy 3.1.2. Support changing
"Revise" to "Explore" in order to
align it with the cited Housing
policy
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Addressed by revisions in Row 36.
40
p.12
We need to address new homes
being built in residential
neighborhoods. There should be
a height restriction on new
homes to be compatible with
existing homes.
Maxine Anderson,
Council Hearing, 8.10.15
Goal 7.4 and the Single - Family Residential
Development Policies address compatible infill
at the policy level. Revisions to zoning code,
such as a maximum height in the LDR zone, will
follow after the Comp Plan update. Comment
noted.
41
p.12
Concern about giant homes. New
development should fit into the
neighborhood.
Barbara Wu, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment noted.
42
p.12
7th bullet under Implementation
Strategies, agree but should be
part of a Good Neighbor Policy
sanctioned and promoted by the
city.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
The idea of a "good neighbor policy" is
addressed through out the Comprehensive Plan
as numerous elements strive to foster positive,
healthy interactions among residents and
among communities across the region. The
Roles and Responsibilities element fosters
positive interactions between the City and
community members. The Community Image
and Identity element fosters positive
interactions internally and externally. The Parks,
Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) fosters
healthy, positive interactions. It is also
addressed in Residential Neighborhoods in
regards to how the built environment can foster
social interaction and community cohesion. ' LO.'
Recommendation: Keep as is.
169
43
p.13
7.4.10 - Why do all plans
promote tall trees? Absent tall
trees most of Tukwila residential
property would have views. With
a 35 foot high tree limit there
would be more view property
with higher values and greater
tax revenue without
compromising privacy. I like trees
but do they need to be so high in
the city?
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
The City's current tree work focuses on the
improving the tree canopy, the number and
types of trees in the city, and does not include a
tree height limit. Residents have the option to
maintain and prune trees to maintain views. An
Implementation Strategy under Goal 7.4
addresses funding and technical assistance for
neighborhood tree planting and pruning. Trees
provide numerous environmental services and
benefits to the community, including natural
management of stormwater and providing
shade and cooling. Comment noted.
44
p.13
5th bullet under Implementation
Strateiges, revise language to
clarify that the Implementation
Strategy is an option to be
explored.
CM Robertson, Council
Work Session, 8.3.15
Staff Recommendation: Revise as suggested.
Implementation Strategy to now read "Explore
Revise code to allow home occupations in
detached garages to support the development
of detached garages."
45
p.13
5th bullet under Implementation
Strategies- The Tukwila
Tomorrow Plan allowed cottages
to be constructed on existing
residential dwelling lots and 1
assume the existing
Comprehensive Plan also allows.
Surely there must be some
chicken coops and dog houses
that could qualify too.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
Detached garages are currently allowed in
residential areas. However, current TMC does
not allow home occupations in accessory
structures. Staff has heard from residents that
they would like to use detached garages for
home occupations to open the door to more
economic opportunities. This Implementation
Strategy is focused on exploring code revisions
to allow home occupations in detached garages.
The potential code revision could include criteria
to ensure that the level of activity and use of
home occupations allowed in detached garages
are compatible with residential neighborhoods,
as stated in Policy 7.4.7. Comment noted.
46
p.14
Plan should require covered off
street parking, at the very least
off street parking which promote
greater safety.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
Parking standards are listed in the zoning code.
In residential areas, the code regulates the
number of off - street parking spaces and the
parking surface. The City has never required
parking spaces to covered. This can be explored
during zoning code updates, at Council's
request. Comment noted.
47
p.15
Policy 7.5.1, make this clearer by
revising to say "...one- quarter
mile of residential areas to those
neighborhoods with..."
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
The intent of this policy is to utilize high - quality
pedestrian and bicycle facilities (i.e. sidewalks,
bike lanes, etc.) to link commercial areas to
residential areas. The pedestrian and bicycle
facilities may not be solely located in
neighborhoods. Staff Recommendation: Keep as
is.
48
p.15
7.5.2 It's hard to imagine a
successful enterprise without
auto accommodations.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
The intent of Policy 7.5.2 is to promote
neighborhood- supportive commercials areas
that are compatible with residential areas and
can be easily accessed by foot and bicycle, such
as a resident being able to walk to the corner
store for a carton of milk. This policy does not
exclude auto access from these potential
commercial developments. Comment noted.
49
p.15
Implementation Strategies under
Goal 7.5. On street parking, more
Shanty Town appearance and
safety issues for pedestrians.
Email from BIM Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
On- street parking along the street front, behind
or beside buildings can help to create a "Main
Street" feel when done with careful design
requirements, such as the commercial center in
Columbia City.
170
50
p.16
Goal 7.6 - Southcenter Boulevard
was moved from the original
Transportation Corridors
Element. The intent of this goal is
to buffer residential
neighborhoods to the north from
the commercial activities and
traffic of the Southcenter area.
Since the 1995 Comprehensive
Plan, Southcenter Boulevard was
extended to the TIB LINK Light
Rail Station. Language should be
added to clarify that this goal
focuses on the portion of
Southcenter Boulevard that is to
the north of the Southcenter
area, as the stretch of
Southcenter Boulevard west of I-
5 is residential on both sides.
Staff edit
Staff Recommendation: Revise Goal 7.6 to now
read "A corridor of low -rise offices, residences,
with localized commercial uses at major
intersections all of which act as a buffer to the
low- density residential neighborhoods to the
north of the Southcenter area."
51
p.16
Goal 7.6. These policies pertain
to the area east of I -5,but do not
pertain to the western portion of
the street. The goal and policies
should be rewritten to so that it
is clear this is only for the eastern
portion of the road.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15; Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Addressed by revisions in Row 50.
52
p.16
The second Implementation
Strategy should be deleted as
Southcenter Boulevard lies
outside the area covered by the
Southcenter Plan.
Letter from Pam Carter,
dated 8.10.15
Southcenter Boulevard is outside of the
Southcenter Plan area, and thus the Southcenter
Plan is not applicable. Staff Recommendation:
Revise as suggested. Implementation Strategy
removed, "Continue implementation the
of
Southcenter Plan."
53
p.17
Add 7.7.3.1 Mandate Contractor
Good Neighbor Policy by
stamping all permits accordingly.
To hold contractors
accountable.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
Construction activities, as relate to noise, are
regulated by TMC 8.22. Staff Recommendation:
Keep as is.
54
p.17
5th bullet under Implementation
Strategies, after 'impacts' add:
including the coordination of
helicopter /drone flight corridors
over non residential areas.
Email from Bill Holstine,
dated 8.18.15
The intent of this Implementation Strategy is to
lobby and work with the FAA to reduce noise
impacts from airport operational procedures,
which many include but not limited to
helicopters and drones. Staff Recommendation:
Keep as is.
171
1 2
From: Nora Gierloff
To: Laura Benjamin; Rebecca Fox
Subject: FW: Residential Neighborhood Policies
Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 10:15:24 AM
Last comments for the matrix.
Original Message
From: William Holstine [mailto:holstine123 @comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 10:08 AM
To: Nora Gierloff
Subject: Re: Residential Neighborhood Policies
Nora:
A few comments on subject draft:
General comment Page 3, second paragraph Obviously, Seattle being a Sanctuary City by definition encourages
the good, the bad and the ugly with respect to human behavior, contributes to Tukwila woes of transitory residents,
crime, affordable housing, etc., because such transcends Seattle's city limits and spills over into Tukwila and other
small cities. Hope Tukwila is being compensated accordingly, Seattle is.
Add 7.2.7 Establish a community Good Neighbor Policy (sociability needs encouragement)
Implementation Strategies
Bullet 5 Does the term 'no protest' mean generally acceptable to all?
Bullet 14 Delete....It discourages individuals from learning english, spend the money on teaching them english and
encourage assimilation.
Neighborhood Sustainability-- Implementation Strategy.... Bullet 1, after protect add and preserve' to sentence We
should maintain our residential areas and avoid commercial rezoning of such land
Bullet 13...Clarification of the term 'traffic calming' if more
than speed bumps.
Neighborhood Development....Implementation Strategies...Bullet 3 Requires more definition of how mitigation of
potential negative impacts of smaller lots will be accomplished.
Bullet 4 Needs clarification of accessory units, standalone
units and units in garages.
Bullet 5 Does this mean or include Mobile Home Parks?
What requires permanent foundations? Clarification needed.
Bullet 6 What does 'site design' include? Trees, fences,
etc.?
Bullet 7 Agree but should be part of a Good Neighbor
Policy sanctioned and promoted by the city.
Bullet 12 The Tukwila Tomorrow Plan allowed cottages
to be constructed on existing residential dwelling lots and I assume the existing Comprehensive
Plan also allows. Surely there must be some
chicken coops and dog houses that could qualify too. Move over Shanty Town, here comes
Tukwila. It seems we are becoming more like the
people we are trying to help faster than they are becoming like us. Pity!
7.4.10 Why do all plans promote tall trees? Absent tall trees most of Tukwila residential property would have
views. With a 35 foot high tree limit there would be more view property with higher values and greater tax revenue
173
without compromising privacy. I like trees but do they need to be so high in the city?
Page 14, Bullet 4 Plan should require covered off street parking, at the very least off street parking which promoter
greater safety.
Bullet 9 More or less dense?
Page 15 7.5.2 It's hard to imagine a successful enterprise without auto accommodations.
Implementation Strategies On street parking, more Shanty Town appearance and safety issues for
pedestrians.
Page 17 Add 7.7.3.1 Mandate Contractor Good Neighbor Policy by stamping all permits accordingly. To hold
contractors accountable.
Page 17 Bullet 5 After 'impacts' add: including the coordination of helicopter /drone flight corridors over non
residential areas.
Aren't you sorry you asked? Anyway I very much appreciate the heads up, Thank You Bil
174
2015 Comprehensive Plan Update - General Comments
Revision Matrix 8.19.15
Note: Comments listed without an exhibit reference were delivered verbally during the public hearing on 8.10.15.
Row #
Comment
Exhibit # /Date /Source
Staff comment /analysis /options
1
Lack of outreach regarding zoning
code updates. Unaware of zoning
code updates since purchased
property in Allentown, such as
6,5000 sf minimum lot size in LDR
zones.
Pat Malara, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15
Comment appears to fall outside scope of the 2015
Comprehensive Plan update. Development standards in
the LDR zone were last updated in 2001. When zoning
code is updated to be consistent with the updated
Comprehensive Plan, staff can explore more robust
outreach processes. Comment noted.
2
Outreach and information on the
proposed updates to the
Comprehensive Plan were
insufficient. Unable to access
documents online and would like
a summary /highlight sheet rather
than reading very long
documents.
David Puki, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15; Email
dated 7.13.15
In an effort to make the update material more user
friendly, staff created one page "fact sheets" for each
element. In 2015, staff utilized a variety of outreach
technique including emails, mailings, articles in the
Tukwila Reporter and E- Hazelnut, posting materials on
the City website, as well as holding a community open
house and attending all See You in the Park events.
Outreach efforts can always be improved and staff will
consider this in future outreach efforts. Comment noted.
3
Cannot attend evening meetings
on weekdays as they conflict with
work. Would prefer meetings on
Saturdays.
David Puki, Council
Hearing, 8.10.15; Email
dated 7.13.15
Council work sessions, public hearing, and deliberations
have taken place as part of Committee of the Whole
meetings, which meet on Monday evenings. Comment
noted.
4
What happens if GMA or other
similar regional goals are not
met?
Email from CM
Hougardy, dated
8.12.15
Goals expressed in the Comp Plan are not specific
requirements. Even if they are not achieved, as long as
the City is working to meet the goals it has committed to
in its policies, adopted plans and development
regulations, there wouldn't be specific consequences.
Note: The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) requires
jurisdictions to submit draft Comp Plan updates by
October 15, 2015 in order to be considered for grants in
2016.
5
Would it be appropriate have
another outreach to the
community regarding the final
version of the
housing /TIB /neighborhood
elements of the comprehensive
plan, due to its impact on our
residents?
Email from CM
Hougardy, dated
8.12.15
In 2015, staff utilized a variety of outreach techniques
including: emails, mailings, articles in the Tukwila
Reporter and E- Hazelnut, posting materials on the City
website, and communications to the Community
Connectors. A community open house was held and
staff attended all "See You in the Park" neighborhood
events to hear from the public and provide information.
Staff feels that outreach to date is sufficient.
175
1
From: Puki. David J
To: Laura Benjamin
Subject: RE: Comprehensive Plan Update Information Issues
Date: Monday, July 13, 2015 3:58:16 PM
Thank you for your prompt response. I will get back to you after I review the information and links
that you have provided.
Dave
From: Laura Benjamin [ mailto :Laura.Benjamin @TukwilaWA.gov]
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 1:10 PM
To: Puki, David J
Cc: Laurel Humphrey; Rebecca Fox
Subject: RE: Comprehensive Plan Update Information Issues
Mr. Puki —Thank you for reaching out regarding the updates to the Comprehensive Plan. I have
attached two documents, one giving an overview of the proposed changes to the Housing Element
and the other giving an overview of the proposed changes to the Residential Neighborhoods
Element. Also, you can access edited versions of the Housing and Residential Neighborhoods
elements at http: / /records.tukwilawa.gov /WebLink8/ Browse.aspx ?startid = 258587 &dbid =1. The
underlined text indicates new draft language and the strikeout text indicates language that may be
removed.
To address the changes you listed below, there are no proposed changes to limit the number and
type of vehicles that may be parked on a residential property. Residential parking requirements are
listed in Tukwila Municipal Code Title 9 — Vehicles and Traffic, available at
http: / /records.tukwilawa.gov /WebLink8 /1 /doc /56244 /Electronic.aspx. There is new draft policy
language to explore adopting smaller lot sizes in neighborhoods where the historical lot pattern is
smaller than the established 6,500 square foot minimum. However, the areas where the proposed
smaller lot size may apply and the exact lot size have not been decided and if this policy moves
forward, the new policy will require more outreach to residents and a Council decision to revise the
City's Zoning Code.
Currently, there are no public meetings scheduled for Saturday mornings. The upcoming meetings
are part of City Council meetings which are held on Monday evenings, starting at 7 p.m. We are in
the process of finalizing meeting dates and will be sending out emails and postcard mailings next
week. If you are unable to attend evening meetings, there is the opportunity to submit written
comments and City Council meetings can be viewed on the City's website and on TukTV. I am happy
to meet with you during a time that is more convenient if you would like to further discuss the
proposed updates to the Comprehensive Plan. Please let me know what works best for you.
Please feel free to contact me with any other questions or concerns. I can be reached at 206 -433-
7166 and Laura.Benjamin @TukwilaWa.gov.
Best,
Laura Benjamin
177
Assistant Planner, Department of Community Development
From: "Puki, David J" <David.J.Puki @boeing.com>
Date: July 11, 2015 at 5:52:45 PM PDT
To: "Planning @tukwilawa.gov" <Planning @tukwilawa.gov>
Cc: "allan.ekberg@tukwilawa.gov" <allan.ekberg@tukwilawa.gov >,
"DeSean.Quinn @TukwilaWa.gov" <DeSean.Quinn @tukwilawa.gov >,
" Dennis.Robertson@TukwilaWa.gov" < Dennis .Robertson@tukwilawa.gov >,
"Joe.Duffie @TukwilaWA.gov" <Joe.Duffie @tukwilawa.gov >, Verna Seal
<Verna.Seal@tukwilawa.gov >, Kate Kruller <Kate.Kruller@tukwilawa.gov >, Kathy
Hougardy <Kathy.Hougardy @tukwilawa.gov>
Subject: Comprehensive Plan Update Information Issues
I have been looking through the website info trying to find out specifically what
changes are proposed in the update and can't find any specific information on exactly
what you are proposing to change or revise. Can you provide myself and other
concerned residents with a list showing current conditions and requirements with the
proposed revisions in a brief, clear and concise easy to read format? I was told you
want to limit the amount of parking on existing residential homes to no more than 4
cars. You want to eliminate the ability for some home owner that owns a licensed
commercial vehicle to be able to park at their home. And I was informed that you want
to reduce low density residential lot sizes from 6500 sq. ft. down to 5500 sq. ft..
I was mailed cards this year that contain a website link that does not work when you
type it in. There is no easy links to the planning dept or Planning Commission from the
city's webpage either. I'm not available in the evenings to attend special meetings due
to my work hours. And I don't need to spend hours upon hours reading hundreds of
pages of vaguely written materials trying to figure out just what applies to me and
what does not. What I have read is way too confusing to properly understand.
So if you could be so kind as to please make available a short form of the exact existing
vs. exact proposed conditions up for revision in this update year you will make me, my
friends that are home owners here and my neighbors much more informed and likely
to get involved in this process. We all don't like being surprised after the fact change is
adopted.
Are you planning to hold any public meeting on Saturday mornings?
Thanks
Dave Puki
3748 So. 152nd St.
Tukwila, WA 98188
178