Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 2012-02-23 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila Department of Cow mmnity Development Jim Ha�,� Mcivor .Tack Pace, Director CHAIR, BROOKE ALFORD, VICE CHAIR, THOMAS MCLEOD, COMMISSIONERS, LOUISE STRANDER, DAVID SHUMATE, MIKE HANSEN, AARON HUNDTOFTE, AND JERI FRANGELLO- ANDERSON Planning Commission Public Hearing February 23, 2012 6:30 PM Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers L Call to Order IL Attendance III. Adoption of 01/26/12 Minutes IV. Presentation Antony Ritch, Regional Senior Vice President, Westfield CONTINUANCE 1/26/12 Public Hearing: V. Case Number: 1_12 -001 Applicant: City of Tukwila Request: A series of proposed housekeeping code amendments ranging from code clarification to policy decisions about allowed uses and development standards. Location: City wide VL Adjourn 6300 Sotathcenter Botalevurd, Silite X100 hlkll iTushington 98188 Phone ?06- 431 -36?0 Fax ?06 -431 -3665 x City of Tukwila Planning Commission Planning Commission (PC) Minutes Date: Januaiv 26, 2012 Time: 6:30 PM Location: City Hall Council Chambers Present: Brooke Alford, Chair, Thomas McLeod, Vice Chair, Commissioners, Louise Strander, David Shumate, and Jeri Frangello Anderson Arrived: Commissioner, Mike Hansen arrived at 6:35 PM Absent: Commissioner, Aaron Hundtofte Staff: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director, Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supeitirisor, and Wynetta Bivens, Planning Commission Secretai Chair Alford opened the public hearing at 6:3(_) PM. Minutes: Commissioner McLeod made a motion to adopt the December 15, 2(_)11 minutes. Commissioner Strander noted one correction and seconded the motion. The motion Avas unanimously approved. Correction: Commissioner Jeri Frangello- Anderson, ivas absent at the 12/15/11 meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING CASE NUMBER: L12 -001 APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: A series of proposed housekeeping code amendments ranging from code clarification to policy decisions about allowed uses and development standards. LOCATION: City wide Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor, Department of Community Development presented the staff report. She gave a brief overview on the proposed code amendments. Similar housekeeping code amendments were last updated in 2009.The current meeting and legislative approval process was explained. Also, background and history was provided on the proposed code amendments, discussion followed. PROPOSED CHANGES: Site Soecific Rezones The State law requires only one public hearing for quasi judicial site specific rezones, which typically also involve changes to the Comprehensive Plan map, as the Zoning and Comprehensive Plan maps are identical in Tukwila. However, the City is currently holding two public hearings and several Council Committee meetings. The city attorney has advised that the process needs to be changed to meet the State law. Therefore, staff is asking the Planning Commission to make a decision between Option 1 Option 2b as drafted in the 1/27/12 PC packet. Staff is recommending option 1. There was extensive discussion on the proposed options, and potential revisions to the proposed Page 1 of 4 PC 1 fearing Minutes January 26, 2011 language. ACTION: Option 1 Staff was asked to provide the Commission with more information and clarification on what the role of the Commissioners is pertaining to giving, gathering, and sharing information in a public meeting, and whether option 1 will involve making a recommendation to the City Council by the Planning Commission. Single Family Design Standards Entered into the record was a public comment letter by Sandra Kruzie, Tukwila resident, that was received on January 26, 2012, and it was handed out to the Commissioners at the public hearing., In 2004, the Zoning Code was amended requiring the same design standards for homes built on site and manufactured homes. In response to a citizen complaint staff briefed the Community Affairs and Parks Committee (CAP) in October 2011, regarding different options of regulating the bulls and size of single family dwelling units. This was in response to a complaint regarding houses being built that are too large in their neighborhood. The committee gave staff directions to amend the method of calculating building height on sloping lots. Recently, another Tukwila resident raised an issue with the City Council regarding the current design standards, which prevent the replacement of a single -wide manufactured home with a much better manufactured home, as it did not meet some design standards. The current standards require all homes to have a minimum roof pitch of 5:12 and the front door to face the street. After discussion on this issue, the PC approved Option 1: ACTION: Amend the Single Family Design Standards to allow the replacement of a single wide mobile home with a newer and larger manufactured home, a one -time allowance. Staff will draft some qualifying language addressing what the community is gaining from allowing this waiver. PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Gary Singh, Developer, expressed concern with changing the building height rules that have been in effect for a very long time. He said the City has slopes, which will dramatically change the size of the houses with the new method of calculating building heights. Mr. Singh asked if Attachment G could be looked into. He talked about building height comparisons of the surrounding cities: Kent, Renton, and Burien, stating they allow 35 ft. structure heights and Tukwila is 5 ft. lower than the other three cities. He said that he wonders why Tukwila wants to lower the building heights more. He said he thinks that the 30 ft. limit is great but if it is changed, it's going to create a lot of complications. Mr. Singh said if someone can build a bigger house, he wonders why it is not allowed. Staff noted that in 2007, the City Building Official looked at the referenced Attachment G. Explanation was given on Tukwila and the methods of calculating building height by surrounding cities. Commissioner Alford stated that Tukwila does have homes that are built out of scale, and that they distract from the community. She said efforts should be made to respond to the land and the surrounding community. Staff walked through the proposed changes listed in Attachment F and Attachment L The PC discussed and approved staff s proposed recommendations with the following changes: Page 2of4 2 PC 1 fearing Minutes January 26, 2011 Attachment F, Page 2: Correct the name of the park to Duwamish Hill Preserve. Page 5: Building Height, add the word "at" to state that the different grade planes be of intervals at least 15 feet. Page 6: Add the phrase "or its successor" after Department of Early Learning. Page 8: Landscape Plan Requirements section, add the following clarifying language -"dead or dying trees as determined by a certified arborist" Page 8: Loading Space Requirement section Eliminate this section Page 9: Filing of Plans section, change the word "restriping" to "reconfiguring" with some thresholds, such as adding new spaces, changes to landscaping islands and fire lanes. Discussion of the proposed changes related to manufacturing uses listed under Attachment I followed. The discussion focused on the following use that is permitted in C /LI zone, "Manufacturing, processing and /or assembling of electrical or mechanical equipment, vehicles and machines including, but not limited to, heavy and light machinery, tools, airplanes, boats or other transportation vehicles and equipment Commissioner Alford asked, "Why are manufacturing uses that have significant potential for causing environmental pollution, such as noise, smoke, and dust, permitted in the Commercial Light Industrial (C /LI) area." She said, "It doesn't seem appropriate for the zone. Ms. Dhaliwal stated that she looked into this matter further to understand what the category means, where it is allowed, and what the legislative intent was when it was adopted in 1995. She said it is a permitted use in C /LI, HI, MIC /L, MIC/H zones, and is a conditional use in TVS. It is likely that it was permitted due to some existing business. It is a broad category and the scale of products being manufactured could be small or big under this zone. Ms. Dhaliwal stated if the other Commissioners felt this was an issue that they could consider the following options: 1. Recommendation that the vehicle, auto and boat manufacturing be moved to a Conditional Use in C /LI. If this option is selected then there should be a provision that before it goes to the City Council there is additional notice provided to the property owners of this zone informing them of the options. This would allow property owners a chance to weigh in at the City Council public hearing. 2. Leave as staff has written. 3. No change at this time, and look at it more comprehensively later. She said in the past there was some sensitivity to making decisions that caused existing businesses to become non conforming, and that should be taken into consideration, and proper notice be given before making any changes that exceed the purview of housekeeping code amendments. Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director, commented that the mildest approach -,with the least impact ,would be Page 3of4 3 PC 1 fearing Minutes January 26, 2011 to make it a Conditional Use, v hich v ould alloy, some additional control for nev uses but it would not make any existing uses non conforming. Ms. Dhaliwal said that if the Commission wants to make a recommendation to the City Council, then she suggests notify iug the property owners in the C /LI zone, and holding a public hearing on the proposed change. Commissioner Alford asked for the other Commissioners opinion on the issue. Discussion on this issue continued during deliberation. There were no additional comments. The public hearing was closed. The PC deliberated. At the next meeting, staff will provide the PC with a memo of the requested information on the Site Specific Rezones, Option 1, with an attached ordinance of all of the other proposed changes. The PC will complete deliberation on the revised ordinance, and then make a recommendation to forward to the City Council. The Commission took a vote regarding notifying property owners that the PC would be holding a public hearing to change vehicle and boat manufacturing to a Conditional Use in the C/1-1. Four Commissioners were in favor, Commissioners Strander and Hansen were opposed. CONTINUANCE: The hearing will be continued to February 23, 2012, at which time staff will return with more specific ordinance language. Staff will also send out a notice to the property owners in the C /LI on the proposed changes to manufacturing uses and inform them of the public hearing continuance on February 23 DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Anthony Ritch, Regional Senior Vice President, Westfield, is tentatively scheduled to attend the February 23 meeting and provide an update on the mall. Work continues on the TUC Plan, staff is not certain it will be ready to bring back to the PC in February. A training opportunity was shared with the PC, if interested they can contact Nora, or Evie Bokin, Tukwila Human Resource Director to RSVP. Greater Youth Involvement, community outreach,- Staff said they are unable to take on this project at this time, and asked if anyone would be interested in taking on this project, and developing a proposal to be submitted to the Mayor. Nora asked to be notified if anyone is interested. Staff inquired whether the link to review their PC packet on laserfiche electronically is sufficient, or whether they would also prefer to have a packet mailed to them. Submitted By: Wynetta Bivens Planning Commission Secretaiy Adjourned: 9:22 PM Adopted: 01 /26/12 Page 4 of 4 4 r I i STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Prepared February 26, 2012 FILE NUMBERS PL12 -001, L12 -001 Code Amendments E12 -001 SEPA Checklist 'liar Hui crton, AI(Ivor .Ica'ckPca'ce, Director REQUEST: Housekeeping Code Amendments. Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed amendments and make recommendations to the City Council for review and adoption. PUBLIC HEARING: The public hearing was held on January 26, 2012 and continued until February 23, 2012. The Notice of January Public Hearing was published in the Seattle Times on January 12, 2012. Additionally notice for the February hearing was mailed to all property owners and tenants of C /LI on February 9, 2012. LOCATION: City wide STAFF: Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor ATTACHMENTS: A. Zoning Map B. Draft Ordinance including all the proposed amendments except site specific rezones and categorization of manufacturing uses. The ordinance has two exhibits: Exhibit A Fig 18 -3 and Exhibit B Fig 18 -7 C. Public comments received by Feb 16, 2012. Any additional comments received after this date will be provided at the hearing. Please remember to bring Attachment I of the staff report dated January 17, 2012 for discussion regarding manufacturing uses. DISCUSSION At the last meeting Planning Commission discussed all the proposed code amendments and asked staff to address the items listed below: Provide more clarification on the role of the Commissioners pertaining to site specific rezone process where the Planning Commission holds the public meeting. Also, provide clarification on whether this option will involve making a recommendation to the City Council. NID Page 1 43 02 172112 03(1(1 SotithcenterBoidevurcl. Silite 11111 Tulovilu. T'Vashinutoa 98188 Phone 206- 4 -30'0 Fax: �200- 431 -366 5 5 Staff discussed this matter with the City Attorney and it was clarified that if it is a public meeting then the purpose of the meeting will be only information sharing and there cannot be a formal recommendation of the Planning Commission to the City Council under this option. Therefore, if a recommendation to the City Council is desired then staff recommends option 2B outlined in the previous staff report. Under this option site specific rezones will be Type 4 land use decision where the Planning Commission will hold an open record hearing before making a recommendation to the City Council and City Council will then hold a closed record hearing before making a final decision and the appeals of the City Council will go to Superior Court. This option meets both State Law requirements of one open record hearing as well as the requirement that the Comprehensive Plan cannot be amended more than once a year unless it qualifies as an emergency. 2. It was decided to notify the property owners of the proposed changes to the manufacturing uses in the C /LI zone. There was concern expressed about one particular use in C /LI zone, which is "Manufacturing, processing and /or assembling of electrical or mechanical equipment, vehicles and machines including, but not limited to, heavy and light machinery, tools, airplanes, boats or other transportation vehicles and equipment There was discussion whether this use should be allowed outright, made a conditional use or not allowed at all. It was decided to notify the property owners before making a final decision. Property owners and tenants were notified by mail. Attachment C includes the written comments received by Feb 16, 2012. If any additional comments are received they will be provided at the hearing. Verbal concerns were received from about five property owners and some of them are planning to come to the hearing to testify. The use in question is permitted in C /LI, LI, HI, MIC /L, MIC /H and it is a conditional use in TVS. C /LI lists other uses with moderate to substantial off -site impact as conditional uses, but this use is permitted outright. It should also be noted that C /LI zone is relatively spread out throughout the city and majority of the zone is not near residential areas. Most of this zone is east of Interurban Ave and West Valley Hwy. See Attachment A for the location of C /LI zone relative to residential zones. Staff has outlined the following options for the Planning Commission to address this use in C /LI zone: a) Add the subheading but make no other changes and keep it as a permitted use. This option was detailed in Attachment I of the previous staff report. b) Do not add the subheading and make no changes. C) Change it from permitted to a conditional use. This option will not make existing uses non conforming, but any expansion of the existing uses will be required to obtain a conditional use permit. 3. Following text changes were requested: a) Amend the single family design standards to allow the replacement of a single wide mobile home with a newer and larger manufactured home, but only allow it nrn Page 2 of 3 02 172012 once for each property. Additionally, the Planning Commission expressed desire to add some qualifying language addressing what the community is gaining from allowing this waiver. Section 41 of the attached draft ordinance (Attachment B page 22/23) includes this change. b) Correct the name of Duwamish Hill Preserve. This has been corrected in Section 4 of the draft ordinance (pg. 4). C) Add the word "at" to the building height definition. This change is included in Section 9 of the draft ordinance 9 (pg. 7). d) Add the phrase "or its successor" after Department of Early Learning. This change is included in Section 13 of the draft ordinance (pg. 9). e) Landscape Plan Requirements section- add the clarifying language "dead or dying trees as determined by a certified arborist This change is included in Section 17 of the draft ordinance (pg. 11). f) Delete the loading space requirements section. This change is reflected in Section 19 of the draft ordinance (pg. 12). g) Change the word `restriping" to "reconfiguring" and add some thresholds to clarify what is considered "reconfiguring" such as adding /deleting parking spaces; changes to interior parking lot landscaping; or changes to fire lanes. This change is reflected in Section 20 of the draft ordinance (pg. 13). REQUESTED ACTION Hold the public hearing on the proposed changes, review each proposed change, choose an option if multiple choices are given, and make recommendations to the City Council. nrn Page 3 of 3 02 172012 7 x Attachment A City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Zoning Map in,n, taaa ree, CO tW`' a oii�u oii �y� do a dii3i�e t 99 `fit_ ri a 3� v I I ae I� e, °Me a °a «a °,e,. I�e�• I SE—E y ha o:iz m•Irob 06• I vas °r e�. =vs s luau I B�1! lio,ia,imalroami InioA, °aoA asaus iws s. Hiss I 100 Li iifa .R. j <6n :s' 1 la• „z,m „lu, -mi Innc,n, °u; li:ai .1 MM II t ll L 74 t LJ r _k m Legend LDR Low Densely Residential MDR Medium Densely Re,,denlril HDR High Densely Re,,denlril Y L 1 MUD Mixed Use Olhte 0 Office RCC Residerinl Connerunl Center g I L NCC Neighborhood Co nnerz el Center MRC Regiom n l Cu nertiel RCM Regio wl Cu nnerunl Mixed Use TUC Tukwle Urbn, Center CLI Con nerunl Light lndminnl I LI L'ounaminal z q r HI Heevy I,anslriel ;x'I�I�M MICIL Woof �y l,am[oel ce,ler,uyhu,aminel I MIC,H Woof I ndminel C'n er,Heevy ndmlriel TPS Tukwle Pelley South Overlays and Sub -Areas Tukwle City Limits 1 °'PolerinlA n—ilon Arens Weler Bodies MIC Boundery Tukwila Urban Center Boundery TIB Urban Renewal Overlay Dislntl Tukwila South Overlay l Public Retrea0o11 Overlay Shoreone overlay IApproxnn:nely 200' eat h side of the rived 9 W Attachment B AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 5 "BUSINESS LICENSE AND REGULATIONS TITLE 8 "PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS AND SAFETY TITLE 17 "SUBDIVISION AND PLATS TITLE 18 "ZONING CODE AND TITLE 21 "ENVIROMENTAL REGULATIONS" TO INCORPORATE A VARIETY OF HOUSEKEEPING CODE AMENDMENTS PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Zoning Code establishes procedures for processing site specific rezones and the city wishes to clarify those procedures to meet the State Law requirements; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code establishes design standards for single family dwelling units and the city wishes to allow exceptions to those standards for the replacement of single wide manufactured homes with newer manufactured homes; and WHEREAS, Title 5 and Title 8 of the Tukwila Municipal Code have some sections that reference zoning designations and the city wishes to correct the inaccurate references; update list of schools /parks to update the areas designated as drug free zones; clarify the public notice requirements for noise variances; correct the inaccurate references in the violations sections; add flexibility to residential parking area limitations; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code establishes regulations for the method of calculating building height and the city wishes to amend it to have a different method of calculation for residential structures on sloping lots; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code includes a definitions section and the city wishes to update it to include a definition of tow truck operations; and update the definitions of regulated and isolated wetlands to be consistent with the Environmentally Sensitive Ares Chapter; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code establishes thresholds for when projects are subject to design review and the city wishes to update the thresholds to be consistent with the recently adopted Shoreline Master Program; clarify thresholds and criteria for non- residential development in Low Density Residential zone; and clarify when modifications to design review approvals are required; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code establishes permit application types and procedures and the city wishes the different sections to be consistent; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code establishes landscaping regulations and the city wishes to clarify regulations pertaining to illegal removal of required landscaping; and Page 1 of 32 11 Attachment B WHEREAS, the Zoning Code establishes procedures for public notice and the city wishes to update the mailing procedures to allow sending the notice of decision by email; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code establishes building height regulations in different areas and the city wishes to correct the building heights exception areas map that inadvertently changed the building height in one area as part of Ordinance 2186 update; and WHEREAS, changes to the allowed uses in MIC /L and MIC /H zone were made as part of the Comprehensive Plan update and adopted by Ordinance 2335 that grouped manufacturing uses under two sub categories: a) those with little potential for creating off -site impacts and b) those with moderate to substantial potential for creating off -site impacts; and the city wishes to follow the same format for other zones that allow manufacturing uses; and WHEREAS, Title 21 of the Tukwila Municipal Code establishes procedures for SEPA applications and the city wishes to clarify public notice requirements for SEPA applications; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2012, the Tukwila Planning Commission, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive testimony concerning amending the Tukwila Municipal Code and continued the hearing to February 23, 2012, at that meeting adopted a motion recommending the proposed changes; WHEREAS, on the Tukwila City Council, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive a testimony concerning the recommendations of the Planning Commission; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Ordinance Nos. 2355 §16, 2011; Ord. 1482 §1 (part), 1988 as codified in TMC Chapter 5.44 Tow Truck Operations, are hereby amended to read as follows 5.44.030 3 is Application A. Every person desiring to operate or have charge of a tow truck business within the City shall make a written application to the Finance Director for a license to do so. B. Such application shall be referred to the Planning Director for review to insure the proper location and screening of the proposed operation as set forth in TMC Section 2. Ordinance Nos. 1482 §1 (part), 1988 as codified in TMC Chapter 5.44 Tow Truck Operations, is hereby deleted: �a.� n:� =ism s�.��. <w j F .�L Page 2 of 32 12 Attachment B Section 3. Ordinance No 837 §2 (part), 1998 as codified in TMC Chapter 8.28 Nuisances, is hereby amended to read as follows: 8.28.180 Landscape Maintenance In addition to the foregoing, it constitutes a nuisance for anyone to fail to maintain landscaping, including but not limited to lawns, shrubs, trees and other plantings, whether of native growth or domestic vegetation in commercial, manufacturing or industrial, or multiple dwelling residential areas of the City; and it is a nuisance to fail to maintain landscaping as designated in the landscaping and maintenance plan required before occupancy Section 4. Ordinance Nos. 1808 §1, 1997; Ord. 1621 §I, 1992 as codified in TMC Chapter 8.07 Controlled Substances, Paraphernalia, Poisons and Toxic Fumes, are hereby amended to read as follows: As described in this section, the following areas are designated as drug free zones, subject to the provisions of this section: 1. Schools (includes 1,000 -foot buffer zone): a Foster High School 4242 S. 144th b Showalter Middle School 4628 S. 144th St. c Tukwila Elementary 5939 S. 149th St. d Cascade View Elementary 13601 32nd Ave. S. e. Thorndyke Elementary 4415 S. 150 St 4 't 2. Parks: a Duwamish Park 42nd Ave. S. /S. 116th St. b Pea Patch Codiga Farm, or as designated by City. c Riverton Park 45th Ave. S. /S. 133rd St. d 57th Avenue Park 57th Ave. S. /S. 133rd St. e Hazelnut Park 59th Ave. S. /S. 147th St. f Fort Dent Park Southcenter Blvd./ Interurban Ave.S. Page 3 of 32 13 Attachment B g Tukwila Park 65th Ave. S. /S. 153rd St. h Ikawa Park 6200 Southcenter Blvd. i Bicentennial Park Christensen Rd. /Strander Blvd. j Duwamish /Green River Trail Part of valley river trail system along shores of the Duwamish /Green River k Interurban Trail S. 180th to north City limits I Crestview Park 42nd Ave. S. /S. 162nd St. m Crystal Springs Park 51 st Ave. S. /S. 158th St. n Joseph Foster Memorial Park 53rd Ave. S. /S. 137th St. o Southgate Park 40th Ave. S. /S. 133rd St. p Community Center Park 42nd Ave. S. /S. 124th q Old Southgate School Park 41 st Ave. S. /S. 131 st St. r Tukwila Pond Park S. 168th /Strander Blvd. s Designated park trails 3. Community Centers: a Tukwila Community Center12424 42nd Ave. S. 4. Libraries: a Tukwila Library 14475 59th Ave. S. b Foster Library 4060 S. 144th Section 5. Ordinance No. 2293 §13, 2010 as codified in TMC Chapter 8.22 Noise, is hereby amended to read as follows: E.3P*A K11LYE 2 F ri 4 _m For variances 30 days or less, notice is not required except: (3) In the case of residential parties and prior to granting the variance, the applicant shall provide written notice to all residents within 500 feet of where the event D is being held. When the 500 foot radius includes multi family complexes, all residents of the complex shall be notified. V. Section 6. Ordinance No. 1838 §2 (part), 1998 as codified in TMC Chapter 8.45 Civil Violations, is hereby amended to read as follows: 8.45. 030 o io E. It is unlawful to: 1. Maintain, allow, permit or fail to prevent a nuisance as defined in TMC Chapter 8.28 or as defined throughout the Tukwila Municipal Code; and Page 4 of 32 I Attachment B 2. Fail to comply with any applicable provisions of the Tukwila Municipal Code, including, but not limited to, the regulations and requirements found in the following sections of the Tukwila Municipal Code, as now in effect or as may be amended hereafter: TMC 5.04.115 Penalties. 8.22.290 11"" Penalties. 9.32.200 Penalties. 9.44.13&" Enforcement. 2 1 4. 06 0 Penalties. 14.16.110 Penalty for violation. 16.04.020 Uniform codes adopted. 16.16.072 Parking in fire lanes prohibited. 16.52.080 Penalties for noncompliance. 16.54._V00 Penalties. 17.28.020 Penalties. Penalty for violations. Section 7. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §1 (part), 2009; Ord. 2056 §1 (part), 2004 as codified in TMC Chapter 8.25 Vehicle Storage and Parking on Single-Family Residential Property, are hereby amended to read as follows: D. Approved durable uniform surfaces outside of structures on-site may cover a maximum of 1,200 square feet or 10% of the lot surface, whichever is greater. V 1 3 V ti V �Z, E. No more than 50% of the front yard or 800 square feet, whichever is smaller, may be approved durable uniform surface. An approved durable uniform surface exceeding this requirement prior to August 25, 2004 may be maintained, but shall not be expanded. ij riDD V j J j "Y F. Single-family properties on pre-existing, legal lots of record containing less than 6,500 square feet are exempt from the s of 8.25.020D Section 8. Ordinance Nos. Ord. 2199 §19, 2008; Ord. 1976 §62, 2001 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.56 Off-street Parking and Loading Regulation, are hereby amended to read as follows: R� It Mile 111 07 Page 5 of 32 15 Attachment B A. Two off street parking spaces shall be provided for each dwelling unit which contains up to three bedrooms. One additional off street parking space shall be required for every two bedrooms in excess of three bedrooms in a dwelling unit (i.e., four- and five bedroom dwelling units shall have three off street parking spaces, six- and seven bedroom homes shall have four spaces, and so on). B. Each unit in a townhouse development shall have an attached garage with parking for at least one vehicle or a parking space in an underground garage. C. The Director shall have the discretion to waive the requirement to construct a portion of the off street parking requirement if, based on a parking demand study, the property owner establishes that the dwelling will be used primarily to house residents who do not and will not drive due to a factor other than age. Such a study shall assure that ample parking is provided for residents who can drive, guests, caregivers and other persons who work at the residence. If such a waiver is granted, the property owner shall provide a site plan, which demonstrates that in the event of a change of use, which eliminates the reason for the waiver, there is ample room on the site to provide the number of off street parking spaces required by this Code. In the event that a change of use or type of occupant is proposed that would alter the potential number of drivers living or working at the dwelling, the application for change of use shall be conditioned on construction of any additional off street parking spaces required to meet the standards of this Code. Section 9. Ordinance Nos. Ord. 1971 §2, 2001; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06 Definitions, are hereby amended to read as follows: "Building height' means the height of a building as calculated by the method in the Washington State Building Code, S: t, k to Vd r C� t, k Page 6 of 32 I: Attachment B Height Limit Lowest Grade Actual Grade is greater than 15% Page 7 of 32 17 C 0 7 D v "D Vv I'D Vv 7 1" 7 "j Vv r". i r". 1 7 Page 7 of 32 17 Attachment B Height Limit f 15' 15' Section 3 15' Section 2 r Section 1 MEMEM Average Grade or Lowe stGrade for each section Section 10. A new section is hereby added to TMC Chapter 18.06, Definitions, as follows: t C' t C tia�' C V a ,�t;k 5te t e t 'a E Section 11. Ordinance Nos. 2075 §1 (part), 2004; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06 Definitions, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.06 9 33 Wetiand Regulated "Regulated wetland" means ponds or lakes 30 acres or less and those lands subject to the "wetland" definition contained in this chapter.. t.f x. Page 8 of 32 I: Attachment B Section 12. Ordinance Nos. 2075 §1 (part), 2004; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.06 Definitions, are hereby amended to read as follows: �R, U R, f v .a m i'Y.i.� fls i el Q x. r,q• rx ..r•• �v r'ti �r Section 13. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §11, 2009; Ord. 1989 §2, 2002; Ord. 1976 §18, 2001; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.10 Low Density Residential, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.10 .030(3)3 Accessory 3. Family child care homes, provided the facility shall be licensed by the Department of a and shall provide a safe passenger loading zone. (This same language needs to amended in the accessory uses section in CC, CC, C, RCM, TUC, TVS and S) Section 14. Ordinance Nos. 2257 §5, 2009; Ord. 2251 §13, 2009; Ord. 1865 §7, 1999 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.10 Low Density Residential, are hereby amended to read as follows: ifatow Design review is required for all conditional c unclassified uses Design review is required for developments in a Commercial Redevelopment Area that propose the uses and standards of an adjacent commercial zone as well as development in the Urban Overlay District. (See TMC Chapter 18.60, Board of Architectural Review.) Section 15. Ordinance No. 2301 §1 (part), 2010 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.45 Environmentally Sensitive Areas, is hereby amended to read as follows: Exceptions A. REASONABLE USE EXCEPTIONS 1. If application of TMC Chapter 18.45 would deny all reasonable use of the property containing wetlands, watercourses or their buffers, the property owner or the proponent of a development proposal may apply for a reasonable use exception. 2. Applications for a reasonable use exception shall be a Type "wF decision and shall be processed pursuant to TMC Chapter 18.104. Page 9 of 32 irt Attachment B 3. If the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the r S ..r that application of the provisions of TMC Chapter 18.45 would deny all reasonable use of the property, development may be allowed which is consistent with the general purposes of TMC Chapter 18.45 and the public interest. 4. The r ,r, ..r in granting approval of the reasonable use exception, must determine that: a. There is no feasible on -site alternative to the proposed activities, including reduction in size or density, modifications of setbacks, buffers or other land use restrictions or requirements, phasing of project implementation, change in timing of activities, revision of road and lot layout, and /or related site planning that would allow a reasonable economic use with fewer adverse impacts to the sensitive area. b. As a result of the proposed development there will be no unreasonable threat to the public health, safety or welfare on or off the development proposal site. c. Alterations permitted shall be the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use of the property. d. The proposed development is compatible in design, scale and use with other development with similar site constraints in the immediate vicinity of the subject property if such similar sites exist. e. Disturbance of sensitive areas has been minimized by locating any necessary alterations in the buffers to the greatest extent possible. f. The inability to derive reasonable use of the property is not the result of: (1) a segregation or division of a larger parcel on which a reasonable use was permittable after the effective date of Sensitive Areas Ordinance No. 1599, June 10, 1991; (2) actions by the owner of the property (or the owner's agents, contractors or others under the owner's control) that occurred after the effective date of the sensitive areas ordinance provisions that prevents or interferes with the reasonable use of the property; or (3) a violation of the sensitive areas ordinance; g. The w when approving a reasonable use exception, may impose conditions, including but not limited to a requirement for submission and implementation of an approved mitigation plan designed to ensure that the development: (1) complies with the standards and policies of the sensitive areas ordinance to the extent feasible; and (2) does not create a risk of damage to other property or to the public health, safety and welfare. h. Approval of a reasonable use exception shall not eliminate the need for any other permit or approval otherwise required for a project, including but not limited to design review. Section 16. Ordinance No. 2301 §1 (part), 2010 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.45 Environmentally Sensitive Areas, is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.45.120 Areas of Potential ^r rr 7 1-esignation, r and Buffers Page 10 of 32 20 Attachment B C. Each development proposal containing or threatened by an area of potential geologic instability Class 2 or higher shall be subject to a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45.040 ;.`r and 18.45.060. The geotechnical report shall analyze and make recommendations on the need for and width of any setbacks or buffers necessary to achieve the goals and requirements of TMC Chapter 18.45. Development proposals shall then include the buffer distances as defined within the geotechnical report. Section 17. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §49, 2009; Ord. 1971 §19, 2001; Ord. 1872 §14 (part), 1999 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.52 Landscaping, Recreation, Recycling /Solid Waste Space Requirements, are hereby amended to read as follows: Landscape it A. A Washington State licensed landscape architect shall prepare and stamp the landscape plans in accordance with the standards herein. Detailed plans for landscaping and screening shall be submitted with plans for building and site improvements. Included in the plans shall be type, quantity, spacing and location of plants and materials, site preparation and specifications for soils and mulches, location of all overhead and underground utilities (so as to avoid conflicts with proposed planting locations), typical planting details and the location of irrigation systems. B. Installation of the landscaping and screening shall be completed and a Landscaping Declaration submitted by the owner or owner's agent prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. If necessary due to weather conditions or construction scheduling the installation may be postponed to the next planting season if approved by the Community Development Director and stated on the building permit. A performance assurance device equal to 150% of the cost of the labor and materials must be provided to the City before the deferral is approved. The property owner shall keep all planting areas free of weeds and trash and replace any unhealthy or dead plant materials for the life of the project in conformance with the intent of the approved landscape plan and TMC 8.28.180. E E v V try tib,: F x ra Section 18. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §66, 2009; Ord. 1795 §3 (part), 1997; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.56 Off street Parking and Loading Regulations, are hereby amended to read as follows: R Page 11 of 32 21 Attachment B f. The Public Works Director or may require ingress separate from an egress for smoother and safer flow of traffic. Section 19. Ordinance Nos. 1795 §2 (part), 1997; Ord. 1770 §33, 1996; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.56 Off street Parking and Loading Regulations, are hereby amended to read as follows: Loading c Requirements Off street space for standing, loading and unloading services shall be provided in such a manner as not to obstruct freedom of traffic movement on streets or alleys. For all office, commercial, and industrial uses, each loading space shall consist of at least a ten -foot by 30 -foot loading space with 14 -foot height clearance for small trucks such as pickup trucks, or a12 -foot by 65 -foot loading space with 14 -foot height clearance for large trucks, including tractor trailer large spaces. i" 1 C iiU e, QM e mow... a o .e a a a.e "1 C atp v These requirements may be modified as a Type decision, where the r r finds that such reduction will not result in injury to neighboring property or obstruction of fire lanes; or traffic and will be in harmony with the purposes and intent of this chapter. Page 12 of 32 22 Attachment B Section 20. Ordinance Nos. 1795 §2 (part), 1997; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.56 Off street Parking and Loading Regulations, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.56.120 Filing o f Detailed plans of off street parking areas, indicating the proposed development including the location, size, shape, design, curb -cuts, adjacent streets, circulation of traffic, ingress and egress to parking lots and other features and appurtenances of the proposed parking facility, shall be filed with and reviewed by the DCD. The parking area shall be developed and completed to the required standards before an occupancy permit for the building may be issued ,f Vk t u t E E t E t w Section 21. Ordinance No. 1795 §2 (part), 1997 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.56 Off street Parking and Loading Regulations, is hereby amended to read as follows: D. Process: Upon application to and review by the subject to a Type decision process outlined in TMC 18.108.0- the bicycle parking requirements may be modified or waived, where appropriate. Section 22. Ordinance No. 1795 §2 (part), 1997 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.56 Off street Parking and Loading Regulations, is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.56.140 Administrative Variance from Parking Standards A. General. 1. A request for an administrative variance from required parking standards must be received prior to any issuance of building or engineering permits. Administrative variances are only eligible for requests for reductions of required parking between 1 and 10 Requests for reductions from minimum parking standards in excess of 10% must be made to the T Tr E ra 2. The project developer shall present all findings to the Director prior to any final approvals, including design review, conditional use permit review, building review or any other permit reviews required by the Director. B. Criteria. 1. All requests for reductions in parking shall be reviewed under the criteria established in this section. 2. In addition to the following requirements, the Director may require specific measures not listed to ensure that Page 13 of 32 23 Attachment B all impacts with reduced parking are mitigated. Any spillover parking which cannot be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Director will serve as the basis for denial. A reduction may be allowed, pursuant to either an Administrative variance or requests to the Planning Commission, after: a. All shared parking strategies are explored. b. On -site park and ride opportunities are fully explored. c. The site is in compliance with the City's commute trip reduction ordinance or, if not an affected employer as defined by the City's ordinance, agrees to become affected. d. The site is at least 300 feet away from a single family residential zone. e. A report is submitted providing a basis for less parking and mitigation necessary to offset any negative effects. C. Process. 1. An applicant shall submit evidence that decreased parking will not have a negative impact on surrounding properties or potential future uses. This may take the form of a brief report for administrative variances. Decreases in excess of 10% must be made to the r ,r, ..r The Director may require additional studies to ensure that negative impacts are properly mitigated. A complete and detailed Parking Demand study is required for requests reviewed by the Planning Commission. 2. All site characteristics should be described in report, including a. Site accessibility for transit. b. Site proximity to transit, with 15- to 30- minute headways. c. Shared use of on -site parking. d. Shared use of off -site parking. e. Combined on -site parking. f. Employee density. g. Adjacent land uses. D. Review. Applications for Administrative Variances for reductions below minimum parking requirements between 1 and 10% shall be processed as Type 2 decisions, pursuant to TMC 18.108.020. Applications for reductions from minimum parking requirements in excess of 10% shall be processed as Type "W' decisions, pursuant to TMC 18.108.&t.30, including a hearing before the r F S r Section 23. Ordinance Nos. 2257 §11, 2009; Ord. 2251 §73, 2009; Ord. 2235 §15, 2009; Ord 2118 §1, 2006; Ord. 2005 §17, 2002; Ord. 1865 §50, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.60 Board of Architectural Review, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.60. 030 co of on A. The rules and regulations of the Board of Architectural Review shall be the same as those stated for the Planning Commission in the bylaws of the Tukwila Planning Commission. Page 14 of 32 24 Attachment B B. The DCD Director will review projects meeting the thresholds for administrative design review. The BAR will review all other projects requiring design review approval. The Board and the DCD Director shall have the authority to approve, approve with conditions, or deny all plans submitted based on a demonstration of compliance with all of the guidelines of this chapter, as judged by the preponderance of evidence standard. C. Design review is required for the following described land use actions: 1. All developments will be subject to design review with the following exceptions: a. Developments exempted in the various districts; b. Developments in LI, HI, MIC /L and MIC /H districts, except when within 300 feet of residential districts or within 200 feet of the Green /Duwamish River or that require a shoreline permit; 2. Any exterior repair, reconstruction, cosmetic alterations or improvements, if the cost of that work equals or exceeds 10% of the building's assessed valuation (for costs between 10% and 25 the changes will be reviewed administratively); a. for sites whose gross building square footage exceeds 10,000 square feet in MUO, O, RCC, NCC, RC, RCM, TUC and C /LI zoning districts; and b. for any site in the NCC, MUO or RC zoning districts in the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor (see TMC Figure 18 -9). c. for any multi family structures in MDR and HDR zones. 3. Development applications using the procedures of 18.60.60, Commercial Redevelopment Area. 4. Development applications using the procedures of 18.43, Urban Renewal Overlay District. V V r ,•x V -,mot t C 4 .4 eD D. For development in the NCC, RC, and MUO zones within the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor, identified in TMC Figure 18 -9, certain landscaping and setback standards may be waived and conditioned, upon approval of plans by the BAR, in accordance with criteria and guidelines in the Tukwila International Boulevard Design Manual, as amended. Landscaping and setback standards may not be waived on commercial property sides adjacent to residential districts. E. No changes shall be made to approved designs without further BAR or Director approval and consideration of the change in the context of the entire project; except that the Director is authorized to approve minor, insignificant modifications which have no impact on the project design. Page 15 of 32 25 Attachment B Section 24. Ordinance Nos. 2235 §16 §17, 2009; Ord. 2199 §20, 2008; Ord. 1986 §16, 2001; Ord 1865 §51, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.60 Board of Architectural Review, are hereby amended to read as follows: C. Multi Family, Hotel and Motel Design Review Criteria. In reviewing any multi family hotel motel V r... the following criteria shall be used by the BAR in its decision making as well as the Multi Family Design Manual or Townhouse Design Manual. Detached zero -lot- line type of developments shall be subject to the Townhouse Design Manual. 1. SITE PLANNING. a. Building siting, architecture, and landscaping shall be integrated into and blend harmoniously with the neighborhood building scale, natural environment, and development characteristics as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. For instance, a multi family development's design need not be harmoniously integrated with adjacent single family structures if that existing single family use is designated as "Commercial" or "High- Density Residential" in the Comprehensive Plan. However, a "Low- Density Residential" (detached single family) designation would require such harmonious design integration. b. Natural features, which contribute to desirable neighborhood character, shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. Natural features include, but are not limited to, existing significant trees and stands of trees, wetlands, streams, and significant topographic features. c. The site plan shall use landscaping and building shapes to form an aesthetically pleasing and pedestrian scale streetscape. This shall include, but not be limited to facilitating pedestrian travel along the street, using architecture and landscaping to provide a desirable transition from streetscape to the building, and providing an integrated linkage from pedestrian and vehicular facilities to building entries. d. Pedestrian and vehicular entries shall provide a high quality visual focus using building siting, shapes and landscaping. Such a feature establishes a physical transition between the project and public areas, and establishes the initial sense of high quality development. e. Vehicular circulation design shall minimize driveway intersections with the street. f. Site perimeter design (i.e., landscaping, structures, and horizontal width) shall be coordinated with site development to ensure a harmonious transition between adjacent projects. g. Varying degrees of privacy for the individual residents shall be provided; increasing from the public right ofway, to common areas, to individual residences. This can be accomplished through the use of symbolic and actual physical barriers to define the degrees of privacy appropriate to specific site area functions. h. Parking and service areas shall be located, designed and screened to interrupt and reduce the visual impact of large paved areas; i. The height, bulk, footprint and scale of each building shall be in harmony with its site and adjacent long -term structures. Page 16 of 32 26 Attachment B 2. BUILDING DESIGN. a. Architectural style is not restricted; evaluation of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its ability to harmonize building texture, shape, lines and mass with the surrounding neighborhood. b. Buildings shall be of appropriate height, scale, and design /shape to be in harmony with those existing permanent neighboring developments which are consistent with, or envisioned in, the Comprehensive Plan. This will be especially important for perimeter structures. Adjacent structures that are not in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan should be considered to be transitional. The degree of architectural harmony required should be consistent with the nonconforming structure's anticipated permanence. c. Building components, such as windows, doors, eaves, parapets, stairs and decks shall be integrated into the overall building design. Particular emphasis shall be given to harmonious proportions of these components with those of adjacent developments. Building components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with the anticipated life of the structure. d. The overall color scheme shall work to reduce building prominence and shall blend in with the natural environment. e. Monotony of design in single or multiple building projects shall be avoided. Variety of detail, form, and siting shall be used to provide visual interest. Otherwise monotonous flat walls and uniform vertical planes of individual buildings shall be broken up with building modulation, stairs, decks, railings, and focal entries. Multiple building developments shall use siting and additional architectural variety to avoid inappropriate repetition of building designs and appearance to surrounding properties. 3. LANDSCAPE AND SITE TREATMENT. a. Existing natural topographic patterns and significant vegetation shall be reflected in project design when they contribute to the natural beauty of the area or are important to defining neighborhood identity or a sense of place. b. Landscape treatment shall enhance existing natural and architectural features, help separate public from private spaces, strengthen vistas and important views, provide shade to moderate the affects of large paved areas, and break up visual mass. c. Walkways, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas shall promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. Direct pedestrian linkages to the public street, to on -site recreation areas, and to adjacent public recreation areas shall be provided. d. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties shall be provided. 4. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES. a. Miscellaneous structures shall be designed as an integral part of the architectural concept and landscape. Materials shall be compatible with buildings, scale shall be appropriate, colors shall be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and structure proportions shall be to scale. b. The use of walls, fencing, planting, berms, or combinations of these shall accomplish screening of service yards and other places that tend to be unsightly. Screening shall be effective in winter and summer. Page 17 of 32 27 Attachment B c. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings shall be screened from view. Screening shall be designed as an integral part of the architecture (i.e., raised parapets and fully enclosed under roof) and landscaping. d. Exterior lighting standards and fixtures shall be of a design and size consistent with safety, building architecture and adjacent area. Lighting shall be shielded and restrained in design with no off -site glare spill -over. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors shall not be used unless clearly demonstrated to be integral to building architecture. Section 25. Ordinance Nos. 2251 §16, 2009; Ord. 2005 §1 2002; Ord. 1865 §11, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) as codified in TMC Chapter 18.12 Medium Density Residential, are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 26. Ordinance Nos. 2005, §2, 2002; Ord. 1865 §15, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.14 High Density Residential, are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 27. Ordinance Nos. 2005 §3, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.16 Mixed Use Office, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18. 16.070 Design review is required for all Droiects located within the shoreline iurisdiction that involve new buildina construction or exterior chana cost of exterior chans- exceeds 10% s assessed valuation. structures Page 18 of 32 Attachment B 1,500 square feet or larger outside the shoreline iurisdiction, for all structures containing multi family dwellings and all structures in the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor. Commercial structures between 1,500 and 5,000 square feet, multi family structures up to 1,500 square feet, and all buildings up to 1,500 square feet in the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor will be reviewed administratively. Design review is also required for certain exterior repairs, reconstructions, alterations or improvements to buildings over 10,000 square feet. (See the Board of Architectural Review chapter of this title.) Section 28. Ordinance Nos. 2005 §4, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.18 Office, are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 29. Ordinance Nos. 2005 §5, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.20 Residential Commercial Center, are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 30. Ordinance Nos. 2005 §6, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.22 Neighborhood Commercial Center, are hereby amended to read as follows: Page 19 of 32 M Attachment B exterior repairs, reconstructions, alterations or improvements to buildings over 10,000 square feet or in the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor. (See the Board of Architectural Review chapter of this title.) Section31. Ordinance Nos. 2005 §7, 2002; Ord. 1865 §30, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.24 Regional Commercial, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.24.070 Design Review Design review is required for all oroiects located within the shoreline iurisdiction that involve new buildina construction or exterior chanaes if the cost of the exterior chanaes equals or exceeds 10% of the buildina's assessed valuation. and all hotels and motels and for other commercial structures 1,500 square feet or larger outside the shoreline iurisdiction. Outside of the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor, commercial structures between 1,500 and 5,000 square feet and multi family structures up to 1,500 square feet will be reviewed administratively. Within the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor (see TMC Figure 18 -9), design review is required for all new development as well as certain exterior repairs, reconstructions, alterations or improvements. Commercial and multi family structures up to 1,500 square feet will be reviewed administratively. (Details on design review are found in Chapter 18.60, Board of Architectural Review.) Section 32. Ordinance Nos. 2005 §8, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.26 Regional Commercial Mixed Use, are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 33. Ordinance Nos. 2084 §2 (part), 2005 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.28 Tukwila Urban Center, are hereby amended to read as follows: Page 20 of 32 30 Attachment B and 2,500 square feet and multi family structures up to 1,500 square feet will be reviewed administratively. Design review is also required for certain exterior repairs, reconstructions, alterations or improvements to buildings over 10,000 square feet. (See Board of Architectural Review chapter of this title.) Section 34. Ordinance Nos. 2005 §10, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.30 Commercial /Light Industrial, are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 35. Ordinance Nos. 2005 §11, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.32 Light Industrial, are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 36. Ordinance Nos. 2005 §12, 2002; Ord. 1793 §1, 1997; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.34 Heavy Industrial, are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 37. Ordinance Nos. 2335 §5, 2011; Ord. 2005 §13, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.36 Manufacturing Industrial Center /Light, are hereby amended to read as follows: Page 21 of 32 31 Attachment B Section 38. Ordinance Nos. 2335 §9, 2011; Ord. 2005 §14, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.38 Manufacturing Industrial Center /Heavy, are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 39. Ordinance Nos. 2005 §15, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.40 Tukwila Valley South, are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 40. Ordinance Nos. 2186 §1, 2007; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) as codified in TMC Chapter 18.50 Supplemental Development Regulations, are hereby amended to read as follows: Spe cial i io There is hereby established a special height limitation area, as depicted by Figure 18 -3 'C �..r Exhibit I within which no building shall be erected which exceeds six (6) stories in height, notwithstanding the provisions for the zoning district within which the subject property may lie. Section 41. Ordinance No. 2098 §3, 2005 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.50 Supplemental Development Regulations, are hereby amended to read as follows: Single -Family xc io A The design standards required at 18.50.050 (5) and (6) may be modified by the DCD Director as a Type 2 Special Permission decision. 1. The criteria for approval of a roof pitch flatter than 5:12 are as follows: Page 22 of 32 32 Attachment B a. The proposed roof pitch is consistent with the style of the house (for example modern, southwestern); b. If a flat roof is proposed, the top of the parapet may not exceed 25 feet in height; c. If a sloped roof is proposed, it must have at least 24 -inch eaves; and d. The house exhibits a high degree of design quality, including a mix of exterior materials, detailing, articulation and modulation. 2. The criteria for approval of a house with a front door that faces the side or rear yard are as follows: a. The topography of the lot is such that pedestrian access is safer or more convenient from the side or rear yard; b. The house will be set back at least twice the minimum front yard setback; c. The entrance is oriented to take advantage of a site condition such as a significant view; or d. The entry feature is integral to a unique architectural design. C t a r Section 42. Ordinance No.2251 §67, 2009; Ord. 1795 §3 (part), 1997; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.56 Off street Parking and Loading Regulations, are hereby amended to read as follows: Required of c The minimum number of off street parking spaces for the listed uses shall be as shown in Figure 18 -7 w.. _t Minimum parking requirements shall be maintained over the life of the original or primary use. Any additional uses, either secondary or accessory in nature, must have parking available that does not impact the minimum parking of the original or primary use. This extends to parking spaces used for park- and -fly lots or use of parking for storage or outdoor displays. Section 43. Ordinance No. 1769 §4 (part), 1996) as codified in TMC Chapter 18.66 Unclassified Use Permit, is hereby amended to read as follows: Expansion of x i c -Animal Rendering Facilities In addition to the structures permitted pursuant to TMC 18.66.110, existing animal rendering facilities shall be allowed to construct new facilities to update and /or modernize such use without needing to obtain a new or revised unclassified use permit if such construction involves an intensification of the permitted existing facility. For purposes of this section, "facilities" shall refer to all structures, including tanks, processing equipment, buildings and other improvements used in the rendering operation, and "intensification" shall mean new construction shall meet all of the requirements below. Any proposed new construction which fails to meet one or more of Page 23 of 32 33 Attachment B the requirements of intensification shall be considered an enlargement or expansion, and shall require an application for a new or revised unclassified use permit for the facilities which constitute the enlargement or expansion: 1. The construction of new facilities shall be considered an intensification and may be permitted without the need to obtain an Unclassified Use Permit (UUP) if: a. The total area of the site is not increased. b. The construction of new facilities does not generate more than ten new vehicle trips at peak hour, as determined pursuant to TMC Chapter 9.48, related to traffic concurrency. c. No new facilities are located in they d. The new facilities will comply with the performance standards set forth in TMC 18.66.130. e. The construction of new manufacturing facilities does not result in more than a 5% cumulative increase in the manufacturing capacity of the processing facility. f. The construction will not increase the extent of any nonconformity of any structure by reason of its height, bulk or setbacks. Section 44. Ordinance Nos. 2294 1 2010; Ord. 2251 §75, 2009; Ord. 2235 19, 2009; Ord. 2135 §19, 2006; Ord. 2119 §1, 2006 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.104 Permit Application Types and Procedures, are hereby amended to read as follows: Classification of o c t Permit Applications Project permit decisions are classified into five types, based on the degree of discretion associated with each decision, as set forth in this section. Procedures for the five different types are distinguished according to who makes the decision, whether public notice is required, whether a public meeting and /or a public hearing is required before a decision is made, and whether administrative appeals are provided. 1. TYPE 1 DECISIONS are made by City administrators who have technical expertise, as designated by ordinance. Type 1 decisions may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner who will hold a closed record appeal hearing based on the information presented to the City administrator who made the decision. Public notice is not required for Type 1 decisions or for the appeals of those decisions. Page 24 of 32 34 Attachment B TYPE 1 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT DECISION MAKER Administrative Variance for Community Noise 30 days or less Development (TMC 8.22.120) Director Any land use permit or As specified approval issued by the City, by ordinance unless specifically Director categorized as a Type 2, 3, 4, or 5 decision by this Chapter Boundary Line Adjustment, Community including Lot Consolidation Development (TMC Chapter 17.08) Director Development Permit Building Official Minor modification to design Community review approval (TMC Development 18.60.030) Director Minor Modification to PRD Community (TMC 18.46.130) Development Director Tree Permit (TMC 18.54) Community Development Director Wireless Communication Community Facility, Minor (TMC 18.58) Development Director 2. TYPE 2 DECISIONS are decisions which are initially made by the Director or, in certain cases, other City administrators or committees, but which are subject to an open record appeal to the Hearing Examiner, Board of Architectural Review, or, in the case of shoreline permits, an appeal to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58. Page 25 of 32 35 Attachment B TYPE 2 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT Administrative Design Review (TMC 18.60.030) Administrative Planned Residential Development (TMC 18.46.110) Administrative Variance for Noise 31 -60 days (TMC Section 8.22.120) Binding Site Improvement Plan (TMC Chap. 17.16) Cargo Container Placement (TMC 18.50.060) Code Interpretation (TMC 18.90.010) Exception from Single Family Design Standard (TMC 18.50.050) Modification to Development Standards (TMC 18.41.100) Parking standard for use not specified (TMC 18.56.100) r INITIAL APPEAL DECISION BODY MAKER (open Community record Development appeal) Community Board of Development Architectur Director al Review Short Plat Hearing Committee Examiner Community Hearing Development Examiner Director Short Plat Hearing Committee Examiner Community Hearing Development Examiner Director Community Hearing Development Examiner Director Community Hearing Development Examiner Director Community Hearing Development Examiner Director Community Hearing Development Examiner Director Page 26 of 32 36 Attachment B Sensitive Areas Community Hearing (except Development Examiner Reasonable Use Director Exception) (TMC 18.45) Shoreline Community State Substantial Development Shorelines Development Director Hearings Permit (TMC Bd Chapter 18.44) Short Plat Short Plat Hearing (TMC 17.12) Committee Examiner 71 1C ry Wireless Community Hearing Communication Development Examiner Facility, Minor Director (TMC 18.58) 3. TYPE 3 DECISIONS are quasi-judicial decisions made by the Hearing Examiner following an open record hearing. Type 3 decisions may be appealed only to Superior Court, except for shoreline variances and shoreline conditional uses that may be appealed to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58. Page 27 of 32 37 Attachment B TYPE 3 DECISIONS ra Page 28 of 32 INITIAL APPEAL DECISION BODY TYPE OF PERMIT MAKER (closed record appeal) Resolve uncertain Hearing Superior zone district Examiner Court boundary Variance (zoning, Hearing Superior shoreline, Examiner Court sidewalk, land alteration, sign) TSO Special Hearing Superior Permission Use Examiner Court (TMC Section 18.41.060) Conditional Use Hearing Superior Permit Examiner Court Modifications to Hearing Superior Certain Parking Examiner Court Standards (TMC Chapter 18.56) Reasonable Use Hearing Superior Exceptions under Examiner Court Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC Section 18.45.180) Variance for Noise Hearing Superior in excess of 60 Examiner Court days (TMC Section 8.22.120) Variance from Hearing Superior Parking Standards Examiner Court over 10% (TMC Section 18.56.140) ra Page 28 of 32 Attachment B Subdivision Hearing Superior Preliminary Plat Examiner Court with no associated Commission Examiner with an associated Design Review Design Review application (TMC 17.14.020) (TMC Section 17.14.020) Wireless Hearing Superior Communication Examiner Court Facility, Major or Waiver Request (TMC Chapter 18.58) 4. TYPE 4 DECISIONS are quasi judicial decisions made by the Board of Architectural Review or the Planning Commission, following an open record hearing. Type 4 decisions may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner based on the record established by the Board of Architectural Review or Planning Commission, except Shoreline Conditional Use Permits, that are appealable to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58. TYPE 4 DECISIONS INITIAL APPEAL DECISION BODY TYPE OF PERMIT MAKER (closed record appeal) Public Hearing Board of Hearing Design Review Architectural Examiner (TMC Chap. Review 18.60) Subdivision Planning Hearing Preliminary Plat Commission Examiner with an associated Design Review application (TMC 17.14.020) v x y Page 29 of 32 W Attachment B 5. TYPE 5 DECISIONS are quasi judicial decisions made by the Hearing Examiner or City Council following an open record hearing. Type 5 decisions may be appealed only to Superior Court. TYPE 5 DECISIONS INITIAL APPEAL Section 45. Ordinance No. 1768 §2 (part), 1996 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.104 Permit Application Types and Procedures, is hereby amended to read as follows: Notice of c o A. The Department shall provide written notice in a timely manner of the final decision on permits requiring Type 2, 3, 4 and 5 decisions and on permits requiring Page 30 of 32 .s DECISION BODY TYPE OF PERMIT MAKER (closed record appeal) Planned City Superior Residential Council Court Development (PRD), including Major Modifications (TMC Chap. 18.46) Rezone (TMC City Superior Chapter 18.84) Council Court Sensitive Area City Superior Master Plan Council Court Overlay (TMC 18.45.160) Shoreline City Superior Environment Re- Council Court designation (Shoreline Master Program) Subdivision Final City Superior Plat Council Court (TMC 17.12.030) Unclassified Use City Superior (TMC Chapter Council Court 18.66) Section 45. Ordinance No. 1768 §2 (part), 1996 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.104 Permit Application Types and Procedures, is hereby amended to read as follows: Notice of c o A. The Department shall provide written notice in a timely manner of the final decision on permits requiring Type 2, 3, 4 and 5 decisions and on permits requiring Page 30 of 32 .s Attachment B Type 1 decisions which require SEPA review. Such notice shall identify the threshold determination, if any, and the procedures for administrative appeals, if any. Notice shall be delivered by first class mail or in person to the applicant, to the Department of Ecology and to agencies with jurisdiction, and to all parties of record. B. Notices of Decision for Shoreline Substantial Development permits shall also comply with the requirements of RCW 90.58. Section 46. Ordinance No. 2103 §1 (part), 2005 as codified in TMC Chapter 18.120 Housing Options Program, is hereby amended to read as follows: Review is o Process A. Limited time frame to apply. When the Director of DCD selects an application as outlined in TMC 18.120.030, the project proponent must apply within one year for the appropriate decision(s) or the selection will become null and void. B. Type of Application. Decision types are described in the Permit Application Types and Procedures Chapter of the Tukwila Zoning Code (TMC 18.104). In all cases, design review is required and shall be consolidated per "Consolidation of Permit Applications" in the Permit Application Types and Procedures Chapter (TMC 18.104.030). land use 3 s w 4,x 5 fey,,. mw Section 47. Ordinance No. 1770 §84, 1996; Ord. 1344 §10, 1985; Ord. 1331 §19, 1984 as codified in TMC Chapter 21.04 State Environmental Policy Act, are hereby amended to read as follows: A. Whenever public notice is required, the City shall follow the procedures set forth in this section. B. Public notice will be given in the following situations: 1. When the City issues the following Determinations of Non Significance (DNS): a. DNS involving another agency with jurisdiction, b. DNS involving the demolition of any structure or facility not exempted by WAC 197- 11- 800(2) (f) or 197 -11 -880, c. DNS involving the issuance of a clearing or grading permit not exempted by WAC 197 -11 -800 throughl 97 -11 -890, d. DNS issued following a request for early notice pursuant to WAC 197 -11- 350(2), e. Mitigated DNS issued pursuant to WAC197 -11- 350(3), f. DNS issued following the withdrawal of a DS pursuant to WAC 197 -11- 360(4); 2. When the City issues a Determination of Significance to commence scoping; 3. When a draft EIS (DEIS) is available for public comment; Page 31 of 32 _r1 Attachment B 4. Whenever the City holds a public hearing pursuant to WAC 197 -11 -535, provided that if the project requires a Type 3, 4 or 5 decision, such hearing shall be consolidated with the public hearing on the merits of the project; 5. Whenever the responsible official determines that public notice is required. C. The City shall give public notice by using the public notice procedures set forth in TMC 18.104.110 and .120 D. Notice of public hearings on non project proposals shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. E. The City may require an applicant to compensate the City for the costs of compliance with the public notice requirements for the applicant's proposal and /or provide services and materials to assist. Section 48. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 49. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2011. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Shelley M. Kerslake, City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A Revised Figure 18 -3 Exhibit B- Revised Figure 18 -7 Jim Haggerton, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Page 32 of 32 42 d 1 1 S 144 Si 1S 1 Special Height Exception Area: Up to Ten (10) Stories Allowed Special Height Exception Area: Up to Six (6) Stories Allowed Special Height Exception Area: Up to Four (4) Stories Allowed Special Height Limitation Area: Limited to No More than Six (6) Stories NIS L J I 1 1 Westfield Shoppingtown 1 Southoenter 1 Mall S ander Ivd 1 1 1 1• I I 1 V i i i 1 slaosl 1 WHIPTRAI north Figure 18 -3 Building Height Exception Areas 43 Exhibit B Figure 18 -7 Required Number of Parking Spaces for Automobiles and Bicycles Use Automobile Standard Bicycle Standard Single family and multi- 2 for each dwelling unit that contains up to 3 For multi- family, 1 space per family dwellings bedrooms. 1 additional space for every 2 bedrooms 10 parking stalls, with a in excess of 3 Bedrooms in a dwelling unit. minimum of 2 spaces. No Additional parking may be required for home requirement for single occupations and accessory dwelling units as family. otherwise proved by this title. Multi family and Mixed- One for each dwelling tulit that contains up to one One secure, covered, Use residential (in the bedroom. 0.5 additional spaces for every bedroom in ground -level bicycle parking Urban Renewal Overlay excess of one bedroom in a multi family dwelling space shall be provided for (URO)) trait. every four residential tmits At least 75 of required residential parking is provided in an enclosed structure (garage or podium). The structure must be screened from view from public rights of way. Senior Citizen Housing For 15 units or less, 1 space per dwelling unit. For 1 space per 50 parking stalls, dwellings with more than 15 with a units, a minimum of 15 spaces are required, plus 1 minimum of 2 spaces. space per 2 dwelling units. Religious facilities, 1 for each 4 fixed seats 1 space per 50 parking stalls, mortuaries and funeral with a minimum of 2 spaces. homes One automobile space at no charge to a car sharing program (if available) for every 50 to 200 residential spaces on site. An additional space shall be provided for developments with over 200 parking spaces. All car share spaces are in addition to required residential parking. If car sharing programs are not available when the building is constructed, an equivalent ntunber of guest parking spaces shall be provided. These shall be converted to dedicated car- sharing spaces when the program becomes available. m a mixed -use or multi- family development. Convalescent/ nursing/ r est homes Food stores and markets 1 for every 4 Beds with a minimum of 10 stalls 1 for each 300 square feet of usable floor area 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Exhibit B High schools 1 for each staff member plus 2 for every 5 students or visitors Hospitals 1 for each lied Hotels, motels and 1 for each room, plus one employee space for each 20 extended stay rooms, rounded to the next highest figure Manufacturing 1 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area Office, commercial and professional Buildings, banks, dental and medical clinics Places of public assembly, including auditoriums, exhibition halls, community clubs, community centers, and private clubs Post offices Restaurant 3.0 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area The Director shall determine the number of required parking spaces, with a minimum of 1 space for every 100 square -feet of assembly area. To ensure parking adequacy for each proposal, the Director may consider the following: a. A parking study or documentation paid for by the applicant and administered biy the City regarding the actual parking demand for the proposed use, or b. Evidence in available planning and teclunical studies relating to the proposed use. 3 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area 1 for each 100 square feet of usable floor area Restaurant, Fast food 1 for each 50 square feet of usable floor area. Fifty percent of any outdoor seating area will be added to the usable floor area for parking requirement calculations. Retail Sales, Bulk 2.5 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area Retail sales, General 4 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area if located within the TUC or TVS zoning districts; 2.5 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area if located in any other zoning district. Schools, Elementary 1.5 for each staff member Junior High 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per classroom Fly Exhibit B Shopping center (mall), planned, per usable floor area size, as listed below 500,000 sq. ft. or 5 for every 1,000 sq. ft. larger 25,000 499,999 sq. ft. 4 for every 1,000 sq. ft. Taverns Theaters Warehousing 1 for every 4 persons based on occupancy load 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 for every 4 fixed seats. If seats are not fixed, 1 1 space per 100 seats, with a per 3 seats, with minimum of 2 spaces. concurrence of Fire Chief, consistent with maximum allowed occupancy 1 for every 2,000 square feet of usable floor area 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. M Attachment C North Valley LLC 3409 West Laurelhurst Drive NE Seattle, WA 98105 February 15, 2012 From: North Valley LLC, by Joe Mitter and David Bromel, principals Re: Proposed Zoning Changes for Public Hearing February 23 We are the owners of the project known as North Valley Business Park, located at 17600 West Valley Highway, Tukwila, WA 98188. The proposed changes to the current allowed uses under the C /LI zoning would impact this project negatively. This type of building and location attracts a large variety of manufacturing uses, and some of our past and current uses could be interpreted as not being permissible under the proposed changes. Particularly in a time when efforts are being made to add jobs and encourage the manufacturing sector in this country, the idea of limiting the types of manufacturing which can take place in a light industrial zone seems counter productive. Our building, and many others in the surrounding area, were built as flexible warehouse /manufacturing buildings to reach a broad market segment, and it would have a negative economic impact to discourage some of these types of uses, thereby driving revenue opportunities to surrounding municipalities, and negatively impacting property values in Tukwila. We strongly urge that you not make these detrimental changes to the current code. Respectfully submitted, North Valley LLC Joe Mitter kalanicor o),amail.com 206 920 -1131 A Minnie Dhaliwal From: anetiaseattle @comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 12:23 PM To: Minnie Dhaliwal Subject: Fwd: Public Hearing on February 23, 2012 Planning Commission revising zoning districts Categories: Red Category Subject: Public Hearing on February 23, 2012 Planning Commission revising zoning districts Dear Minnie Dhaliwal, Per our conversation the other day, I am sending you this email due to the fact I am out of the country and cannot attend the Meeting on February 23, 2012. I am extremely worried about the Planning Commission revising the allowed uses in my building's zoning district. My building located at 4712 S. 134th St. Tukwila, WA, currently has two of my renters. A Roofing company in the upper part of my building and a business that repairs and paints damaged commercial vehicles in the lower part of my building. Prior to renting out my building I owned and operated a machine shop for 30 years which manufactured airplane parts. When I sold my business I left the electrical wiring in place, which is probably worth $100,000.00 dollars. I did this so if I were to lose my renters, I would have the option to set up another machine shop. It would seem to me if this proposed zoning revision is approved, my building and other business near mine, will become worth a lot less money and will keep many more people from getting jobs and could possible created immediate job losses. There used to be 6 houses behind my building and 6 houses to the east of my building. When Sound Transit came through, they bought those houses and demolished all them. Also the light rail makes more noise than my machine shop ever did. All up and down 134th St. there are manufactuing Business's. I would appreciate and strongly recommend 48 1 not changing my zoning area from light manufacturing. Sincerely, Eric Schweiger 206 601 -3977 IL FARWEST PAINT MANUFACTURI FARWEST 4522 South 133rd P.O. Box 68726 Tukwila, Washington 98168 (206) 244 -8844 FAX (206) 246 -7691 1- 800 727 -9694 February 16, 2012 1��i Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Public Hearing Meeting Notice for February 23, 2012, Regarding Manufacturing Use in Tukwila Dear Ms. Dhaliwal: Thank you for speaking with me via telephone on February 13 regarding the Public Hearing Meeting scheduled for February 23 As I stated to you during our call, I wanted to get a clearer picture of how any Planning Commission revision for light industrial use in Tukwila might affect manufacturers, specifically our company, Farwest Paint. You suggested that I write a letter to you regarding our concerns. First, I wanted to give you a brief background on our company. Farwest Paint has been in business since 1925; we have been a family -owned business since 1965, when my father bought the company. My dad was in the paint business for 66 years; I have been with Farwest Paint for 40 years. We are now third generation with 7 family members involved from our total of 17 employees. As our name states, we manufacture paints for various types of uses. Farwest Paint moved to our present location on South 133 in 1977. Through the 35 years we have been in Tukwila, we have had a very good working relationship with the City and have been good stewards of our property that our family owns. We have worked closely with the fire department to ensure that we operate in a safe environment, which we have done. We are zoned light industrial. As your Public Hearing Notice states, the Planning Commission is reviewing manufacturing uses in the City. It appears that the review is aimed at manufacturing not associated with our type of business, but we want to be clear on how any changes might affect our business, if at all. We assume that the February 23 meeting will answer that. FARWEST PAINTS jBPVie paints MATSON PAINTS 50 "Quality Paints Since 1925" I will be in attendance at the February 23 meeting; I would hope that the City would do a fair and equitable review and would continue to welcome manufacturers of all types and the jobs they create in Tukwila. Having manufacturers in Tukwila certainly adds revenue to the city from the businesses located here and brings money to other businesses in Tukwila that is spent by our employees on a daily basis. Sincerely, Paul Sheehan President Farwest Paint Mfg. Co. PES:jms Copy: Michael Huber, General Manager Janna Huber, Finance and Administration Brian Huber, Sales Manager 51