HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 2025-06-26 Item 6 - Tukwila International Blvd Regulations - Staff Report and AttachmentCity of Tukwila
Thomas McLeod, Mayor
Department of Community Development - Mora Gfedoff. NCR Director
TO: Tukwila Planning Commission
FROM: Nora Gierloff, AICP, Community Development Director
BY: Isaac Gloor, Senior Planner, DCD
Neil Tabor, AICP, Senior Planner, DCD
DATE: June 26, 2025
SUBJECT: Tukwila International Boulevard: Regulation Workshop
ISSUE
The City is proposing potential modifications to development standards within designated zoning
districts associated with the Tukwila International Boulevard (TIB) neighborhood. In May, the
Commission reviewed the history of the City's efforts to implement the community's vision for the
TIB neighborhood, and the regulatory barriers that contribute toward the neighborhood's lack of
development. This meeting aims to provide a more in-depth review of the work performed by the
Congress on New Urbanism (CNU), examine the context for development in our region, and begin
review of the proposal for development regulation changes.
DISCUSSION
Background
In 2017, the City contracted with the Congress for New Urbanism (CNU) to kickstart
implementation of the Comprehensive Plan with a community workshop. After reviewing existing
conditions, plans, and the community goals and visions for the neighborhood, the CNU's work
culminated in the Tukwila International Boulevard — Implementing the Vision document, which
contains an analysis of the existing conditions in the neighborhood, as well as recommendations
for regulations to help the community achieve neighborhood goals.
Figure 1
A CNU illustration depicting potential development on the site of the existing TIB Link station
9
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
Except for the moratorium on certain uses that were incompatible with the vision, the
recommendations included in the CNU's report were never adopted by the City in any official way.
CNU Project: Engagement
In February of 2017, the CNU held a three day workshop where neighborhood residents and
stakeholders shared ideas for the neighborhood. The workshop included tours of TIB and other
main streets in the area, discussions of the neighborhood's opportunities and challenges, and in-
depth dives into the dynamics in the corridor that drive development, investment, and urban
design. The total attendance numbered in the hundreds- a list of some of the input that was
received can be found here.
In March of the same year, City staff held 5 separate focus group sessions with students at Foster
High School. Students provided feedback about their most and least favorite parts of the TIB area,
and their ideas for how to make the neighborhood more like the places they love the most. A
summary of the feedback they provided can be found here.
CNU Project and Beyond: Residential Market Analysis
As a component of the TIB Rising project, an analysis of residential market potential was
conducted by Zimmerman/Volk Associates. The analysis found that an estimated 405-502 rental
and for -sale housing units could be supported within the TIB study area over a five-year period
(2017-2022). The analysis also projected ranges of costs of housing units by area median income
(AMI) range, separated by housing and ownership type.
The analysis revealed a strong preference for multifamily rental units affordable to those earning
80% AMI and greater.
Due to the age and limited timeframe of this study, these data points should be taken with a grain
of salt. Housing was underproduced compared to the projected market demands in the analysis
period, while development in surrounding cities may have further impacted the current demand.
Since this analysis was created, events such as legislative reforms to middle housing,
condominium liability law changes, the COVID-19 pandemic, updates to state building codes and
other changes in construction costs are all reflected in the current residential development
market.
As part of the lead up to the Comprehensive Plan update, in 2021 the City contracted with
ECONorthwest to produce a Transit -Oriented Development Housing Strategies Plan. This plan is
intended to guide the City's policy development on housing within the Comprehensive Plan update
and beyond.
Differing from other citywide housing action plans, market conditions studied in this plan
specifically focused on a half -mile radius around the TIB light rail station, generally within the TIB
study area.
Within the TOD Housing Strategies Plan, development possibilities were evaluated using "Residual
Land Value" (RLV). In basic terms, RLV determines whether the final value of a proposed
development minus the costs of development make the project desirable for the developer. Very
generally, this equation can be understood as:
Project value after construction — Development Costs = Residual Land Value
10
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
The RLV model can be useful in analyzing the impacts of policy or regulations on project viability.
See the example from the TOD Housing Action Plan (HAP) below, with the green shaded box
representing a minimum range of return to make a residential project viable.
Figure 2
Figure 4-g_ Feasibility Itnpacis of Various Policies on 4-Over-1 Podium ProtoF4 9es
scurox- ECUNorc9xes:
Effects of Policy Changes for 4•Oirerrl Podium Prototypes
Residual Land Value
SII I S- $15 SI) 1-45 Sfi4 1.73 S20
IEEE
522.n
3.52
53rt5
WiChOutS1 ucturedP rklrg
With Stfucturecl Parkii
Flo MFTE
12-Vttar+AFTE
Inca us awry Frown
Cun-Bnt Recrearianaa Space Require - man.
Artametrue RecreaLionaESae ce Requirement
No Stop Back
Maximum Studio Requirement
MO ry MUM 2 -agd rug m na o u i urnieR
The full Transit -Oriented Development Housing Strategies Plan can be found here.
As a component of the City's housing efforts with other grants, the City subcontracted with Leland
Consulting Group in 2023 to conduct a residential market analysis of select zoning districts within
Tukwila, and specifically the TIB Study Area. The presentation to council can be found here.
The study specifically evaluated the Medium Density Residential (MDR) and High Density
Residential (HDR) zoning districts for residential development feasibility. The MDR zoning district is
proposed to be consolidated into the Community Residential (CR) zoning district and is not
intended to support high densities of residential development, the HDR zoning district standards
are very similar to existing standards of the Regional Commercial (RC) and Neighborhood
Commercial Center (NCC) zoning districts proposed for updated regulations.
The study evaluated recent development within Tukwila and the surrounding market area, and the
market conditions of multifamily residential development in South King County broadly.
Townhomes, garden apartments and low -to -mid -sized podium construction were identified as the
most common multifamily development types seen in South King County.
It was found that Tukwila had seen less multifamily development than peer cities, had numerous
older multifamily buildings that exceed the permitted density in their underlying zoning districts,
and that most newer multifamily development similarly had to be permitted through a development
agreement, as the underlying zoning did not permit the density of units and other site features
desired by the developer.
Vacancy rates for larger multifamily units were also shown to be the lowest for Tukwila out of all
peer cities, a trend that was projected to continue, as shown in the graphic below. Generally, a
residential vacancy rate of 5% represents a constrained housing market, while a rate of 2%
represents an extremely constrained housing market.
11
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 4
Figure 3
Historical & Projected Multifamily Vacancy Rate, Medium and High Density Zoning Analysis
6.00%
5.00%
4.00%
3.00%
2.00%
1.00%
0.00%
5.78% ! 5.90%
.77%
/ 4.08% 51
79%
74%
‘ .7% 3.45%
I I I I I I I 1\1
/ 3.03% 2.58%
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028
Tukwila SeaTac Burien Des Moines Kent Renton
Although differing in overall scope and timeframe, many themes were consistent across the
studies, including:
• Market demand exists to support additional residential development within the TIB area at
different housing types and ownership structures.
• Current regulations impose major impediments to construction of denser housing types.
Some of the regulation limitations identified include:
• High recreation space requirements
• High parking requirements (Partially reduced with recently adopted middle
housing regulations)
• Upper -story stepbacks (Removed with middle housing update)
• Further separation from lower density zones (Removed with middle housing
update)
• Arduous design review process (Changed with previous code update)
• Lack of an available multifamily tax exemption (MFTE) program
• Lack of flexibility for mix of parking (structured and surface) and mix of unit
types
• Many peer cities have more permissive standards, which better support new residential
development.
12
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 5
CNU Project: Report Details
The CNU report contains a concept plan for zoning code
amendments. Their recommendations included:
• Replacing the Regional Commercial (RC) zone
with a new zoning district, named "TIB-1 ".
• Replacing the Neighborhood Commercial Center
(NCC) zone with a new zoning district, named
"TIB-2".
• Replacing the High -Density Residential zone
within the TIB neighborhood with a new zoning
district, named "TIB-3".
These conceptual zoning districts featured more urban
uses and development standards than the existing
zoning. For example, the proposal would have
prohibited most industrial uses and allowed a greater
variety of residential and mixed uses.
However, the concept proposed only small adjustments
in some areas, a reflection perhaps of the different real
estate market and development pressures of the time.
For example, the maximum heights in the concept were
set at 4 stories. The plan also included large stepbacks
for upper stories, and sizable setbacks for certain
properties. Some of those setbacks reached 20 feet.
The concept included lower parking minimums than
were in place at the time; it required 1 parking space for
each dwelling. However, in the eight years since, residential parking requirements have been
adopted city-wide that match the proposal.
Figure 4
See pages 36-43 of the CNU report for the full conceptual development standards.
8 Years Later: What's Changed?
The CNU project represented a major effort to attempt to create a regulatory framework that would
accomplish the vision of the TIB neighborhood. If adopted at the time, it may have been a
revolutionary shift to the standards for the neighborhood.
However, in the years since, the neighborhood, the region, and the real estate market have shifted
in innumerable ways. Any 8-year-old development code would likely be due for an update; this is
even more true for a development code that did not go through a vetting process with the
Department of Community Development and was never adopted.
Some examples of ways in which the CNU project's concept development standards may not
adequately implement the goals and policies of today's Comprehensive Plan are below:
13
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 6
• Building Heights:
o The maximum
height proposed
by the CNU
concept was 4
stories. This
height limit
conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan, which envisions high-rise transit -oriented
development near TIB Station. See the policy below:
Figure 5: CNU Concept Height Requirements
HEIGHT
stories above average s►]ewalk grade.
Ground floor su fies, irons fmished (loaf to firm -shed floor. exceeding 20
feet are eansldered viva stories.
MerZanirtM eueedirig 39% of [ht. ground Mew mtg. ix considered t wry.
Stories abowa ground ibar, from finished /loar to finished flow, vxcecd+ng
16 feet are considered as two ssaries.
5(ruaure [►eght Ls 3lmiteU na the nnamrwrn perrnlmed hedge of (he adja-
cent dstrlcs within Setae( Oche nearer[ 9eI.
■ Policy LU 11.7: "Prioritize this area [the area around TIB Station] for a more
intensive, transit -oriented mix of mid- to high-rise office, multifamily
residential and hospitality uses and services, with structured parking that
builds on the momentum of the Tukwila International Boulevard Station's
proximity to SeaTac Airport and generates jobs for the community."
o 4 stories (45-60 feet), has become an uncommon height for new construction in the
Seattle area. This is largely due to land and construction costs.
• The cost to purchase land is high. Land costs influence building heights
because the increased investment required to purchase land necessitates
larger buildings that can recoup that cost, either with more leasable
commercial space or more homes to rent or sell. This generally results in a
minimum height of new buildings of 5 or 6 stories (55-70 feet).
• Construction costs influence building heights because the life -safety
requirements for buildings change in thresholds with increased height. The
high cost of installing elevators, multiple fire -rated stairwells, and concrete
lower floors is usually only borne when building heights are higher than 4
stories.
• Setbacks and Stepbacks:
o The setbacks and stepbacks proposed by the conceptual plan apply largely to
properties adjacent to parcels in the (now defunct) Low -Density Residential (LDR)
zoning district. The reasoning for this is not provided in the document; however, it
reflects a traditional belief that single-family homes should be treated as a special
class and "protected" from the impacts of higher -density construction.
The following 8 years have shifted understanding of best practices. For example, in
accordance with State law, almost all jurisdictions in the State (Tukwila included)
have removed restrictions on denser housing within zones that previously
exclusively allowed single-family homes, rendering the restriction from the concept
plan less relevant. Additionally, the prior focus on buffering higher density homes
from single-family homes triggers a question: Should the City's regulations limit
new housing construction for the purpose of buffering Tukwila's most expensive
form of housing?
14
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 7
• Parking:
o The concept
plan envisions
the area
retaining
parking
requirements (See Figure 3). The concept standards are generally similar to the
current requirements, but do not necessarily help implement the goals and policies
of the Comprehensive Plan. Goal 13 of the Land Use Element states:
Figure 6: CNU Concept Parking Requirements
OFF-STRFEL RARKING Arip LO,apI I
HCSimnt�al
Cwnmc. nal
Larlging
rdve
1 for mach d`rcllirr unit, 1 ?or every pgclling arms for SGnlor hglrSing-
2far each 1JI101Iequere Fret of usable floor area
1 Far each rOOrn.
1 for every +1 pl.f scos Gaited On acc jpantp soar]
"TIB parking requirements are based on urban, rather than suburban, densities and
needs and balance the need for parking with TIB urban design goals and policies
that encourage transit use and walking."
Additionally, policy LU 13.1 states:
"Parking requirements encourage dense development supported by major transit
facilities and reflect the availability of transit service while accommodating the
needs of residents, workers and visitors frequenting the area."
Parking is one of the primary cost -drivers of new development. A report by the
Sightline Institute found that in Washington, surface parking can cost between
$5,000 and $20,000 per space, and structured parking often has a per -space cost
more than $60,000. Surface parking is cheaper to build than structured parking but
uses valuable land area; after adding the area required for vehicle maneuvers, each
parking stall requires about 330 square feet of space.
The CNU concept's commercial parking space requirement of 2 spaces per 1000
square feet of floor area means that a potential developer would be required to
dedicate approximately 650-700 square feet of area for parking for each 1000
square feet of commercial use. If that parking is surface parking, it detracts from the
walkable, dense, and urban nature envisioned for the neighborhood, and reduces
the buildable area of properties. However, if the parking is structured, it could add
between $100,000-$200,000 to the cost of each 1000 square foot commercial area.
To highlight the challenges with parking requirements, consider urban format
grocery stores. These are often found in walkable and dense areas and can range in
size between 7,000 and 14,000 square feet. They typically primarily serve local
customers and are a necessity for livability in urban areas. These uses, in an area
with these parking requirements, would require between 14 and 28 parking spaces.
Those spaces would take up between 4,700 and 10,000 square feet of area, or two-
thirds of the area needed for the grocery store itself. If that parking was provided in a
garage, it could add between $800,000 and $1.7 million to the development cost.
Residential parking minimums in urban settings pose similar challenges. Studies
have found that each parking space in an urban setting can add upwards of $200 to
monthly rents. Flat parking requirements mandate that all households pay for
parking, regardless of whether they drive. Even with Tukwila's current parking
requirements mandating 2 parking spaces for most homes, between 6% and 10% of
all households within the City do not own cars. A King County study of multi -family
apartment buildings found that 40% of all spaces in multifamily buildings sit emp$y55
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 8
16
overnight.
Part of the reasoning for requiring parking relies on the assumption that without
parking minimums, developers will include no parking at all. This is rarely the case.
A study of apartment buildings in developed in portions of Seattle with no parking
minimums found that 70 percent of new multifamily buildings still provided off-
street parking. The study examined 868 new developments and found that they
provided about 40% less parking than was previously mandated — exactly in -line
with the previously mentioned King County study.
Removing parking minimums is a growing trend in Washington. Within the past few
years, Bellingham, Port Townsend, Bremerton, and Spokane have completely
removed parking minimums citywide. Many other cities have removed parking
minimums within dense and transit -rich areas, including Tukwila's neighbor Seattle.
Figure 7: Shea Apartments, Seattle
32 apartments and 12 parking stalls (0.3 spaces per home)
A bill passed by the legislature in 2025 will require a parking -requirement -overhaul
for all jurisdictions in the State with a population of 30,000 or more. The new
requirements will apply to all of Tukwila's immediate neighbors (SeaTac, Burien,
Kent, Renton, Seattle, and unincorporated King County) and most other
jurisdictions in our vicinity (Auburn, Des Moines, Federal Way, Puyallup, Tacoma,
etc). The new law establishes that a jurisdiction cannot require more than 0.5
parking spaces for multifamily dwellings, and prohibits any parking minimums for
the following uses:
• Buildings undergoing a change of use.
• Residences with less than 1,200 square feet.
• Commercial spaces less than 3,000 square feet.
• Affordable housing.
• Senior housing.
• Child-care facilities.
• Ground -Level commercial space in mixed -use buildings.
While Tukwila's population is currently below the threshold for compliance with this
bill, the City is located within an urban area that is entirely affected. When
considering parking minimums in the City's urban areas, it is important to note that
any developer would compare the cost of construction in Tukwila with our
neighbors. Parking minimums that exceed those of neighboring jurisdictions may
make developing in the TIB area less desirable than other areas in the region.
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 9
Procedural Challenges
In addition to the standards themselves, which may not reflect the City's current goals or policies,
implementation of the CNU proposal also posed procedural challenges. The concept envisioned
the creation of three new zoning districts and an area -wide rezoning effort. This process would
require a major update to the City's Comprehensive Plan. These kinds of updates are time-
consuming and heavily restricted by State law; a City only has a single chance each year to adopt
updates to their Comprehensive Plan.
After reviewing the depth of the outreach and work performed
by the CNU and evaluating the community -shaped policies of
the 2024 Comprehensive Plan, City Staff proposes a path
forward that retains the existing RC and NCC zoning districts
but re -writes the underlying development standards to better
conform with the vision. It would remove the neighborhood
overlays (Commercial Redevelopment, Special Height, and
Urban Renewal) and adopt new multifamily design standards
that comply with current state law. Additionally, the proposal
includes amendments to the parking requirements and the
table of allowed uses, and the introduction of a development
incentive program and a residential tenant displacement
program.
This pathway would allow the Department to accomplish the
goals of this project without requiring major updates to the
Comprehensive Plan.
City Staff Proposal
Regional Commercial (RC) District
Of the two TIB zoning districts, the RC has the greatest
potential for transit -oriented development. The district
includes properties within a half mile walking distance of the
Link light rail station, two King County metro bus rapid transit
lines, and the future Sound Transit Stride bus rapid transit that
will provide service to Burien and Bellevue.
Figure 8: RC Zoning District (Red)
When looking at peer city development, the following differences are noted in transit -oriented, high
density districts. Typically, no maximum residential density is set. Setbacks are not typically
considered necessary, unless certain uses are located on the first floor that require privacy, such
as first -floor homes. Height limits do not usually prohibit buildings from reaching at least 8 stories
and often permit structures to achieve desired market -based heights.
See the table on the next page for the proposed development standards within the RC zoning
district:
17
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 10
RC DIMENSIONAL AND DENSITY STANDARDS (Proposed)
Minimum Lot Area:
None.
Residential Density:
No Maximum
Setbacks:
Fronts, Sides, Rear - Portions
of Structure Below 85 feet
Front, Sides, Rear - Portions of Structure Above
85 feet
Entrances of Street Facing First -
Abutting Street or Alley
Floor Homes
Minimum: 6 feet
Maximum Average: 10'
All other Uses:
Minimum: 10 feet
Abutting Adjacent Property
Minimum: 0 feet
Maximum Average Along
Frontages: 10 feet
Minimum: 20 feet
Maximum Site
Coverage
Portions of Buildings Above 85 Feet in Height
65%
Maximum Tower
Floorplate
Average must not exceed 12,000 square feet
Maximum Building
Width
130 feet
Landscaping
Landscaping would be required by the City's landscaping code and frontage
improvement requirements.
Base Heights and
Incentive Heights
Parcels south of 148th Street
Parcels north of
S 148th Street &
south of S 146th Street
Parcels north of 146th
Street
Base Height:
Base Height:
Base Height:
85 feet
Incentive Height:
65 feet
Incentive Height:
65 feet
Incentive Height:
Limited by the FAA
125 feet
85 feet
Tower Separation
Above 85 feet, where building exceeds 100 feet
N/A
60 feet
These standards reflect the current Comprehensive
Plan's goals to allow high-rise development. At the
same time, limitations on maximum tower
floorplates and site coverage above 85 feet
incentivize slimmer buildings known as "point
towers". These kinds of buildings narrow as they
increase in height, ensuring that light can reach the
street below.
While the proposed standards would, in theory,
permit high-rise buildings, it is unlikely the current
development market would be supportive of their
construction. This standard would align code with the Comprehensive Plan and "future -proof" the
1r8a should economic conditions change in a way that makes high-rise construction feasible. It's
Figure 9: Point Tower Example
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 11
important to note that the maximum height of any structure would also be limited by the
requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration; the neighborhood's proximity to SeaTac
airport would likely provide an upper limit on the height of any future construction.
As an example, the City of SeaTac permits structures adjacent to TIB Station to achieve unlimited
heights. However, SeaTac's newly constructed Polaris development, located kitty-corner to TIB
Link Station, achieves only 7 stories.
Properties within the RC district would be permitted lower
heights further from TIB Station.
Neighborhood Commercial Center (NCC) District:
The portion of the neighborhood within the NCC district is
slightly further from the neighborhood's most valuable
transit assets, although all are still within a short walk of
frequent King County Metro service. The Comprehensive
Plan envisions this neighborhood building on the success
of the Tukwila Village project, which is a 6-story high -
density development with ground floor retail and public
amenity space. This zone contains several parcels
outside of the TIB neighborhood. For this reason, the
standards have two separate tiers.
See the table below for the proposed development
standards within the NCC zoning district:
Figure 10: NCC Zoning District
within TIB Neighborhood
NCC DIMENSIONAL AND DENSITY STANDARDS (Proposed)
Property Location:
Parcels Within 500 Feet of Tukwila
International Boulevard
All Other
Parcels
Minimum Lot Area:
None
Residential
Density:
Unlimited
Setbacks:
Fronts, Sides, Rear
Front
Entrances of Street Facing First -Floor Homes
Minimum: 6 feet
Minimum: 6 feet
Maximum Average: 10 feet
All Other Uses
Sides & Rear
Minimum: 0 feet
Maximum Average Along Frontages: 10 feet
Minimum: 10 feet
Maximum Site
Coverage
75%
Maximum Building
Width
130 feet
ping:
Landsca in
Refer to TMC 18.52, "Landscape Requirements," Table A, for perimeter and parking
lot landscaping requirements.
Base Heights and
Incentive Heights
Base Height:
65 feet
Incentive Height:
Base Height:
45 feet
Incentive Height:
85 feet
65 feet
19
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 12
When compared to the proposal for the RC district, these standards reflect a reduction in intensity
of uses in the neighborhood from south to north. The NCC zoning district would not be eligible for
high-rise development, but could be developed with 6-8 story buildings, similar to the existing
Tukwila Village development. Both districts would similarly require buildings to front along streets,
typical of more urban development
Areas further than 500 feet from Tukwila
International Boulevard are the portions of the NCC
zoning district that are not located within the TIB
neighborhood (See Figure 11). The standards in
those areas would allow moderately more density
than current standards allow, but in -keeping with
their less urban nature, be less permissive than
within the TIB neighborhood.
Parking Requirements
City Staff recommends simplifying the section of the
TMC that controls mandatory parking minimums
and reducing or removing minimum parking
requirements for certain uses. The proposed
parking table mirrors the requirements that will be
implemented byTukwila's neighbors, as required by State law (SB 5184). The provisions continue
to include requirements for parking in large commercial spaces and residential homes that are
further than half a mile from major transit. See the proposal below:
Figure 11: NCC Zoning District Not Within
TIB Neighborhood
LOR w
4
i4'
LOR f• Loa 4_ DA CU y -
i 7...1 _ , t
LOk y F
tLPF4 S. T7!T
✓ , nSF
▪ {4{M LUh LOR }
$ L i ▪ LOCI
C W_ :Ii1
L cj. LPP � .
1
4911.
+T 'Y •'is'l'9�
r
Lb � I
• wo1 l L_TE
?�uR III rCatsi Hi I' LOR
LOR
L
Use Types Minimum Parking
Within Half a Mile from a Major Transit Stop (Link Light Rail or Bus Rapid Transit)
All Uses
None
Greater than Half a Mile from a Major Transit Stop
Residential Uses which:
• Meet the definition of affordable (RCW 36.70A.030); or
• Limit occupancy to senior citizens or those with disabilities; or
• Meet the definition of Accessory Dwelling Units; or
• Contain less than 1,200 sf of interior livable floor area.
Residential Uses which:
• Meet the definition of middle housing or multi -family housing.
Residential Uses which:
• Meet the definition of single-family home.
Commercial and Industrial Uses which:
• Serve alcohol for on -site consumption; or
• Contain less than 3,000 sf of usable floor area (UFA); or
• Are childcare uses, such as commercial daycares.
All Other Commercial and Industrial Uses
All Uses which:
• Are in existing/vacant buildings that are proposed for new
occupancy or change of use.
None
1 space / unit
2 spaces / unit
None
1 space / 1000 sf of Useable Floor
Area
None
All Uses which:
2.0 Require conditional or unclassified use permits.
The provision of parking may be
required as a condition of approval
to mitigate potential impacts.
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 13
These standards would allow uses near high -value transit assets to include as much or as little
parking as the developer believes is required. It also preserves the City's ability to require parking to
mitigate potential impacts that may be associated with uses requiring conditional or unclassified
use permits.
Permitted Uses
Goals and policies from TIB documents and the City's Comprehensive Plan all envision the
neighborhood being home to a wide variety of dense and walkable uses. With that in mind, the
following uses are proposed to be permitted within both zoning districts:
o Retail
o Restaurants
o Cafes
o Personal services (barbers, nail salons, etc.)
o Mixed -use multi -family buildings
o Stand-alone multi -family buildings
■ Single -use multi -family buildings would be required to develop their first floor to
be convertible to commercial space in the future.
o Senior citizen housing
o Offices
o Schools
o Cultural facilities
o Parks and playgrounds
o Other similar non -auto -oriented uses
In addition, the NCC zoning district would allow middle housing, such as townhomes or stacked
flats. The RC district may be suitable for hotels, given its proximity to transit and the airport.
Industrial uses, low density uses, and uses that typically require the use of automobiles would not
be permitted in either of the zones. These uses include:
o Gas stations, auto shops, car dealers
o Drive throughs
o Warehouses
o Bulk retail
o Cemeteries, morticians, funeral homes
o Light or heavy manufacturing
o Self -storage
The area is currently home to many businesses that would be made nonconforming by these
updates, including fast food restaurants and commercial parking areas. The zoning code contains
provisions for nonconforming uses that would permit those businesses to continue to operate
indefinitely. Nonconforming uses and structures could also undergo routine maintenance.
Conformance with the new standards would only be required if the building owner proposes
improvements to the building that exceed 25% of the building's value, or the if the use vacates the
building for a period of 6 consecutive months or a total of 365 days in a 3-year period.
21
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 14
Development Incentive Program
New development should provide as much benefit to the community as possible. That benefit can
be as simple as the provision of new housing; in Tukwila, one of the primary needs of our
community is additional housing supply. However, that benefit could also be community spaces,
enhanced streetscapes, larger family size units, green building or infrastructure techniques, or
more.
Some jurisdictions take the approach of requiring all new development to provide these kinds of
amenities. In areas where development pressure is incredibly high, this can make sense; if
development is an inevitability, it may make sense to mandate specific public benefits for all new
development.
In Tukwila, however, requirements like that may not be feasible at this time. Each requirement
imposed by the City layers increased costs onto a project. Development costs in Tukwila are not
significantly cheaper than they are in Bellevue, Kirkland, or Seattle, but asking rents or sale prices
are lower. For this reason, development in Tukwila can be inherently riskier than in some of our
more affluent neighbors; if our regulations demand costly additions to housing developments, we
run the risk of disincentivizing development altogether. With this in mind, City Staff proposes to
implement a Development Incentive Program. This program would allow projects to develop taller
buildings in exchange for the provision of community benefits. The types of benefits that a
developer could choose to include are the following:
22
o Family sized homes:
■ 5% of all homes containing 3+ bedrooms, and 20% of all homes contain 2+
bedrooms; or
■ 10% of all homes contain 3+ bedrooms; or
■ 40% of all homes contain 2+ bedrooms.
o Affordable homes:
■ Participation in the 12-year Multi -Family Tax Exemption program and its
affordability requirements.
o Enhancements to the streetscape:
■ Providing at least 4 feet of extra frontage beyond the requirements.
• Could be used for residential patios or stoops, restaurant or cafe
seating, retail patios, or public street furniture.
o Midblock promenades:
■ This would be a pedestrian promenade that breaks up large blocks, creating
pedestrian spaces and more activity corners than might otherwise exist.
■ May be appropriate on sites more than 150 feet from intersections.
o Active recreation areas:
■ These would be required to be open to the public during business hours. Fees
could be charged for use, but membership couldn't be required.
• Could be used for sport courts, child play areas, dog relief areas,
climbing walls, or exercise equipment.
o Enclosed plazas:
■ A publicly accessible continuous open space located within a building and
covered to provide overhead weather protection, while providing substantial
natural daylight. Examples are atriums or galleries.
o Green infrastructure / architecture:
■ Construction meeting the standards of the Living Building Challenge (LBC).
• The LBC is an international green building certification program,
administered by the International Living Future Institute (ILFI), that
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 15
defines an advanced measure of sustainability for buildings and
landscapes. The LBC's goal is to create buildings that generate more
energy than they use, capture and treat all water on site, and are made
using healthy materials.
o Neighborhood serving uses:
■ Allocation of space for noncommercial neighborhood serving uses that bolster
livability for residents. Eligible neighborhood serving uses include childcare,
community meeting rooms, or nonprofit space.
The baseline height limits proposed would allow the development of 6-8 story buildings in the
Regional Commercial zone and 4-6 story buildings in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. A
project participating in the proposed Development Incentive Program would be eligible to achieve
6-8 stories within the NCC and the furthest north portions of the RC, and 8 stories within the central
RC area. Building height would not be restricted by the zoning code for buildings participating in the
incentive program south of S 148th Street.
Residential Tenant Displacement Program
The TIB neighborhood is home to many of Tukwila's existing apartment buildings. Many of the
buildings located within the area are older, and may not feature up-to-date amenities, features, or
appliances. These homes provide valuable housing at rents affordable to those on lower incomes;
however, some may provide subpar living conditions. If a building's condition means that asking
rents are much lower than market -rate rents, the building's owner can sometimes fail to perform
needed maintenance and improvements, causing a slow deterioration in housing quality.
These naturally occurring affordable homes (NOAH) face development pressures as the region's
housing market continues to tighten. As market rate rents increase, the difference between what a
building owner is capable of charging for the existing home and what they could potentially charge
for a new one continues to widen. Additionally, a new 2025 state law limits a landlord's ability to
increase rents for existing units; a landlord is prohibited from raising rents higher than 7% +
inflation, or 10%, whichever is lower, each year. This cap on rent increases may provide relief for
tenants from high annual increases, but it also may incentivize owners of NOAH properties to
pursue redevelopment. Even without the increase in development capacity that this code update
would provide, over time, naturally occurring affordable homes face unavoidable threats.
The City is limited in its ability to preserve these homes — doing so would require large-scale
funding. Additionally, many of these buildings do not necessarily help achieve the goals and visions
of the Comprehensive Plan; they may have auto -oriented designs, with large surface parking areas
on their street frontages, or they may achieve a much lower density than envisioned.
This proposal aims to assist tenants by establishing a tenant displacement program. Any project
that will require a tenant to vacate a dwelling due to demolition, rehabilitation, change of use, or
removal of rent or income restrictions, would be subject to the program. Below are the proposed
requirements:
o The developer would be required to provide all tenants, at a minimum, a ninety -day
notice of the requirement to vacate. This would allow all tenants regardless of income
three months to find a new rental unit.
o Tenants who can verify that their household income is 50% or less of the area median
income would be eligible for relocation assistance.
■ Relocation assistance would be paid by the developer or property owner. 23
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 16
■ The amount of relocation assistance would be equal to or exceed 2 months'
rent costs or $4000 (in 2025 dollars), whichever is greater.
This program aims to provide tenants with more information earlier in the process and provide
lower -income tenants with the resources needed to help with their moving costs.
Multifamily Design Standards
Currently, projects within the TIB neighborhood and subject to design review are required to use
the TIB Design Manual. This document was adopted in 1999, and the guidelines it contains are no
longer compliant with statewide requirements that all design standards be "clear and objective".
For example, the document requires projects to "Provide for visual and functional continuity
between the proposed development and adjacent and neighboring structures when these
structures demonstrate an appropriate level of architectural quality." This standard is unclear and
not objective; what appears to be visually and functionally continuous to one beholder may appear
incongruent to another, and "architectural quality" is a purely subjective statement.
The TIB Design Manual is not alone; many of the City's design standards do not meet the "clear and
objective" requirement. City Staff proposes to adapt the requirements of the City's existing design
review standards, including those located in TMC 18.60, Design Review, those located within the
Tukwila Urban Center Design Manual, and the TIB Design Manual, into new multifamily design
standards that comply with State law. The new design review standards would include
requirements around the following design features:
• Minimum percentages for ground floor transparency for commercial and residential spaces
• Prohibitions on blank walls
• Locations of public entrances
• Weather protection
• Vehicular Areas
o Above -ground structured parking screening
o Sidewalk and walkway features
o Locations of vehicular access points
• Ground floor residential stoops or porches
• Building modulation
• Building corner features, such as corner towers or projecting or recessed entrances
• Standards for the design of waste disposal areas, loading docks, and utility apparatus
• Exterior lighting requirements
To allow for design creativity, the standards would allow an applicant to request design departures
from the standards. Departures would only be permitted if the project meets certain criteria,
including that allowing the departure would accomplish the Comprehensive Plan goals to a similar
or greater extent than compliance would, and that the project is participating in the Development
Incentive Program.
Tukwila's Neighbors
How would these standards compare to our peer cities and the region as a whole? Many of
Tukwila's surrounding jurisdictions have development allowances near major transit stops, such
as light rail stations or King County Metro Rapid Ride stops, which far exceed the current
allowances near the TIB Station.
24
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 17
The table below represents the predominant standards found around the identified subareas. Many
of the standards, especially height and density, illustrate how current standards found within the
Regional Commercial (RC) and Neighborhood Commercial Center (NCC) zones in Tukwila make
development far less feasible than in other jurisdictions within the area.
Jurisdiction (subarea)
Max Height
Max Density
Parking Requirements
SeaTac (Angle Lake)
No Maximum (FAA
Limited)
Unlimited
Parking study required
SeaTac (TIB Station)
No Maximum (FAA
Limited)
Unlimited
1 per studio, 1.5 per 1 bd, 2 per 2-3
bd (Reductions available)
SeaTac (Airport Station)
No Maximum (FAA
Limited)
Unlimited
Maximum 1 space per bedroom or 2
spaces per unit (Reductions
available)
Burien (Downtown)
85 feet - 95 feet
Unlimited
1 per unit (Reductions available
through parking study or fee -in -lieu)
Des Moines (SR 99
Neighborhood)
Minimum: 55 feet
Maximum: 200 feet
Unlimited
- Two parking spaces per dwelling.
- One guest parking space shall be
provided per each 10 dwellings.
- For one -bedroom dwellings within
the PR Zone: one and one-half
parking spaces per dwelling.
The basic development standards proposed for the TIB neighborhood would be broadly similar to
the standards that exist in neighboring jurisdictions. While Tukwila's peers currently have variable
parking requirements, their standards are soon to change under the requirements of State law.
Case Studies
See Attachment 1 for an examination of case studies.
Next Steps
The intended outcome of this meeting is for City Staff to receive direction from the Commission
regarding the proposed code updates. Using that direction, City Staff will draft the amendments
and present draft proposed text of the TMC to the Commission at the July meeting.
The tentative meeting schedule for this project is below:
• June 26' Planning Commission Meeting:
o Regulation proposal workshop
• July 24' Planning Commission Meeting:
o Review of TMC text amendments
• August 28' Planning Commission Meeting:
o TIB project public hearing
25
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 18
■ September 25' Planning Commission Meeting:
o Review of final code proposal, if necessary
■ October and November:
o City Council work session and final decision
Attachments:
1. Costs and Case Studies
26
City of Tukwila
Thomas McLeod, Mayor
Department of Community Development - Nora Gierioff, AlCP, Director
TO: Tukwila Planning Commission
FROM: Nora Gierloff, AICP, Community Development Director
BY: Neil Tabor, AICP, Senior Planner, DCD
DATE: June 26, 2025
SUBJECT: Attachment 1— Costs and Case Studies
Multifamily Construction Costs
Cost of construction can vary greatly as the height of structures change. Additional height of structures
may require or lead to greater financial viability of one construction type, or combination of construction
types used, i.e., wood frame, podium (combining a type V wood frame above a type I concrete podium)
or steel frame construction. Transitioning from less intensive construction types to more intensive
construction types, or combination of types, will generally increase construction cost per square foot.
However, increasing the number of stories within the same construction type may reduce the cost per
square foot of construction. A generalized example, displaying the average cost of construction by
building stories (both least and most expensive projects) can be seen in graphic that follows.
Within the context of amending regulations on height, although incentivizing one additional story of
height from seven to eight may seem like a generous concession, and limiting a structure to six stories
instead of seven may seem like a minor restriction, these thresholds can be far more impactful for
overall project cost and viability than a single -story modification would suggest. Pairing development
regulations with both community good and market realities is key for creating positive housing
production outcomes.
Turk wila City Hall • 6200SauthcenterBoulovord • Tukwila, WA 981.8E 206-4.3-/800 . Website_ Tukw iloW'VA.gau
27
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 2
Panel A. Flange in Average Costs per Square Foot. by Building Story
4 6 8 10 12
Number al Building Stones
Moil ExperY1.ve Lead ExpensA+e
Figure 1. Cost per Square Foot by Building Stories, A. Orlando
The amount of parking and type of parking (structured or surface) required can also have profound
impacts on the financial viability of a project. As the graphic below illustrates, additional parking
requires either use of an additional portion of a site for surface parking, or construction of structured
parking at a significant cost premium. This concept can, of course, be applied to other requirements such
as recreation space vs. reductions or in -lieu fees for recreation space.
79'
I L pamiry
Rllllll
45DOI
1 Story Building: Parking 3 Story Building: Parking
occupies 37,5% -of the lot evoupies 62.5% of the lot
Figure 2. Parking allocation example
28
Phone:206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor fiukwilaWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINALgov
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 3
Case Studies
While there is never an exact comparable location in evaluating the market or redevelopment potential
of an area, staff feel these two examples represent subareas within relative proximity to TIB that have
amended development standards to leverage nearby transit investments into transit oriented development
(TOD), expanding residential options, economic growth and overall offerings for the community. It is
important to note that these are living case studies at different phases of overall redevelopment and
starting points.
Basic data points are provided with each development for general context.
Angle Lake (SeaTac)
The Angle Lake station area, depicted within the blue polygon in the image below to the right was
designated with the Angle Lake District Station Area plan adopted shortly before the opening of the
Angle Lake Light Rail station, sets the subarea focus for future TOD near the station. The plan intends
to maximize the economic benefit to the community with the station's opening, and align with
community goals expressed through the comprehensive plan. With the adoption of this plan and
opening of the station area, development standards were modified to better support the TOD desired
within the subarea.
The subarea, unincorporated until the City of SeaTac's incorporation in 1990, has historically been
characterized by lower density residential development and auto -oriented commercial development,
including gas stations, vehicle rental, airport parking, hotels and other airport related businesses. As
depicted in the examples of residential and mixed -use developments under construction, these projects
exist within a transitioning environment, which currently limited commercial offerings catered to
pedestrians, whereas three of four corners of the intersection of International Boulevard and S 200tn
Street are occupied by gas stations and associated convenience stores, while the other is vacant. Over
time, increased density of residents, improvements of the streetscape, as well as ground floor
commercial spaces will support increased walkable commercial development in this area. When
compared to the TIB corridor, it could be argued that TIB has many advantages in transitioning to an
area of more TOD, with more existing core commercial offerings, control over their section of TIB,
better overall connectivity and a closer proximity to Seattle.
Phorke:206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor TukwilaWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINA.gery
29
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 4
Figure 3. Angle Lake Station Area Map
Figure 4. Projects around Angle Lake Station Area
30
Phone:206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor fiukwi(aWA,gov • W bSite: TukwilaINA.gery
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 5
Rainier Lofts Phase I & II
Figure 5. Phase I construction looking SE, June 2025
Figure 6. Phase I & II Rendering looking NW
• Site: 6.2 acres at 20220 International Blvd
• Former Use: Kenworth Trucking Site
• Units: 770 (Phase I 355 units)
• Density: 125 units/acre
• AMI: Market Rate
• Parking: 732 spaces (342 phase I, some allotment for commercial in phase II)
• Status: Phase I under construction, anticipated opening early 2027
Phone:206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor fiukwilaWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINA.gery
31
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 6
Amelia Apartments
Figure 7. Amelia Apartments looking SW, June 2025
• Site: 0.5 acres at 2929 S 200th St
• Former Use: Fire Station
• Units: 108, mix of studio, one and two bed units
• Density: 200 units/acre
• AMI: 20% of units reserved for no greater than 115% AMI households
• Parking: 78 spaces
• Status: Opened in 2023
32
Phone:206-433-18W0 • Email: Mayor TukwilaWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINA.gery
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 7
Connection at Angle Lake
Figure 8. Connection at Angle Lake looking NE, June 2025
• Site: 0.8 acres at 2650 S 200th St
• Former Use: Surplus parcel from Angle Lake parking garage redevelopment
• Units: 130, mix of studio, one and two bed units
• Density: 168 units/acre
• AMI: 60% AMI households and lower
• Parking: None
• Status: Under construction, anticipated opening Summer 2025
Phone:206-433-18W0 • Email: Mayor fiukwi(aWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINA.gery
33
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 8
Birchway
Figure 9. Birchway under construction looking NE, June 2025
Figure 10. Birchway Rendering looking NW
• Site: 2.1 acres at 19831 International Blvd
• Former Use: Self storage site
• Units: 289
• Density: 136.1 units/acre
• AML• Market rate
• Parking: 238
• Status: Under construction, anticipated opening mid-2026
34
Phone:206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor fiukwi(aWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINA.gery
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 9
Hilltop (Tacoma)
The Hilltop neighborhood of Tacoma, is generally comprised of the area west of downtown Tacoma,
bordered by Sprague Ave to the West, and Division St and S 27th St to the North and South respectively.
The subarea of focus is a much smaller portion of the Hilltop neighborhood along MLK Way from
roughly S 9th St to S 13th St. With the expansion of the Tacoma T-Line light rail completed in 2023,
streetcar lines now run along MLK Way, with stop at S 3rd St, S 6th Ave, S 11th St and S 18th St along
MLK Jr Way. Zoning changes in anticipation of this expansion permitted more dense housing
development with far lower parking requirements.
The Hilltop neighborhood has historically been the center of the African American community in
Tacoma, with a rich history in churches and other cultural centers still existing today. The neighborhood
has also been subject to historic disinvestment through restrictions in lending practices and other racially
restrictive practices in housing, ownership and investment. The area is characterized by a mix of single-
family, middle housing, and small to medium apartments, with denser housing generally clustered along
major arterials such as MLK Jr Way and S Yakima. The area also contains several health clinics and
hospitals, a grocery store, schools, and commercial buildings largely clustered off of MLK Jr Way.
While many auto -centric businesses still exist, significant investment has been made in improving
pedestrian and cycling facilities within the area. Similar to TIB, this area also has a higher risk of
displacement based on factors such as lower ownership rates, educational attainment, household income
vs. city or area median, and rapidly increasing rents and land values. Beyond affordability levels
provided with 12-year multifamily tax exemptions (MFTE) offered to qualifying new market rate
multifamily development, specific focus on creating new income -restricted housing at deeper levels of
affordability.
Phorke:206-433-18W0 • Email: Mayor fiukwilaWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINA.gery
35
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 10
Figure 11. Subarea context map
Figure 12. Recent development in Hilltop
36
Prone; 206-433-1200 • Email: M yor ]TukwllaWA,gov + Website: TukwiialNA_gov
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 11
Koz on MLK
i
•1 L '• k
11 I
4. ..f�llft�,r��E_ ML I
w ;
Figure 13. Koz on MLK looking NW, June 2025
• Site: 0.7 acres at 824 MLK Jr Way
• Former Use: Single -story offices/church
• Units: 161 studio through 3-bedroom units
• Density: 237 units/acre
• AMI: Market rate
• Parking: 30 spaces
• Status: Opened in 2022
Phone:206-433-18W0 • Email: Mayor fiukwi(aWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINA.gery
37
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 12
Mercy Rosa Franklin Place
Figure 14. Rosa Franklin Place looking SW, June 2025
• Site: 0.22 acres at 802-804 MLK Jr Way
• Former Use: Single -story offices/church
• Units: 60 one -bedroom units
• Density: 268 units/acre
• AMI: 30% household AMI and below (Senior)
• Parking: None
• Status: Opened in 2021
38
Phone:206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor fiukwilaWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINA.gery
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 13
Aspire 11
Figure 15. Aspire 11 looking NW, June 2025
Figure 16. Aspire 11 looking East, June 2025
• Site: 1.2 acres at 1011 S l lth St
• Former Use: Some small retail, largely vacant in recent decades
• Units: 289 studio through three -bedroom units
• Density: 238 units/acre
• AMI: Market rate
• Parking: 228 spaces
• Status: Opened in 2025
Phone:206-433-18W0 • Email: Mayor TukwilaWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINA.gery
39
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 14
Hilltop Housing North & South
Figure 18. Hilltop Housing North looking SE, June 2025
Figure 19. Hilltop Housing South looking SE, June 2025
• Site: 1.47 acres (combined) at 1011 & 1111 S L St
• Former Use: Largely parking lots, limited office/retail
• Units: 231 one to three -bedroom units
• Density: 157 units/acre
• AMI: Households at 50-60% AMI and less
• Parking: 103 stalls
• Status: Opened 2024-2025
�wrrrn a -
4 idnItn rfrpl ii1111.1p
Figure 17. Hilltop Housing Site Plan,
North up
40
Phone:206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor fiukwi(aWA,gov • Website: TukwilaINA.gery
PC Packet Attachment 1 — Costs and Case Studies
June 26, 2025
Page 15
Shiloh New Life Apartments
Figure 20. Shiloh New Life Apartments looking SW, June 2025
• Site: 0.22 acre site at 1206 S I St
• Former Use: Three small lot single-family homes
• Units: 60 one and two -bedroom units (across two phases)
• Density: 267 units/acre
• AMI: 30-50% Household AMI or lower
• Parking: None
• Status: Phase I completed in 2025
Phone:206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor Tukwi(aWA,gov • W bsite: TukwilaINA.gery
41