HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAP 2008-12-08 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET Je w City of Tukwila Distribution:
J. Duffle G. Labanara
frr Sy J. Hernandez K. Matej
4 V. Griffin M. Miotke
a. s:� CommunityAffairs an
D. Quinn C. O'Flaherty
Parks Committee
i P. Linder N. Olivas
D. Robertson J. Pace
Joan Hernandez, Chair Mayor Haggerton D. Speck
1905 R. Berry R. Still
Verna Griffin E. Boykan B. Arthur
De' Sean Quinn B. Fletcher C. Parrish
M. Hart K. Narog(cover)
S. Hunstock S. Kirby(emaii)
V. Jessop S. Norris(email)
S. Kerslake L. Verner
AGENDA
MONDAY, December 8, 2008, 5:00 PM
Conference Room #3
ITEM I RECOMMENDED ACTION Page
1. PRESENTATIONS)
2. BUSINESS AGENDA
a. Cascade Land Conservancy Membership; a. Forward to 1/5 Regular Pg.1
Jack Pace, Director of Community Development, Meeting.
b. Contract Extension for Commercial Development b. Forward to 12/8 C.O.W. P9.9
Solutions, Rhonda Berry, City Administrator, and 12/15 Regular.
c. Impact Fee Ordinances for Fire and Parks; c. Information only. Pg.11
Lisa Verner, Project Manager.
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS
4. MISCELLANEOUS
Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, December 22, 2008
The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate those with disabilities.
Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 206 433 -1800 for assistance.
City of Tukwiia
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Department of Community Development
jack Pace, Director
TO:
Mayor
Community Affairs and Parks
~~
Jack Pace, Director of DC r
Bruce Fletcher, Director 0 lcs and Recreation
FROM:
RE:
Cascade Land Conservancy
Cascade Agenda Membership
DATE:
December 2, 2008
Issue
Should the City participate in the Cascade Land Conservancy's "Cascade Agenda" as a
member city?
Background
On October 27,2008, Jeff Aleen with Cascade Land Conservancy briefed Community
Affairs and Parks (CAP) about the possibility of the City participating in the Cascade
Agenda. CAP asked staff to see what role the Conservancy could play with regards to
on-going and future planning activities in order to see if membership would be beneficial
to the City. DCD and the Parks Department met with Cascade Land Conservancy to
discuss possible projects where the City could use the assistance of the Cascade Land
Conservancy. As the City Council may be aware, the Parks Department has had an
ongoing relationship with Cascade Land Conservancy for several years.
The City has committed itself to reducing greenhouse emissions within the City by 20
percent by 2020. Membership in the Cascade Agenda as a "Leadership City" would be
beneficial to the City in achieving its greenhouse gas reduction goals. In 2009, Cascade
Land Conservancy could assist the City in public outreach associated with the City's
greenhouse emission reduction efforts and in the early update process of the
Comprehensive Plan which will include new sections devoted to climate change and
sustainability. The climate change and sustainability goals will most likely include
efforts to add additional open space and nature areas within the City in order to increase
livability.
Joining at the "Leadership City" level has an annual membership fee of$5,000.
B. Miles Page 1 12/04/2008
H:\Global Warminll\CAP. 2008.12.05.doc
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 .. Tukwila, Washington 98188 · Phone: 206-431-3670 e Fax: 206-431-3665
Discussion
Tukwila would be the first city in south King County to become a member of the Cascade
Agenda. Membership will assist staff in our ongoing effort to create a more sustainable
City.
DCD and Parks will be split the annual membership dues of $5,000
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City join at the "Leadership level". Given Council time
constraints in December and January, staff would request to take this to the January 5,
2009 Regular Council meeting. At that time Jeff Aken will provide the same briefing
that was previously provided to CAP. Additionally, planning staff will provide an update
on the City's 2008 green initiatives and what staff has planned for 2009.
Attachment( s):
Draft Resolution
Brochure from Cascade Land Conservancy
Minutes from 10/27/08 CAP Meeting
B. Miles Page 2
H:\Global Warming\CAP, 2008.l2.05.doc
12/04/2008
DRAFT
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUK\VILA,
WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE "CASCADE
AGENDA" CITY PROGRAM.
WHEREAS, the population in the Puget Sound region is expected to double in the next
100 years, in addition to the already dramatic growth recently experienced, thereby
significantly impacting the growth of cities and towns; and
WHEREAS, long-term ecosystem health, economic vitality and quality of life are of
critical importance to the citizens of the City; and
WHEREAS, in the face of such growth, the City can maintain and enhance the quality
of life by guiding how and where this growth will occur; and
WHEREAS, The Cascade Agenda is a 100-year collective vision for the Central Puget
Sound region Vvit.'1 the goals of conserv'J..l'1g 1.3 million acres of working farms, forests cu,d
natural areas, and creating vibrant and livable communities, while sustaining a strong
regional economy; and
WHEREAS, The Cascade Land ConservanClJ, recogrnzmg the relationship between
making our communities spectacular enough to attract growth and the conservation of this
region's ecosystems and working lands, has launched the "Cascade Agenda Cities Program"
to help local jurisdictions create complete, compact and connected communities;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKvVILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City endorses the vision articulated in The Cascade Agenda as beneficial
to the City and the region as a whole.
Section 2. The City shall pursue a partnership with the Cascade Land ConservanClJ as a
member of the Cascade Agenda Cities Program to advance this vision within the community.
Section 3. The City will seek to align policies and programs on community
development, housing, transportation, parks, open space, and sustainability with the
objectives of The Cascade Agenda Cities Program, striving to make the City more complete,
compact and connected.
Section 4. The City shall appoint a staff person to act as the City's primary link with
respect to Cascade Agenda Cities related activities.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2008.
ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED:
Joe Duffie, Council President
Christy O'Flaherty, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Filed v.rith the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Resolution Number:
Office of the City Attorney
C:\Do--urnenls and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Resolutions\Cascade Oties Agenda Program.doc
SG:ksn 12/4/2008 Page 1 of 1
CASC:ApEAGENDA CITIES are Complete, Compact. and Connected,
•■,"i.
The Cascade Agenda cities Program l accbrnOisheilthby:
Educating partner.clties It takes to become a truly livable city
17ielping these cltiett.,..anO their residerts.-...make smart choices abOut'futere growtI'l,.. I
aframeWcirk'fOr, coatimidus Improvement and sharing bes
that enablecities to make theMneighbothOods even baiter
II
CAREFUL PLANNING OF Ti4E. REGION'S CITIES WILL PROVIDE MORE CHOICES FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS.
COMPLETE
Urban neighborhoods have a vibrant mle of people,
public gathering spaces. civic and cultural anchors,
and retail establishments.
COMPACT
NOW development is designed to mains
neighborhoods efficient, walkable and affordable.
CONNECTED
Residents can use transit. walk and bike safely to
daily clenirlilti011S. Communities have links between
natural arid urban areas, allowing residents access to
waterfronts, parks and trails.
GENDA:Cl..
BENEFITS
By becoming a member of the Cascade Agenda Cities Program. you are demonstrating initiative, taking action
and gaining access to the following services
Recognition as a regional leader in creating smart communities
Technical assistance on growth options
Access to best practices through a region-wide learning network of peers
Workshops with other innovative cities and regional experts
Community outreach on how to create a better future for the region
Membership In the Cascade Agenda Coalition—directed at Influencing State level policy
CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
To facilitate a productive partnership the Cascade Agenda Cities program requests the following of participating cities:
I. Member Cities
Pass a resolution aligning city policies with the principles of the Cascade Agenda Odes program
Designate a primary staff contact
II. Leadership Cities
Apply to the Cascade Agenda Cities Leadership Program
Pass a resolution aligning city policies with the principles of the Cascade Agenda Cities program
Designate a staff contact and create an interdepartmental team
Assist in an evaluation of city policies to advance compact growth
Use policy review to identify opportunities and develop strategies for improvement
Implement improvement strategies
Participate In a learning network with cities across the region
Agree to an annual membership fee
CASCADE AGENDA CITIES PROGRAM
)7 cc ha■eii/oVi• I
crty•ckin
dnClcor)rioctedpl orulyr4' 1'
1
Please e.)1.1taCt affF■Itan ;it leffag
sir 20690p,69II iO
CASCADE LAND CONSERVANCY
61S 2nd Avanun, &AM 600
Seattln,WA 98504
The Puget Sound region has a spectacular
natural environment with mountains,
forests, streams and a strong legacy
of working lands. It is a striking place
to live with a strong lob market, great
neighborhoods and community assets,
remarkable parks. libraries and museums.
The region Is at a critical moment In Its
history. Population Is expected to double
in the next 100 years, adding enough
peoplu so populate six cities the size of
Seattle. Globally, climate change threatens
the natural environment, economy and
standard of living. In response to these
mounting pressures. Puget Schind residents
must work together to protect their quality
of life now arid crease a better future for
those who come after them.
rill-, THE CASCADE
AGENDA
Careful planning of the region's a ties will
provide more choices for future generations.
By building most new hornes in walkable
neighborhoods near transit, this new growth
will not compromise natural areas, working
farms and forests that make this region
special. Locating homes near transportation,
jobs )1i1c1 shopping will also make it easier to
get around, helping to make the cities more
affordable, attractive and safer places to live,
work and raise families.
Ti)e C0Scoclo Agenda Is 0 collective 10C4ue0r vision conservir)9
Wssshinglorths rernaricakilo'InneisCopi2s in tho face aria growhio
pulatpn end., cl,t0t)ging,oconoirrib:160,
City of Tuhwila
Community Affairs and Parks Committee
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PARKS COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes
October 27,2008, - 5:00 p.m.; Conference Room #3
PRESENT
Councilmembers: Joan Hernandez, Chair; Vema Griffin and De'Sean Quinn
Staff: Bruec Fletcher, Lisa Verner, Jack Pace, Brandon Miles, Rhonda Berry and Kimberly Matej
Guests: Brooke Alford (parks Commissioner), Jeff Aken (Cascade Land Conservancy), Chuck Parrish
(resident) and Mark Hancock (Segale Properties)
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Hernandez called the meeting to order at 5:04 p.m.
I. PRESENTATIONS
No presentations.
n. BUSINESS AGENDA
A. Cascade Agenda Cities Program .
Staff is seeking full Council approval of a resolution which establishes the City as a member of the
. Cascade Agenda Cities Program.
"-.V Brooke Alford, Parks Commissioner, introduced Jeff Aken from Cascade Land Conservancy (CLC) and
./} briefed the Committee on The Cascade Agenda. Jeff spoke further to the Agenda and how it reaches out
to communities within the region as well as to different stakeholders. The Cascade Agenda Cities
Program began last year and is an extension of the Agenda. It acknowledges that we are all planning
under the Growth Management Act and also incorporates the greater Agenda vision which looks out over
100 years. The Cities Program encourages partnering with cities to talk about creating livable cities
through smart choices about future growth. Additionally, the Program assists cities in connecting
planning policies to things the community cares about (traffic, housing, walk-ability, etc.). The Program
focuses on working towards creating communities that are: complete, compact and connected.
Jeff described the two types of levels in the Cities Program: the Membership level and the Leadership
level. The Membership level results in no cost to the city and requires a council resolution supporting
membership. The Leadership Cities requires a council resolution, costs $5,000 annually and Cascade
Land Conservancy establishes a closer partnership with the member city on a policy level often resulting
in specific planning objectives between CLC and the city.
Committee members were interested in the Program and have requested staff return to Committee at a
later date with a draft resolution and recommendation regarding which level the City should pursue.
STAFF WILL RETURN TO COMMITTEE AT A LATER DATE WITH A
RECOMMENDATION AND RESOLUTION.
B. Tukwila Pond Park Development Contract with Robert W. Droll. Landscape Architect
Staff is seeking Council approval of a consultant agreement with Robert W. Droll Landscape Architect in
the amount of $34, 1 00.54 for Tukwila Pond Park Development Design.
The most recent contract with Robert W. Droll expired in August 2008, with a remaining balance on the
agreement. Since the agreement was not extended prior to its expiration, staff must draw up a new
agreement for the unspent/available funds remaining from the original agreement ($34,100.54). The new
agreement will be valid for one year. According to the agreement, Robert W. Droll will continue to serve
as consultant to the City in the capacity of park planner/landscape architect as well as preparation of bid
documents. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 10 COW FOR
DISCUSSION.
City of Tukwiia
6200 Southcenter Boulevard e Tukwila7 Washington 98188
Jim Haggerton7 Mayor
INFO Rl"VIATI ONAL lV1El\10RAl~D Ul\1
TO:
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS Al'H) PARKS COMl\lITTEE
FROM:
Rhonda Berry, City Administrator
DATE:
November 20, 2008
SUBJECT:
Contract Amendment
Commercial Development Solutions (Lisa Verner) <
ISSUE
Professional Services Contract \vith Commercial Development Solutions (CDS) will
expire on December 31, 2008.
BACKGROUND
The City entered into contract with Lisa Vema in 2006 to serve as Project Manager for
the Tukwila South project. Though we now have agreement on "deal points", staff
continues to work on getting a Development Agreement ready to present for Council
approval. Once the Development Agreement is approved, additional help will be needed
to coordinate the mmexation and other tasks related to the project. Additionally, it is
helpful to have one focal person to serve a liaison role with the property owner.
It is anticipated that approval of the Development Agreement and annexation can be
accomplished within the first half of 2009.
DISCUSSION
CDS was hired because there was no staff person available to dedicate solely to the
Tukwila South project. The comprehensive institutional knowledge of all aspects of the
project resides with Lisa Verner. Transferring these responsibilities to someone else at
this point would be extremely unproductive and would probably prolong the amount of
time necessary to accomplish tasks critical to beginning construction ofthe Southcenter
Parkway extension.
RECOl\1MENDATION
Approve the contract amendment and forward it to the December 8 Committee of the
Whole meeting and December 15 Regular Meeting.
\V:MayorsOfticeContraCls:CDScovennemo November 242008
Phone: 206-433-1800 .. City Hall Fax: 206-433-1833 e www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
CITY OF TUKWILA
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES
Amendment to #06-059( a~)
That portion of Contract No. AG06-059(eg) benveen the City of Tubvila and
Commercial Development Solutions is amended as follows:
Under Section 2, Compensation and Method of Payment: Total amount to be paid shall
not exceed $151,000199.000 (an addition of$6'1,00048.000 to the original previous
contract amount of$87,000151.000).
Under Section 4, Duration of Agreement: This Agreement shall be in full force and
effect for a period commencing January 1, ~2009 and ending December 31,
~J une iO, 2009 unless sooner terminated under the provisions hereinafter specified.
All other provisions of the contract shall remain in fi!-ll force and effect.
Dated this
day of
,2008.
CONTRACTOR
CITY OF TUKWILA
Commercial Development Solutions
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
A TTEST/ AUTHENTICATED
APPROVED AS TO FORi\1
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
City Attorney
Date Approved by City Council
INFORMATION l\1EMORAl\TJ)Ul\1
To:
Community Affairs and Parks (information)
CC:
Mayor Haggerton
Rhonda BelTY
FROM:
Lisa Verner, Mayor's Office
Nick Olivas, Fire Chief
Rick Still, Deputy Parks Director
DATE:
December 3,2008 (REVISED)
RE:
FIRE AJ\TD PARKS IMP ACT FEES
This information memorandum has been revised twice to address new information. One update
is as of December 3 and one is as of December 2. The original document begins on page 5.
2ND REVISION
l\TEW INFORMATION (as of December 3,2008)
The Finance & Safety Committee reviewed impact fees for both fire and parks services at it's
meeting on December 2, 2008. The Committee discussed a spreadsheet on impact fee payment
examples (Attachment A), a memo from Derek Speck to Lisa Verner (Attachment B), and the
Mayor's recommendations on impact fee (Attachment C). The Committee also addressed the
following questions:
1. Do you want to adopt impact fees?
2. If yes, which projects do you want to include? What is the total cost?
3. Of the total cost, how much do you want to fund through impact fees and how
much do you want the city to contribute?
4. For Parks, what is the split between residential and commercial land uses?
The Finance & Safety Committee unanimously recommended the following:
CAP Infonnation Memorandum
December 3,2008
Page 2 of7
FIRE
PARKS
Capital Facilities List:
Split:
$6,479,500
90% - 10%
Capital Facilities List:
Split:
$8,000,000
80% - 20%
Fees
Fees:
SF
MF
Office
Retail
Industrial
$ 922
$1,200
$1,624
$ 580
$ 127
SF
MF
Office
Retail
Industrial
$1,426
$1,398
$ 837
$ 419
$ 262
The Committee reviewed the use ratio between residents and employees of 2.44-to-1 (as part of
the park impact fee calculation) and forwarded it to COVI for discussion without making a
recommendation.
lVlavor's Recommendations
The Mayor's recommendations on impact fees (Attachment B) were presented to the Finance &
Safety Committee on December 2, 2008 and are as follows:
FIRE
PARKS
Capital Facilities List:
Split:
$6,479,500
90% - 10%
Capital Facilities List:
Split:
$8,000,000
80% - 20%
Fees Fees:
SF $ 922 SF $1,426
MF $1,200 MF $1,398
Office $1,624 Office $ 837
Retail $ 580 Retail $ 419
Industrial $ 127 Industrial $ 262
The revised list of Parks capital facilities projects and costs (which now total $8,000,000) is
shown on the third page of Attachment B .
CAP Information Memorandum
December 3,2008
Page 3 of7
1 st REVISION - INCLUDED IN FINANCE & SAFETY PACKET FOR DECEMBER 2
INFORMATION AND COUNCIL QUESTIONS (as of December 2,2008)
1. Problem Statement
The City of Tukwila expe,cts both commercial and residential growth through 2020. It has
adopted a Parks level of service and will adopt a Fire level of service. In order to maintain the
existing levels of service for growth and new development, the City must provide new park
capital facilities and new fire capital facilities. The City's financial resources are not sufficient
to fund the fire and parks capital f<:tcilities necessitated by ne\v growth. It needs to find
additional revenue sources to help pay for these capital facilities over the next 12 years.
2. Redevelopment
The ordinances are drafted to say that any new, additional square footage for which a building
permit is issued will be assessed a fire and a parks impact fee. A change of use does not trigger
the application of impact fees. So, if a warehouse adds a second floor and turns into an office
building, the applicant pays impact fees based on the second floor square footage (new addition)
but not on the original square footage. This holds even ifthere are more people on the first floor
under the office use. HOV'lever, if the warehouse turns into an office use but does not add any
more square footage, the applicant does not pay any fire or parks impact fees.
Vlith respect to the City's existing traffic impact fees, the applicant is charged a traffic impact
fee when the use changes, in addition to when new square footage is added. In the example
above, the applicant would pay a traffic in1pact fee in both cases (with and without a new second
floor, when the use changes).
3. Payment Examples
Below are examples of fire and parks impact fee assessments for several development projects in
Tukwila. The table shows what \vould have been paid at the time a building permit was issued if
the City had adopted fire and parks impact fees. The calculations are based on total capital
projects costs of$6,479,500 for Fire with a 90%-10% split and $8,000,000 for Parks with a 80%-
20% split between fees and city contributions.
FIRE - $6,479,500 in capital projects (90%-10% split)
Project Land Use Square Impact Fee per Impact Fee
Category Footage/D\velling 1,000 gsf or per Assessment
Units Dwelling Unit
\Vig development! Retail 230,444 $580 $133,658
Southcenter Square
Parkway Place Office I 66,000 $1,624 $107,184
16400 Southcenter Pkwy
New Bank of America Office 7,451 $1,624 $12,100
building (at mall)
CAP Infonnation Memorandum
December 3, 2008
Page 4 of7
Tukwila Village Multi - 144 $1,200 $172,800
family
Retail 52,000 $580 $30,160
Office 2,000 $1,624 $3,248
PARKS $11 250 000 .
't I
. t (900;; 100;; lit)
- , , III capl a proJec s 0- o SpJ
Project Land Use Square Impact Fee per Impact Fee
Category Footage/Dwelling 1,000 gsf or per Assessment
Units Dwelling Unit
Wig development! Retail 230,444 $662 $152,554
Southcenter Square
Parkway Place Office 66,000 $1,325 $87,450
16400 Southcenter Pkwy
New Bank of America Office 7,451 $1,325 $9,873
building (at mall)
I Tukwila Village Multi - 144 $2,211 $318,384
family
Retail 52,000 $662 $34,424
Office 12,000 $1,325 $2,650
4. Parks Capital Facilities List (Southgate Park)
As a result of Council discussion at COvV on November 24, staff has taken Southgate Park off
the list of Parks Capital Facilities to be funded by impact fees. This brings the total cost of the
remaining projects to $11,250,000. A 90%-10% split means the impact fees fund $10,125,000
and the City must fund $1,125,000 from the General Fund. An 80%-20% split means the impact
fees fund $9,000,000 and the City must fund $2,250,000 from the General Fund.
5. Parks Use Ratios
The Use Ratio used in the Impact Fees formula was derived from an analysis of the pass holder's
use for the past year. Every time a person uses their pass to use the Tuk\vila Community Center
the computer collects that information. We were able to determine from this sampling that a
resident uses their facility pass 2.44 times more than a business pass holder. Therefore, we are
equating using a 1 :2.44 ratio in allocating impact fees. We \vill attempt to collect data in more
areas of the Parks & Recreation Department Services for a larger sampling in the future.
The City of Tukwila is unique with having 70% or more of its users of the Golf Course,
Community Center and Pool being nomesidents. Our current and past residents have paid for the
established or current Level-of-Service in the City. It makes sense that future residential and
commercial growth pay for future needed Park, Recreation and. Open Space facilities to maintain
this quality of life in the City of Tukwila. The City needs to have another funding mechanism for
parks other than the General Fund or we will not be able to maintain our current level of service.
CAP Information Memorandum
December 3, 2008
Page 5 of7
PREVIOUS INFORMATION (November 18,2008)
ISSUE
Adopt an ordinance for Fire impact fees and an ordinance for Parks impact fees, both for
funding of capital facilities needed by Fire services and Parks services due to anticipated new
grmvth and development.
BACKGROUND
The Admin istration is evaluating new sources of revenue for the City. One such source is
"impact fees" through which new development helps to pay for capital facilities necessitated due
to the new growth: Mayor Haggerton 's goal is to analyze options and to adopt impact fees by
the end of 2008.
The Growth A1anagement Act allows impact fees for parks services and for fire services, in
addition to the traffic impact fees the City has already enacted. In order to consider and adopt
impact fees, the City needs to have adopted a Fire Master Plan and identified a level of service
goalforfire services. The 2008 Fire jI.1aster Plan, the Mayor's recommendations on
implementation, and the Level of Service for the Fire Department are scheduled for adoption by
Council on December 1, 2008.
The City also needs to have an adopted Parks master plan and identified level of service. The
Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan was adopted in June, 2008. The Parks Level of Service
is scheLluled for adoption by the Council on November 17, 2008.
Additionally, RCW 82.02.050 (4) says, in part:
Impact fees rnay be collected and spent only for the public facilities defined in
RCW 82.02.090 which are addressed by a capital facilities element of a
comprehensive land use plan adopted pursuant to the provisions of RCW
36.70A.070...
An ordinance to amend the Capital Facilities Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan is
before the CO W on November 10 for public hearing and discussion. It is scheduled for adoption
on December 1. Among other things, the amendment will incOlporate by reference the 2008 Fire
jI.1aster Plan and the 2008 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, as amended. The Parks LOS
ordinance includes list of Parks capital projects (some of which will be paid for through impact
fees) amends the Parks Plan and is scheduled for discussion at the November 10 COWandfor
adoption on November 17. The Fire Master Plan, which includes Fire capital projects (some of
which will be paid for through impact fees) is scheduled for adoption on December 1. Then the
City will be consistent with RCW 82.02.050 (4).
CAP Infoilllation Memorandum
December 3,2008
Page 6 of7
A public hearing on impact fees is advertised for November 24, 2008.
DISCUSSION
The State Legislature authorized impact fees when it adopted the Growth Management Act in
1990 as one mechanism to help communities address growth. According to RCW 82.02.050 (1),
it is the intent of the State Legislature:
(a) To ensure that adequate facilities are available to serve new growth and
development;
(b) To promote orderly growth and development by establishing standards by
fA/hich counties, cities, and towns rnay require, by ordinance, that new growth
and development pay a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities
needed to serve new growth and development; and
(c) To ensure that impact fees are imposed through established procedures and
criteria so that specific developments do not pay arbitrmy fees or duplicative
fees for the same impact.
Impact fees can be assessed for traffic, parks, fire and schools. The City already assesses a
traffic impact fee. The Mayor is asking the Council to consider assessing a parks impact fee and
a.fire impact fee. NOlie of the school districts which serve Tuhvila have asked the City to collect
a school impact fee on their behalf.
Impact fees are used to provide funds for capital projects or capital facilities which are needed
because of new growth. They are used to fund projects which maintain the same level of service
for new growth as is provided for existing.development. They may not be used for projects which
are needed due to current deficiencies in public facilities serving existing development.
In essence, impact fees are a mechanism for "growth to pay for growth. "
For consideration are two ordinances, onefor impactfeesforfire services and one impact fees
for parks services. The text of the ordinances is similar. The ordinances address the fee
formula, adjustments, credits, appeals, refunds and exemptions as well as use of the impact fees.
Also, each ordinance includes a spreadsheet for calculating an impact fee and a list of projects
for which the impact fee "l--vould be collected.
Conceptually, the fee formula identifies the anticipated growth between 2009 and 2020 (12
years) in several land use categories and the cost of capital facilities needed to senJe that growth
and divides the two. The variables include the request for service (either calls for fire/aid
service per land use categOlY or amount of parks needed per resident) and the growth
anticipated in each land use category. Because the City has a strong track record of both
residents and employees using park facilities and fire services, an impact fee for
commercial/industrial uses as well as an impact fee for residential uses is proposed.
CAP Infonnation Memorandum
December 3,2008
Page 7 of7
Attached are two pages of Options for impact fees (kind of a sensitivity analysis). One is for
parks (Attachment A) and one is forfire (Attachment B). At the bottom of each sheet is
information on the relevant impact fees assessed by other jurisdictions.
Each Options page compares differing project totals, differing City contributions, and differing
impact fees for several different land use categories. For example, the Parks Impact Fee.
Options page shows $12,250,000 as the total amount of projects. Next it shows what the impact
fees would generate over 12 years if impact fees paid for 90% of the total and what the City's
10% contribution would be. Below that is shown the impact fee per single family house, per
multifamily dwelling unit, per 1,000 gsf of office use, per 1,000 gsf retail use and per 1,000 gsf
of industrial use. The next block to the right shows the results of impact fees generating80% of
the funds and the City contributing 20%. The block on the far right shows a 70%-30% split.
Finally, the same 90%-10%/80%-20%/70%-30% splits are shown if$8, 750,000 is the total
amount of the projects.
The same kind of comparison is offered on the Fire Impact Fee Options page. Council members
may choose which impact feelcity contribution split results in acceptable levels of impact fees.
RECOMll1ENDATION
· Adopt an ordinance which authorizes assessment of impact fees for capital facilities for
Fire services needed due to new growth
. Adopt an ordinance lvhich authorizes assessment of impact fees for capital facilities for
Parks seniices needed due to new growth
NOTE: ATTACHJ\1ENTS HAVE BEEN REVISED BASED ON THE NE'V
INFORt'\1ATION; FOR OLD ATTACHJ\1ENTS. PLEASE REFER TO 11/24/08 PACKET
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C:
Impact Fee Payment Examples (1 page)
Memo from Derek Speck to Lisa Vemer (4 pages)
Mayor's Recommendations (7 pages)
Project
Wig development/
Southcenter Square
New Bank of America
building (at mall)
Tukwila Village
Fidelity Office Bldg
FIRE IMPACT FEES*
Square Impact fee per
Land Use Footage /Dwelli 1,000 gsf OR per
Category ng Unit Dwelling Unit
Retail 230,444
Office 7,451
Multi- family 144
Retail 52,000
Office 2,000
Office 7,200
Fire fees are split 90 -10 capital costs of $6,479,500
Parks fees are split 80 -20 capital costs of $8,000,000
$1,200
$580
$1,624
Impact Fee
Assessment
$580 $133,658
$12,100
$172,800
$30,160
$3,248
$11,693
$1,624
$1,624
PARKS IMPACT FEES TOTAL IMPACT FEES
Impact fee per Fee as
1,000 gsf OR per Impact Fee Impact Fee Total Project of Total
Dwelling Unit Assessment Assessment Cost Cost
$419 $96,556 $230,214 $19,017,119 1.2%
$837 $6,236 $18,337 $1,281,446 1.4%
$1,398 $201,312 $430,982 $50,000,000 0.9%
$419 $21,788
$837 $1,674
$837 $6,026 $17,719 $1,661,344 1.1%
Attachment B
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Office of the Mayor
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 98188
www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
Date: November 30,2008
To: Lisa Verner, Project Manager
Copy: Mayor
City Administrator
Finance Director
From: Economic Development Administrator
Re: Impact Fees Effect on New Development
I have attached two spreadsheets that estimate the cost of the proposed development impact fees
relative to the cost of new construction and to a monthly lease rate. These estimates are very
approximate and reflect a number of assumptions that are listed on the attachment. All assume a
Fire Department project list totalling $6,479,500.
Assuming the Parks Department list ofproiects totals $11,250,000:
o As a percent of the cost of new construction, the impact fees would range from a low of .
0.4% to a high of 1.7%, depending on assumptions and product type.
o As a percent of a monthly lease rate, the impact fees would range from a low of 0.5% to a
high of 2.8%, depending on assumptions and product type.
Assuming the Parks Department proiect list totals $6,750,000:
o As a percent of the cost of new construction, the impact fees would range from a low of
0.3% to a high of 1.3%, depending on assumptions and product type.
o As a percent of a monthly lease rate, the impact fees would range from a low of 0.4% to a
high of2.0%, depending on assumptions and product type.
I am not aware of any way to determine conclusively whether the proposed impact fees would
cause us to lose new development. One significant factor to consider is how competive a
particular product type is (e.g. retail or office). For example, I think our Southcenter area is
strong in terms of retail compared to our competitors but we are in fairly tight competition for
high quality office space. At the levels proposed, especially with the $6.75 million Parks project
list, I think it is unlikely that we would lose development.
Please contact me at 206-433-1832 or dspeck@ci.tukwila.wa.us if you have any questions.
Impact Fees Comparisons to New Development Costs
DRAFT 11/30/08
Based on assumptions: Parks $ 11,250,000
Fire $ 6,479,500
90% of cost paid by development impact fee
10% of cost paid by city
Impact Fees
Parks Fire Total Units
SF $ 2,255 $ 922 $ 3,177 Dwell unit
MF $ 2,211 $ 1,200 $ 3,411 Dwell unit
Office $ 1,325 $ 1,624 $ 2,949 1,000 SF
Retail $ 662 $ 580 $ 1,242 1,000 SF
Industrial $ 414 $ 127 $ 541 1,000 SF
$ 6,867 $ 4,453 $ 11,320
Comparision of Impact Fee to Cost of Development
SF
MF
Office
Retail
Industrial
Impact Fee
Cost/Unit Units
$ 3,177 dwelling unit
$ 3,411 dwelling unit
$ 2.95 square foot
$ 1.24 square foot
$ 0.54 square foot
Typical Construction
Cost Per Unit
Low High
$ 250,000 $ 500,000
$ 200,000 $ 300,000
$ 200 $ 300
$ 150 $ 300
$ 75 $ 150
Comparision of Impact Fee to Monthlv Lease Rate
SF
MF
Office
Retail
Industrial
Impact Fee
Cost/Unit Units
$ 3,177 dwelling unit
$ 3,411 dwelling unit
2.95 square foot
1.24 square foot
0.54 square foot
Typical Monthly Lease
Rate Per Unit
Low High
N/A N/A
$ 1,400 $ 1,800
$ 2.00 $ 2.50
$ 2.00 $ 3.00
$ 0.50 $ 0.75
Impact Fee
% of Cost
Low High
0.6% 1.3%
1.1% 1.7%
1.0% 1.5%
0.4% 0.8%
0.4% 0.7%
Impact Fee
Added
To Lease
N/A
$38.62
$0.03
$0.01
$0.01
Impact Fee
% of Lease Rate
Low High
N/A N/A
2.1% 2.8%
1.3% 1.7%
0.5% 0.7%
0.8% 1.2%
Assumptions
Lease rates are based on new construction.
Multifamily lease rates assume 1,000 square foot, 2 bedroom apartment.
Retail lease rates based on single story, surface parked, direct entry, box retail in Southcenter area.
Calculation of impact fee added to lease assumes initial impact fee is amortized over a 10 year lease at 6% interest.
Based on impact fee data Attachments A-2 and B-2 from staff report for F&S 12/2/08 revised version 12/1/09.
Economic Development Analysis
1/1
Printed: 12/03/2008 6: 14 PM
Impact Fees Comparisons to New Development Costs
DRAFT 11/30/08
Based on assumptions: Parks $ 6,750,000
Fire $ 6,479,500
90% of cost paid by development impact fee
10% of cost paid by city
Impact Fees
Parks Fire Total Units
SF $ 1,353 $ 922 $ 2,275 Dwell unit
MF $ 1,327 $ 1,200 $ 2,527 Dwell unit
Office $ 795 $ 1,624 $ 2,419 1,000 SF
Retail $ 397 $ 580 $ 977 1,000 SF
Industrial $ 248 $ 127 $ 375 1,000 SF
$ 4,120 $ 4,453 $ 8,573
Comparision of Impact Fee to Cost of Development
SF
MF
Office
Retail
Industrial
Impact Fee
Cost/Unit Units
$ 2,275 dwelling unit
$ 2,527 dwelling unit
$ 2.42 square foot
$ 0.98 square foot
$ 0.38 square foot
Typical Construction
Cost Per Unit
Low High
$ 250,000 $ 500,000
$ 200,000 $ 300,000
$ 200 $ 300
$ 150 $ 300
$ 75 $ 150
Comparision of Impact Fee to Monthlv Lease Rate
SF
MF
Office
Retail
Industrial
Impact Fee
Cost/Unit Units
$ 2,275 dwelling unit
$ 2,527 dwelling unit
2.42 square foot
0.98 square foot
0.38 square foot
Typical Monthly Lease
Rate Per Unit
Low High
N/A N/A
$ 1,400 $ 1,800
$ 2.00 $ 2.50
$ 2.00 $ 3.00
$ 0.50 $ 0.75
Impact Fee
% of Cost
Low High
0.5% 0.9%
0.8% 1.3%
0.8% 1.2%
0.3% 0.7%
0.3% 0.5%
Impact Fee
Added
To Lease
N/A
$28.61
$0.03
$0.01
$0.00
Impact Fee
% of Lease Rate
Low High
N/A N/A
1.6% 2.0%
1.1% 1.4%
0.4% 0.6%
0.6% 0.8%
Assumptions
Lease rates are based on new construction.
Multifamily lease rates assume 1,000 square foot, 2 bedroom apartment.
Retail lease rates based on single story, surface parked, direct entry, box retail in Southcenter area.
Calculation of impact fee added to lease assumes initial impact fee is amortized over a 10 year lease at 6% interest.
Based on impact fee data Attachments A-2 and B-2 from staff report for F&S 12/2/08 revised version 12/1/09.
Economic Development Analysis
1/1
Printed: 12/03/2008 6: 14 PM
Impact Fees Comparisons
DRAFT 11/24/08
Based on: Parks $ 12,250,000
Fire $ 6,479,500
90% of fee paid by development
Comparison of Parks Vs Fire Spread Across Development Types
Parks Fire
SF $ 2,518 34% $ 922 21%
MF $ 2,420 32% $ 1,200 27%
Office $ 1,421 19% $ 1,624 36%
Retail $ 710 9% $ 580 13%
Industrial $ 444 6% $ 127 3%
$ 7,513 100% $ 4,453 100%
Mayor's Recommendation
Impact Fees
12-2-08
FIRE
Capital Facilities List:
Split:
Fees
PARKS
SF
MF
Office
Retail
Industrial
Capital Facilities List:
Split:
Fees:
TOTAL
Fees:
SF
MF
Office
Retail
Industrial
SF
MF
Office
Retail
Industrial
Attachment C
$6,479,500
90% - 10%
$ 922
$1,200
$1,624
$ 580
$ 127
$8,000,000
80% - 20%
$1,426
$1,398
$ 837
$ 419
$ 262
$2,348
$2,598
$2,461
$ 999
$ 389
Examples of Impact Fee Payments:
FIRE $6479 500 0 Ot lOt (900f< 100f< l't)
- , , m capl a pro.lec s 0- o SplI
Project Land Use Square Impact Fee per Impact Fee
Category F ootagelDwelling 1,000 gsf or per Assessment
Units Dwelling Unit
Wig development! Retail 230,444 $580 $133,658
Southcenter Square
Parkway Place Office 66,000 $1,624 $107,184
16400 Southcenter Pkwy
New Bank of America Office 7,451 $1,624 $12,100
building (at mall)
Tukwila Village Multi- 144 $1,200 $172,800
family
Retail 52,000 $580 $30,160
Office 2,000 $1,624 $3,248
PARKS $8 000 000 0 Ot lOt (800f< 200f< l't)
- , , mca III a pro]ec S 0- o SPll
Project Land Use Square Impact Fee per Impact Fee
Category F ootagelDwelling 1,000 gsf or per Assessment
Units Dwelling Unit
Wig development! Retail 230,444 $419 $96,556
Southcenter Square
Parkway Place Office 66,000 $837 $55,242
16400 Southcenter Pkwy
New Bank of America Office 7,451 $837 $6,237
building (at mall)
Tukwila Village Multi- 144 $1398 $201,312
family
Retail 52,000 $419 $21,788
Office 2,000 $837 $1,674
Tukwila Parks Capital Facilities List
Project List - Impact Fees 2009 to 2015 Project Cost
Duwamish Riverbend Hill Develop Phase II $ 2,000,000
Trail Connections Green River Trail to Renton $ 500,000
Black/Cedar River Trail
Tukwila Pond Development - Phase IV $ 3,000,000
City ofTukwila Pool [Extend land lease]; expand features $ 500,000
and services
TOD Pedestrian Bridge Sounder Connection $ 2,000,000
Total $8,000,000
TukwiIa Parks Impact Fees, 2008
TABLE 1: 2008 Park Impact Fee Calculations
Land Use
2007 2007 2007 Building 2020 Housing
Housing Employment. Area -3 Units
Units -1 2
2020 2020 Building
Employme Area
nt
Sin!!:le-familv 3,822 4,338
Multi-familv 4,107 6,491
Office 6,245 1,561,250 7,727 1,931,750
Retail 20,384 10,192,000 25,220 12,610,000
Industrial 20,343 16,274,400 25,169 20,135,200
TOTALS 7,929 46,972 28,027,650 10,829 58,116 34,676,950
1. OFM
2. PSRC 2007 Covered Emplooyment Estimates
3. Retail: 500gsfper emp; Office: 250gsfper emp; Industrial: 800gsfper emp; X emp growth
4. 43 SF du/yr; rest is MF from 2007 Buildable Lands Report
5. 90% of Buildable Lands Report estimates, at same % as 2007 employment
6. Tukwila ResidentINon-Tukwila resident breakdown based on 2000 census data
In 2000, the number of residents who live and work in Tukwila is 1,502, out of a population of 17,181
9%
Net Growth, 2008 - 2020
Housing Units - Employment Building Employment: Employment:
4 -5 Area - 3 Tukwila Non-Tukwila
Residents - Residents -
9% - 6 91 % - 6
516
2,384
1,482 370,500 133 1,349
4,836 2,418,000 435 4,401
4,826 3,860,800 434 4,392
2,900 11,144 6,649,300 1,003 10,141
moact ee
Persons per Use Ratio Total Use % Use by Cost Per Housing Per 1,000 Rounded
Housing Unit Between by Land Land Use Allocation Unit GFA**
Residents! Use Category
Employees Category
2.54 2.44 3,198 11.49% $735,607 $1,425.59 $1,426
2.49 2.44 14,484 52.06% $3,331,715 $1,397.53 $1,398
1.00 1,349 4.85% $310,214 $837.29 $837
1.00 4,401 15.82% $1,012,279 $418.64 S419
1.00 4,392 15.78% $1,010,185 $261.65 $262
27,823 100.00% $6,400,000
I F
Note: $6,400,000 is 80% of$8,000,000
Fire Department Capital Facilities List
Capital Facility
1. Construct/build relocated Station 51 - 5,000 gsf
addition due to newgrowth in ruc
2. Purchase aid car for Station 51 (new)
3. Purchase engine for Station 54 to replace aerial
ladder truck
4. Purchase land for relocated Station 52, if Station 51
is relocated
5. Construct/build relocated Station 52, if Station 51 is
relocated
TOTAL
] 5,000 gsfbui1ding addition x $400/psfbui1ding construction cost
2 Y2 acre site (21,780 sf) x $25/psfland cost
37,500 gsfbui1ding x $400/psfbui1ding construction cost
Cost
$ 2,000,0001
$ 185,000
$ 750,000
$ 544,5002
$ 3,000,0003
$ 6,479,500
TABLE 1. Tukwila Fire Impact Fee Calculation, 2008
Net Growth, 2008 -2020
2007 2007
Land Use Housing Employmc Housing Building Employmc
Units -1 nt 2 Units 3 Area 4 nt 5
Single family 3,822 516 1
Multi family 4,107 2,384
Office 6,245 370,500 1 1,482
Retail 20,384 2,418,0001 4,836
Industrial 20,343 3,860,8001 4,826
TOTALS 46,972 6,649,3001 11,144
I. OFM numbers
2. PSRC 2007 Covered Employment Estimates
3. 43 SF du /yr; rest is MF from 2007 Buildable Lands Report
4. Retail: 500gsf per emp; Office: 250gsf per cmp; Industrial: 800gsf per cmp; X cmp growth
5. 90% of Buildable Lands Report estimates, at same as 2007 employment
TABLE 2. Tukwila Fire Service Demand Calculation, 2008
Land Use
Single family
Multi family
Office
Retail
Industrial
NET TOTAL
2007 Responses
Incident
Responses
619
866
445
1,039
362
3,332
13%
19%
10%
22%
8%
71%
Based
on Net
Total
19%
26%
(3%
31%
11%
100%
Proportion
al
Reallocatio
n of
"Other"
249
349
179
418
146
1,341
Incident
Responses
868
1,215
625
1,458
508
4,673
Tukwila Fire Impact Fees, 2008
Per
Residential
Unit
$922
$1,200
Revised
2007 Responses
19%
26%
13%
31%
1l%
100%
Other 1,341 29%
TOTAL 4,673 100% 100% 1,341 4,673 100%
Note: The $5,831,550 capital cost is 90% of $6,479,500 (the growth related fire capital cost).
Impact Fee
Per GFA
$1.62
$0.58
$0.13
Incident
Responses
per 1,000
Units
227
296
Per 1,000
Sq. Ft. GFA
$1,624
$580
$127
Increase in Annual Incident
Responses due to Growth
Incident Capital Costs
Responses Incident Allocated by
per 1,000 Responses Incident
Employees Responses due
to Growth
117 8% $475,668
705 49% $2,861,894
100.0 148 10% $601,536
71.5 346 24% $1,403,649
25.0 120 8% $488,804
1,437 100% $5,831,550
100%
$5,831,550
Impact Fee Categories
Pro erty Type &Allocation to Imp FE CATEGOR1ES
I IMPACT TOTAL
3, 2007 Incident Responses by rn Industrial
TABLE Mu TOTAL Single- Tamil"
Aid Total family 54
Fire Dept. Land Firc 1
Use Cate2orics \L 54
12 42 48 I
I, I,
Public Assembly I 30 I 48 I 70 47
18 117 I I I
Educational 90 619
1527 9 r 619 I 794 I
Sino_le Care* 460
I 159 I 570 1 794
Sin _tc-family 2 305
I 224 I 2 r I 0 Apartments I 2 I. 351 6$0
203 305 14
Bo Hotels _House I. 102 I
Hotels I 590 1,031 I
441 1 14 24
Business 2 1 332
ManU
i 12 104 3b2 104 4 3
f at I 57 j 47 I 244 445 1,039
S ora e cturin! 1 81 163 b19 1 8b6
3,33 1 11% 100%
Storage 1,133 2,199 31%
SUBTOTAL o 26 13 "/O
]9 /o
I
Tukwila Fire Impact Pees, 2008
PERCENT OF
SUBTOTAL i
855 1,130
y 275 63 211
Special Pro ?crtY Ii 148 1
918 211
SUBTOTAL i 423 146 1,341
SUBTOTAL 174 418
249 344
Reallocation of
Special Property
Unclassified 508 4,673
625 1,458
TOTAL 868 1,215
INCIDENT
RESPONSES BY
IMPACT FEE
CATEGORY 40 Office (Redmond)
split 60% Multi- family,
split 34% Oftice, 66° Retail (2007 Tukwila)
DRAFT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF mVILA,
WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING THE ASSESSMENT OF FIRE IMPACT
FEES ON NEW RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPME1\.TT IN THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND
ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Growth Management Act of the State of Washington
and RCW 36.70A, the City of Tukwila has an adopted Comprehensive Plan, which
includes provisions for fire protection facilities as part of its Capital Facilities Element;
and
V\1lfEREAS, RCW 82.02.050 authorizes cities to impose impact fees on development
activity as part of the financing for public facilities, including fire protection facilities;
and
v'.1lfEREAS, the Tukvvila City Council desires to provide funding for fire protection
facilities, as referenced in the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan,
through the imposition of residential and non-residential development impact fees
beginning January 1, 2009;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKvVILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds and determines that new growth and
development in the City creates additional demand and need for public fire protection
facilities in the City, and the City Council finds that new growth and development
should pay its proportionate share of the costs for new fire service facilities to serve new
growth and development in the. City. The City Council believes that this can be
accomplished by the assessment of fire impact fees on new residential, commercial, and
industrial development in the City. It is the Council's intent that the provisions of this
ordinance be liberally construed in establishing the fire impact fee program.
Section 2. Definitions. Terms or words not defined herein shall be defined
pursuant to RCW 82.02.090 when given their usual and customary meaning. For the
purposes of this ordinance, unless the context or subject matter clearly requires
othervvise, the words or phrases defined in this section shall have the following
meanings:
1. The" Act" means the Growth Management Act, Chapter 17, Laws of 1990,
First Extraordinary Session, Chapter 36.70A RCW et seq., and Chapter 32, Laws of 1991,
First Special Session, as now in existence or hereinafter amended.
2. "Building permit" means an official document or certification of the City
of Tukwila issued by the City's building official which authorizes the construction,
alteration, enlargement, conversion, reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection,
placement, demolition, moving, or repair of a building or structure.
3. "City" means the City of Tulev'lila, Washington, County of King.
4. "Development activity" means any construction of a building or structure
that creates additional demand and need for fire safety facilities.
C:\Documenls and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Fue Impact Fees.doc
LV;ksn U/4/2()()8
Page 1 of 5
5. "Development approval" means any 'written authorization from the City,
which authorizes the commencement of the "development activity."
6. "Encumber" means to reserve, set aside, or earmark the fire impact fees in
order to pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other liabilities incurred for
the provision of fire protective services.
7. "Fee payer" is a person, corporation, partnership, an incorporated
association or governmental agency, municipality, or similar entity commencing a land
development activity that requires a building permit and creates a demand for
additional fire capital facilities.
8. "Impact fee" means the payment of money imposed by the City on
development activity pursuant to this ordinance as a condition of granting
development approval in order to pay for the fire facilities needed to serve new growth
and development that is a proportionate share of the cost of fire capital facilities that is
used for facilities that reasonably benefit new development. Impact fees do not include
a reasonable permit fee, an application fee, and the administrative fee for collecting and
handling fire impact .fees or cost of revieV\ring independent fee calculations.
9. "Owner" means the owner of record of real property, as found in the
records of King County, Washington, or a person vvith an unrestricted written option to
purchase property; provided, that if the real property is being purchased under a
recorded real estate contract, the purchaser shall be considered the owner of the
property.
10. "Proportionate share" means that portion of the cost for fire facility
improvements that are reasonably related to the service demands and needs of new
development.
11. "Public facilities" means the follov,ring capital facilities owned or operated
by governmental entities: (1) public streets and roads; (2) publicly ovmed parks and
open spaces and recreational facilities; (3) school facilities; (4) fire protection facilities
not part of a fire district; and (5) police facilities and essential public facilities as defined
by Chapter 36.70A RCW.
Section 3. Fire Impact Fee Assessment.
A. The City shall collect fire impact fees from applicants seeking development
approvals from the City for any development activity in the City for which building
permits are required, effective January 1, 2009. This will include the expansion of
existing uses, which create the demand for fire protection services.
B. Fire impact fees shall be assessed at the time of a technically-complete building
permit application that complies with the City's zonli,g ordinances and building and
development codes. Fire' impact fees shall be collected from the fee payer at the time
the building permit is issued.
C. Except if othenvise exempt, the City shall not issue the required building
permit unless or until the fire impact fees are paid.
Section 4. Use of Fire Impact Fees.
A. Pursuant to this ordinance, fire impact fees shall be used for fire facilities that
will reasonably benefit the City and its residents.
B. Fees shall not be used to make up deficiencies in City facilities serving an
existing development.
C. Fees shall not be used for maintenance and operations, including personnel.
D. Fire impact fees shall be used for but not limited
improvements, engineering and architectural services,
administrative expenses and applicable mitigation costs,
pertaining to fire protection facilities.
to land acquisition, site
permitting, financing,
and capital equipment
C\Documents and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\1~1SDATA \Ordi...""lance5\Frre Impact Fees.doc
LV,ksn 12/4/2008
Page 2 of 5
E. Fire impact fees may also be used to recoup public improvement costs incurred
by the City to the extent that new growth and development V\~ be served by the
previously constructed improvement.
F. In the event bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been issued for fire
facility improvements, impact fees may be used to pay the principal on such bonds.
Section 5. Fire Impact Fee Capital Facilities Plan. In order to collect fire impact
fees, the City must first adopt a Fire Capital Facilities Plan as an element of the City's
Comprehensive Plan. The City's Capital Facilities Plan for fire protection services shall
consist of the following elements:
1. The City's capacity over the next six years, based on an inventory of the
City's fire facilities both existing and under construction;
2. The forecast of future needs for fire facilities based upon the City's
population projections;
3. A six-year financial plan component, updated as necessary, to maintain at
least a six-year forecast for financing needed \.."ithin projected funding levels;
4. Application of the formula set forth in this ordinance based upon the
information in the Capital Facilities Plan; and
5. City Council Action. No new or revised impact fee shall be effective until
adopted by the City Council following a duly advertised public hearing to consider the
City's Capital Facilities Plan or plan update.
Section 6. Fire Impact Fee Formula. The impact fee formula is based on the
assumptions found in Tukvvila Fire Impact Fees, 2008, Exhibit A, and Tukwila Fire
Department Capital Facilities List, Exhibit B, attached hereto and by this reference fully
incorporated herein.
FIRE IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS
I Impact Fee
Land Use I Per Residential Unit Per 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Single family I $922 i
Multi-family I $1,200
Office I $1,624
Retail I $580
Industrial I $127
Section 7. Fire Impact Fee Adjustments.
A. The City may adjust a fire impact fee at the time the fee is imposed to consider
unusual circumstances in specific cases to ensure that impact fees are imposed fairly.
B. In calculating the fee imposed on a particular development, the City shall
permit consideration of studies and data submitted by a developer to adjust the amount
of the fee. The developer shall submit an independent fee calcUlation study to the Fire
Chief who shall review the study to determine that the study:
1. is based on accepted impact fee assessment practices and methodologies;
2. uses acceptable data sources and the data used is comparable with the uses
and intensities planned for the proposed development activity;
3. complies vvith the applicable state laws governing impact fees;
4. is prepared and documented by professionals who are mutually agreeable
to the City and the developer and are qualified in their respective fields; and
5. shows the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made.
C. In reviewing the study, the Fire Chief may require the developer to submit
additional or different documentation. If an acceptable study is presented, the Fire
Chief may adjust the fee to that appropriate for the particular development activity. If
C\Documents and Settings\All Users\Deskt~p\Kell)'\MSDATA \Orilinances\Fire Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn U/4/20V8
Page 3 of 5
an acceptable study is not presented, the developer shall pay the impact fees required
prior to submitting the study.
D. A developer requesting an adjustment or independent fee calculation may pay
the impact fees imposed by this ordinance to obtain a building permit while the City
determines whether to partially reimburse the developer by making an adjustment or
accepting the independent fee calculation.
Section 8. Credits. A fee payer can request that a credit, or credits, be awarded to
the fee payer for the value of dedicated land, improvements to, or new construction of
any system improvements provided by the developer to facilities that are identified in
the Capital Facilities Plan and that are required by the City as a condition of approving
the development activity.
Section 9. Appeals.
A. Any fee payer may pay the impact fees imposed by this ordinance under
protest in order to obtain a building permit.
B. Appeals regarding fire impact fees imposed on any development activity may
only be taken by the fee payer of the property where such development activity will
occur. No appeal shall be permitted unless and until the impact fee at issue has been
paid.
C. Determinations of the City staff with respect to the applicability of fire impact
fees "to a given development activity, or the availability of a credit, can be appealed to
the City's Hearing Examiner pursuant to this section.
D. An appeal shall be ta...1(en Vvih'1i1110 working days of payment of the impact fees
under protest or within 10 working days of the City's issuance of a written
determination of a credit or exemption decision by filing with the City Oerk a notice of
appeal giving the reasons for the appeal v.ith an accompanying appeal fee as set forth
in the existing fee schedule for land use decisions.
Section 10. Refunds.
A. If the City fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within six years from the
date the fees were paid, unless extraordinary circumstances or reasons exist, the current
owner of the property on which the impact fees were paid may receive a refund of such
fees.
B. The City shall notify potential claimants by first class mail that they are entitled
to a refund. In determining whether impact fees have been expended or encumbered,
impact fees shall be considered expended or encumbered on a first-in, first out basis.
C. Ovmers seeking a refund must submit a \vritten request for a refund oUhe fees
to the City within one year of the date the right to claim a refund arises or notice is
given, whichever comes later.
D. Any impact fees for which no application has been made within the one-year
period shall be retained by the City and expended on appropriate fire facilities.
E. Refunds of impact fees shall include any interest earned on the impact fees by
the City.
Section 11. Exemptions. The fire impact fees are generated from the formula for
calculating the fees as set forth in this ordinance. The amount of the impact fees is
determined by the information contained in the adopted fire department master plan
and related documents, as appended to the City's Comprehensive Plan. All new
development located in the City will be charged a fire impact fee, provided that the
following exemptions shall apply. Any development activity or project which has
submitted a technically complete building permit application prior to the effective date
of this ordinance shall be exempt from the payment of fire impact fees. The follov.wg
shall be exempt from fire impact fees:
C\Documents and Settings\All Users\DC:5ktop\KelJy\~/J.5DATA \Ordinances\Fire Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 12/4/2008
Page 4 of 5
1. Replacement cif a structure with a new structure having the same use, at
the same site, and when such replacement is ",ithin 12 months of demolition or
destruction of the previous structure;
2. Alteration or expansion of or remodeling of an existing dwelling or
structure where no new units are created and the use is not changed;
3. Construction of an accessory residential structure;
4. Miscellaneous improvements including, but not limited to, fences, walls,
swimming pools, and signs;
5. Demolition of or moving an existing structure within the City from one site
to another;
6. Low-income housing developed by individuals, nonprofit corporations, or
a housing authority may be exempted from impact fees at the discretion of City staff
subject to:
a. Fiscal impact analysis of the effect of impact fees upon low-income
housing and how exempting housing from impact fees would fonvard the goals for
lm-v-income housing in the City and King County;
b. That adequate documentation be provided that the housing ",'ill
remain available for low-income persons for a 10-year period of time at affordable rents;
and
c. . In the case of owner-occupied dwellings, that such housing will be
sold or leased at affordable rates to lm-v-income households for a period of 10 years; and
d. The impact fee for exempt development shall be calculated as
provided by this ordinance and paid with public funds. Such payments may be made
by including such amounts in the public share of the system improvements undertaken
within the City for fire protection services and facilities.
Section 12. Authority Unimpaired. Nothing in this ordinance shall preclude the
City from requiring the fee payer to mitigate adverse and environmental affects of a
specific development pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapters 43.21C
RCW and/ or Chapter 58.17 RCVv, governing plats and subdivisions, provided that the
exercise of-this authority is consistent with Chapters 43.21C and 82.02 RCW.
Section 13. 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 i4. Effective Date. TIUs 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 . 2008.
ATTEST / AUTHEl\.TTICATED:
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Christy O'Flaherty, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Office of the City Attorney
Attachments: Exhibit A - Tukwila Fire Impact Fees, 2008
Exhibit B - Fire Department Capital Facilities List
C:\Documenls and Settings\All Users\Desktop \Kelly\MSDA T A \Ordinances\FlIe Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 12/4/2(}J8
Page 5 of 5
00
OSS`1£ °fo
8`S$ 00
1708` 8.817$ °/o8
6179'£0171$ °/o01 109$ 61 17
1768'1.9 0
899'S Ltr$
111MOx0 01
anp ssnodsa2l
l rcaptaux
palLaouv
s1s0c 1.0030
s asuods v a
luapt
0 CZ,
CIL
0
tool° o1 aup sasu sa T.
luoprauX lrnrta� of as''axairx
slu(1
saa&Wi a aad
i xad 1100
000 sasu ods2X
sasYZOds lua praol
loa ppul
£1'0$
L Zt$
p8S$
96Z
LZZ
a1r ax t11 0.z$ a1 0
•(1SOa`dLa axt P t ttr£`1 '001
%61
ssuods
lop
""sasuo sad. LOOZ
pasvoll,
O0Z` 1$
ZZ6$
Iva
la lutlu a2X
117£' 1
9171
81V
6L1
617£
617Z.
o 1110,1,
1 d
uotl,�aollra� pasr•£t
xl �odoxd
1
trtrl` l t 00£ 6 �9
9Z8<1� 008'098'
08` 09
9£8` 000 g117 Z
2817` 1
OOS`0L£
aw
v tat
g00Z sOg 1D ct�.c.�X
tt •ej�rn��
v 1.10-:Na
sr lsoa lul tdea OSS`t£8`S$ orl3.:010N,
9$ %06 £L9 aaqIC
%00
°lo 6Z
t 1
178£`Z
Z££`
Z9£
6£0` 1
so
998 19
6
s l
suodsa2
lua ppul
uuU sasuodsaYi LOOZ
��fl1auin3leD u��aa aat
SOOT u¢'L�lquPt.
tn4 J° °1tl06 'S
od1sP $3005'1'•x;06 •V
se awes �u `salz'tiu4�sa v a'�z�JO `•dLUa xad vy
dwa LOOZ duza act }s30SZ sx �saz
g ltu a P l ¢zalsz1PLZ� tuO.0 1W d 'Z
$3008 u¢Z a1g LPim9 LO av du1'd Pa zano0 Loot 3
z a oz3 duia X `.dLU iad u�uz Col
a�oday sp saa szuG�sH a saaq+unu W_-
lutxasnp
1te1a2X_
aarl
w n� t 1 t n W
Ll a1��
LO1 n
ut5
ttS
as jl pu''i
1
i
t --9 iS____� Z lu l as(l pue i
gutsnoK
j sh z C01dw t LOOZ
tr eaxl� LOOZ
otsnoFJ
ldw tutpltng t �rl` VZ
nn xo J �tdmi a �i1
0Z0Z_ z 11
4pz t �6��e�na�U� a
4 a6ad
Page 2
EXHIBIT A
Tukwila Fire Impact Fees, 2008
TABLE 3. 2007 Incident Responses by Property Type Allocation to Impact Fee Categories
IMPACT FEE CATEGORIES
Fire Dept. Land Multi
Use Categories Fire Aid Total Single family Office Retail Industrial TOTAL
family
Public Assembly 12 42 54 54
Educational 18 30 48 48
Health Care* 27 90 117 70 47
Single family 159 460 619 619
Apartments 224 570 794 794
Boarding House 0 2 2 2
Hotels 102 203 305 305
'Business** 441 590 1,031 351 680
Industrial 12 2 14 14
Manufacturing 57 47 104 104
Storage 81 163 244 244
SUBTOTAL 1,133 2,199 3,332 619 866 445 1,039 362 3,332
PERCENT OF
SUBTOTAL
Special Property 275 855 1,130
Unclassified 148 63 211
SUBTOTAL 423 918 1,341
19% 26% 13% 31% 11% 100%
Reallocation of
Special Property 249 349 179 418 146 1,341
Unclassified
TOTAL
INCIDENT
RESPONSES BY 868 1,215 625 1,458 508 4,673
IMPACT FEE
CATEGORY
split 60% Multi family, 40% Office (Redmond)
split 34% Office, 66% Retail (2007 Tukwila)
Fire Department Capital Facilities List
EXHIBIT B
Canital Facility Cost
1. Construct/build relocated Station 51— 5,000 gsf $2,000,000
addition due to new growth in TUC
2. Purchase aid car for Station 51 (new) $185,000
3. Purchase engine for Station 54 to replace aerial $750,000
ladder truck
4. Purchase land for relocated Station 52, if Station 51 $544,500
is relocated
5. Construct/build relocated Station 52, if Station 51 is $3,000,000
relocated
1 5,000 gsf building addition x $400 /psf building construction cost
2 '/2 acre site (21,780 sf) x $25 /psf land cost
3 7,500 gsf building x $400 /psf building construction cost
TOTAL $6,479,500
C:\Documents and Settings\Al1 Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Fire Impact Fees Exhibit B Capital Facilities List.doc
LV:ksn 12/4/2008 Page 1 of 1
~.o A bT
~/~~.&~U
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING THE ASSESSMEI\TT OF PARKS
IMP ACT FEES ON Nm-V RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY; PRGVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
vVHEREAS, pursuant to the Growth Management Act or the State or Washington
and RCW 36.70A, the City or Tukwila has an adopted Comprehensive Plan, which
includes provisions ror parks racilities as part or its Capital Facilities Element; and
WHEREAS, RCW 82.02.050 authorizes cities to impose impact rees on development
activity as part or the financing ror public racilities, including parks racilities; and
WHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council desires to provide funding ror parks
racilities, as rererenced in the Capital Facilities Element or the Comprehensive Plan,
through the imposition or residential and non-residential development impact fees
beginning January 1,2009;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWTLA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds and determines that nev,r growth and
development in the City creates additional demand and need ror public parks racilities
in the City, and the City Council rinds that new growth and development should pay its
proportionate share or the costs ror new parks racilities to serve new growth and
development in the City. The City Council believes that this can be accomplished by the
assessment or parks impact rees on new residential, commercial, and industrial
development in the City. It is the Council's intent that the provisions or this ordinance
be liberally construed in establishing the parks impact ree program.
Section 2. Definitions. Terms or words not defined herein shall be defined
pursuant to Rei^! 82.02.090 when given their usual and customary meaning. For the
purposes or this ordinance, unless the context or subject matter dearly requires
otherwise, the words or phrases defined in this. section shall have the rollowing
meanings:
1. The" Act" means the Growth Management Act, Chapter 17, Laws or 1990,
First Extraordinary Session, Chapter 36.70A RCW et seq., and Chapter 32, Laws or 1991,
First Special Session, as now in existence or hereinafter amended.
2. "Building permit" means an official document or certification or the City
of Tukwila issued by the City's building official which authorizes the construction,
alteration, enlargement, conversion, reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection,
placement, demolition, moving, or repair of a building or structure.
3. "City" means the City of Tukwila, Washington, County of King.
4. "Development activity" means any construction of a building or structure
that creates additional demand and need for parks facilities.
5. "Development approval" means any written authorization from the City,
which authorizes the commencement of the "development activity."
C,\Documenls and Settings\AlI US€rS\DesHop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Parks Impact Fees.doc
L v,ksn 12/412008
Page 1 or 5
6. "Encumber" means to reserve, set aside, or earmark the parks impact fees
in order to pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other liabilities incurred for
the provision of parks services.
7. "Fee payer' is a person, corporation, partnership, an incorporated
association or governmental agency, municipality, or similar entity commencing a land
development activity that requires a building permit and creates a demand for
additional parks capital facilities.
8. "Impact fee" means the payment of money imposed by the City on
development activity pursuant to this ordinance as a condition of granting
development approval in order to pay for the parks facilities needed to serve new
growth and development that is a proportionate share of the cost of parks capital
facilities that is used for facilities that reasonably benefit new development. Impact fees
do not include a reasonable permit fee, an application fee, and the administrative fee for
collecting and handling parks impact fees or cost of reviewing independent fee
calculations.
9. "Owner" means the ovmer of record of real property, as found in the
records of King County, Washington, or a person with an unrestricted written option to
purchase property; provided, that if the real property is being purchased under a
recorded real estate contract, the purchaser shall be considered the owner of the
property.
10. "Proportionate share" means that portion of the cost for parks facility
improvements that are reasonably related to the service demands and needs of new
development.
11. "Public facilities" means the following capital facilities owned or operated
by governmental entities: (1) public streets and roads; (2) publicly oWlled parks and
open spaces and recreational facilities; (3) school facilities; (4) fire protection facilities
not part of a fire district; and (5) police facilities and essential public facilities as defu,ed
. by Chapter 36.70A RCI/v.
Section 3. Parks Impact Fee Assessment.
A. The City shall collect parks impact fees from applicants seeking development
approvals from the City for any development activity in the City for which building
permits are required, effective January 1, 2009. This will include the expansion of
existing uses, which create the demand for parks serVices.
B. Parks impact fees shall be assessed at the time of a technically-complete
building permit application that complies with the City's zoning ordinances and
building and development codes. Parks impact fees shall be collected from the fee
payer at the time the building permit is issued:
C. Except if otherwise exempt, the City shall not issue the required building
permit unless or until the parks impact fees are paid.
Section 4. Use of Parks Impact Fees.
A. Pursuant to this ordinance, parks impact fees shall be used for parks facilities
that will reasonably benefit the City and its residents.
B. Fees shall not be used to make up deficiencies in City facilities serving an
existing development.' .
C. Fees shall not be used for maintenance and operations, including personnel.
D. Parks impact fees shall be used for but not limited to land acquisition, site
improvements, engineering and architectural services, permitting, financing,
administrative expenses and applicable mitigation costs, and capital equipment
pertiining to parks facilities.
C\Docurnenls and Settings\Al1 Users\Desktop\Kelly\l/,sDATA \Ordinances\Parks Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 12/4/2008
Page 2 of 5
E. Parks impact fees may also be used to recoup public improvement costs
incurred by the City to the extent that new growth and development will be served by
the previously constructed improvement.
F. In the event bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been issued for
parks facility improvements, impact fees may be used to pay the principal on such
bonds.
Section 5. Parks Impact Fee Capital Facilities Plan. In order to collect parks
impact fees, the City must first adopt a parks capital facilities plan as an element of the
City's Comprehensive Plan. The City's Capital Facilities Plan for parks services shall
consist of the folloV\>ing elements:
1. The City's capacity over the next six years, based on an inventory of the
City's parks facilities both existing and under construction;
2. The forecast< of future needs for parks facilities based upon the City's
population projections;
3. A six-year financial plan component, updated as necessary, to maintain at
least a six-year forecast for financing needed within projected funding levels;
4. Application of the formula set forth in this ordinance based upon the
information in the Capital Facilities Plan; and
5. City Council Action. No new or revised impact fee shall be effective until
adopted by the City Council following a duly advertised public hearing to consider the
City's Capital Facilities Plan or plan update.
Section 6. Parks Impact Fee Formula. The impact fee formula is based on the
assumptions found in Tukwila Parks Impact Fees, 2008, Exhibit A, and Tukwila Parks
Capital Facilities List, Exhibit B, attached hereto and by this reference fully incorporated
herein.
PARKS IMP ACT FEE CALCULATIONS
Impact Fee
Land Use Per Residential Unit Per 1,000 Sa. Ft. GFA
Single Family $1,426
Multi~Family I $1,398
Office I $837
Retail I $419
Industrial I $262
Section 7. Parks Impact Fee Adjustments.
A. The City may adjust a parks impact fee at the time the fee is imposed to
consider unusual circumstances in specific cases to ensure that impact fees are imposed
fairly.
B. In calculating the fee imposed on a particular development, the City shall
permit consideration of studies and data submitted by a developer to adjust the amount
of the fee. The developer shall submit an independent fee calculation study to the
Director of Parks and Recreation, who shall review the study to determine that the
study:
1. is based on accepted impact fee assessment practices and methodologies;
2. uses acceptable data sources and the data used is comparable with the
uses and intensities planned for the proposed development activity;
3. complies with the applicable state laws governing impact fees;
4. is prepared and documented by professionals who are mutually agreeable
to the City and the developer and are qualified in their respective fields; and
5. shows the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made.
C:\Documenl:s and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Parks Impact Fees.doc
L V;ksn 12/4/2003
Page 3 of 5
C. In reviewing the study, the Director of Parks and Recreation may require the
developer to submit additional or different documentation. If an acceptable study is
presented, the Director of Parks and Recreation may adjust the fee to that appropriate
for the p;u:ticular development activity. If an acceptable study is not presented, the
developer shall pay the impact fees required prior to submitting the study.
D. A developer requesting an adjustment or independent fee calculation may pay
the impact fees imposed by this Ordinance to obtain a building permit while the City
determines whether to partially reimburse the developer by making an adjustment or
accepting the independent fee calculation.
Section 8. Credits. A fee payer can request that a credit, or credits, be awarded to
the fee payer for the value of dedicated land, improvements to, or new construction of
any system improvements provided by the developer to facilities that are identified in
the Capital Facilities Plan and that are required by the City as a condition of approving
the development activity.
Section 9. Appeals.
A. Any fee payer may pay the impact fees imposed by this ordinance under
protest in order to obtain a building peimit.
B. Appeals regarding parks impact fees imposed on any development activity
may only be taken by the fee payer of the property where such development activity
will occur. No appeal shall be permitted unless and until the impact fee at issue has
been paid.
C. Determinations of the City staff with respect to the applicability of parks
impact fees to a given development activity, or the availability of a credit, can be
appealed to the City's Hearing Examiner pursuant to this section.
D. An appeal shall be taken within 10 working days of payment of the impact fees
under protest or within 10 working days of the City's issuance of a 'written
determination of a credit or exemption decision by filing with the City Clerk a notice of
appeal giving the reasons for the appeal with an accompanying appeal fee as set forth
in the existing fee schedule for land use decisions.
Section 10. Refunds.
A. If the City fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within six years from the
date the fees were paid, unless extraordinary circumstances or reasons exist, the current
OV-'Tler of the property on which the impact fees were paid may receive a refund of such
fees.
B. The City shall notify potential claimants by first class mail that they are entitled
to a refund. In determining whether impact fees have been expended or encumbered,
impact fees shall be considered expended or encumbered on a first-in, first out basis. .
C. Ovmers seeking a refund must submit a vn-itten request for a refund of the fees
to the City within one year of the date the right to claim a refund arises or notice is
given, whichever comes later.
D. Any impact fees for which no application has been made within the one-year
period shall be retained by the City and expended on appropriate parks facilities.
E. Refunds of impact fees shall include any interest earned on the impact fees by
the City.
Section 11. Exemptions. The parks impact fees are generated from the formula for
calculating the fees as set forth in this ordinance. The amount of the impact fees is
determined by the information contained in the adopted parks master plan and related
documents, as appended to the City's Comprehensive Plan. All new development
located in the City will be charged a parks impact fee, provided that the following
exemptions shall apply. Any development activity or project which has submitted a
technically complete building permit application prior to the effective date of this
C:\DocumenG and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordiilances\Parks Impact Fee'.doo
LV:ksn 12/4/20D8
Page 4 of 5
ordinance shall be exempt from the payment of parks impact fees. The folloV\~g shall
be exempt from parks impact fees:
1. Replacement of a structure with a new structure having the same use, at
the same site, and when such replacement is vvithin 12 months of demolition or
destruction of the previous structure;
2. Alteration or expansion of or remodeling of an existing dwelling or
structure where no new units are created and the use is not changed;
3. Construction of an accessory residential structure;
4. 1\liscellaneous improvements including, but not limited to, fences, walls,
swimming pools, and signs;
5. Demolition of or moving an existing structure within the City from one site
to another;
6. Low-income housing developed by individuals, nonprofit corporations, or
a housing authority may be exempted from impact fees at the discretion of City staff
subject to:
a. Fiscal impact analysis of the effect of impact fees upon low-income
housing and how exempting housing from impact fees would forw~d the goals for
low-income housing in the City and King County;
b. That adequate documentation be provided that the housing will
remain available for low-income persons for a 10-year period of time at affordable rents;
and
c. In the case of owner-occupied dwellings, that such housing will be
sold or leased at affordable rates to low-income households for a period of 10 years; and
d. The impact fee for exempt development shall be calculated as
provided by this ordinance and paid with public funds. Such payments may be made
by including such amounts in the public share of the system improvements undertaken
,vithin the City for parks services and facilities.
Section 12. Authority Unimpaired. Nothing in this Ordinance shall preclude the
City from requiring the fee payer to mitigate adverse and environmental affects of a
specific development pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapters 43.21C
RCW and/ or Chapter 58.17 RCW, governing plats and subdivisions, provided that the
exercise of this authority is consistent ,vith Chapters 43.21C and 82.02 RCW.
Section 13. Sever.ability. 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 14. 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 , 2008.
ATTEST / AUTIffiNTICA TED:
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Christy O'Flaherty, City Clerk
Filed ''vith the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
Attachment: Tukwila Parks Impact Fees, 2008, Exhibit A
Tukwila Parks Capital Facilities List, Exhibit B
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Parks Ir"pact Fees.doc
LV:ksn U/4/200B
Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT A
Tukwila Parks Impact Fees, 2008
TABLE 1: 2008 Park Impact Fee Calculations
Land Use
2007 2007 2007 Building 2020 Housing
Housing Employment. Area -3 Units
Units -1 2
2020 2020 Building
Employme Area
nt
SiDl!Je-family 3,822 4,338
Multi-family 4,107 6,491
Office 6,245 1,561,250 7,727 1,931,750
Retail 20,384 10,192,000 25,220 12,610,000
Industrial 20,343 16,274,400 25,169 20,135,200
TOTALS 7,929 46,972 28,027,650 10,829 58,116 34,676,950
1. OFM
2. PSRC 2007 Covered Emplooyment Estimates
3. Retail: 500gsfper emp; Office: 250gsfper emp; Industrial: 800gsfper emp; X emp growth
4. 43 SF du/yr; rest is MF from 2007 Buildable Lands Report
5. 90% of Buildable Lands Report estimates, at same % as 2007 employment
6. Tukwila ResidentINon-Tukwila resident breakdown based on 2000 census data
In 2000, the number of residents who live and work in Tukwila is 1,502, out of a population of 17,181
9%
Net Growth, 2008 - 2020
Housing Units - Employment Building Employment: Employment:
4 -5 Area - 3 Tukwila Non-Tukwila
Residents - Residents -
9% - 6 91 % - 6
516
2,384
1,482 370,500 133 1,349
4,836 2,418,000 435 4,401
4,826 3,860,800 434 4,392
2,900 11,144 6,649,300 1,003 10,141
I F
mpact ee
Persons per Use Ratio Total Use % Use by Cost Per Housing Per 1,000 Rounded
Housing Unit Between by Land Land Use Allocation Unit GFA**
Residents/ Use Category
Employees Category
2.54 2.44 3,198 11.49% $735,607 $1,425.59 $1,426
2.49 2.44 14,484 52.06% $3,331,715 $1,397.53 $1,398
1.00 1,349 4.85% $310,214 $837.29 $837
1.00 4,401 15.82% $1,012,279 $418.64 $419
1.00 4,392 15.78% $1,010,185 $261.65 $262
27,823 100.00% $6,400,000
Note: $6,400,000 is 80% of $8,000,000
EXHIBIT B
Tukwila Parks Capital Facilities List
Project List - Impact Fees 2009 to 2015 Project Cost
Duwamish Riverbend Hill Develop Phase II $ 2,000,000
Trail Connections Green River Trail to Renton $ 500,000
Black/Cedar River Trail
Tukwila Pond Development - Phase IV $ 3,000,000
City of Tukwila Pool (Extend land lease]; expand features $ 500,000
and services
TOD Pedestrian Bridge Sounder Connection $ 2,000,000
Total $8,000,000
City of Tukwila
Finance and Safety Committee
FINANCE AND SAFETY COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes
December 2,2008, - 5:00 p.m.; Conference Room #3
PRESENT
CounciImembers: Dennis Robertson, Chair; Pam Linder and Kathy Hougardy
Staff: Bruce Fletcher, Rick Still, Lisa Verner, Gail Labanara, Shawn Hunstock, Mary Miotke,
Nick Olivas, Steve Rydeen, David Haynes, Jack Pace, Rhonda Berry and Kimberly Matej
Guests: Mark Segale, Bill Arthur, Nancy Damon, Mike Hansen, Chuck Parrish and Louis Strander
and Joe Desmoine
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Robertson called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m.
The agenda was amended to reflect the new order ofbusiness as presented below.
I. PRESENTATIONS - No presentations.
II. BUSINESS AGENDA
A. Impact Fee Ordinances for Fire and Parks
This agenda item is returning to the Finance and Safety meeting for additional discussion prior to
returning to full Council. As a result of tonight's discussion, staff is requesting Committee
_~ recommendations to Council regarding impact fees.
.k Lisa Verner distributed several pages to Committee members with corrections from information that was
included in the original agenda packet (substitution for pages 52, 61 and 62). She also distributed an
additional rour pages that were not included in the original agenda packet.
Lisa reviewed a list of example impact fees that would have been paid by recent developments if impact
fees had been implemented and assessed at the time of those projects. Additionally, she distributed a
memo from Derek Speck which states his opinion, as Economic Development Administrator, that at the
impact fee levels proposed, it is unlikely that development would be lost. However, he is not aware of
any way to determine conclusively whether the impact fees would or would not cause a loss in
development. Although impact fees may appear high, they are they are a fairly low percentage of the
development costs.
After this discussion, staff began presentation of the Mayor's recommendations in regards to impact fees.
The four specific questions outlined below are the policy questions that need to be answered by full
Council. Staff requested recommendations from the Finance and Safety Committee on each issues as
outlined below.
· Determine if impact fees should or should not be implemented for fire and parks:
o Fire Impact Fees - Committee recommends implementation. UNA1~OUS APPROVAL.
FORWARD TO DECEMBER 8 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
o Park Impact Fees - Committee recommends implementation. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
FORWARD TO DECEMBER 8 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
· Identify the projects which should be included in the list that establishes capital facilities projects
resultingfrom new growth as well as the costs associated with those lists for bothfire and parks:
o Fire Capital Facilities Projects - Committee supports the list as recommend by the Mayor and
presented in the Finance and Safety Committee agenda packet page 57. UNANIMOUS
APPROVAL. FORWARD TO DECEMBER 8 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
Finance & Safety Committee Minutes
December 2, 2008 - Paqe 2
o Park Capital Facilities Projects - Committee supports the list as recommended by the Mayor
and presented in Exhibit B, page 3, of a document entitled Mayor's.Recommendation Impact
Fees 12-2-08, which was distributed at tonight's Committee meeting (information attached to
minutes). UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO DECEMBER 8 COW FOR
DISCUSSION.
· Determine the City contribution- developer impactfee split (90/10,80/20, 70/30, etc)
o Fire impact fee City contribution - developer split. Mayor's recommendation for fire impact
fees is a 90/10 split. This means that 90% of the project costs will be funded through the
collection of impact fees and the remaining 10% will be funded through City contribution.
UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO DECEMBER 8 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
*
o Park impact fee City contribution - developer split. Mayor's recommendation for the park
impact fees is a 80/20 split. This means 80% of the project costs will be funded through the
collection of impact fees, and the remaining 20% will be funded through City contribution.
UNANIlVIOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO DECEMBER 8 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
Committee members asked why Fire fees would be funded at a 90/1 0 split and Parks fees at an 80/20
split. Staff explained that many times the determination of impact fee contribution splits are very
subjective. Fire is an essential service provided by the City, and calls for service will increase as
development increases. The need for adequate basic safety and life service responses justify the higher
developer contribution. The Parks fee split is lower as City staff feels confident that available grants and
other such resources can assist L.f1 the City absorbing a larger contribution amount.
e Determine impact fees calculations/contributions based on designated land use categories (i.e.:
single family, multi-family, office, retail and industrial):
o This was new information presented to the Committee at the beginning of the meeting.
Members reviewed the information and felt that it appeared as if the Mayor's recommended
contribution splits based on land use designations were acceptable. However, since this is new
information they prefer to take more time to review the material and recommend forwarding
this item to the COW. FORWARD TO DECEMBER 8 COW FOR DISCUSSION.
Several members of the public were in attendance at the meeting. Questions were raised regarding the
park use ratios, specifically, data which stated that 70% of users are nonresidents. A comment was made
that there is no data identifying what percentage of the nonresident users are employed within the City.
Several guests also shared that they believe impact fees will drive development away from this location,
stating that development decisions are based on prices, and the assessment per square foot of retail space
is significant.
Mark Segale communicated that in the impact fee audit conducted by the State for the City of Redmond
detail audit work was conducted for fire fees, but not for park fees. He felt that City staff was purely
making an assumption regarding park fees and wauted to clarify that no audit had been conducted on
Redmond park impact fees.
In closing, the Committee reviewed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) pages that are applicable to
impact fee projects and requested several wording changes.
B. South Correctional Entity (SCORE) Interlocal Agreement (Multi-Jurisdictional Misdemeanor Jail Facility)
In relation to the South Correctional Entity facility and formation of a respective public development
authority, staff is seeking full Council approval of an ordinance authorizing a SCORE interlocal
agreement between all owner cities and formation ofthe SCORE Development Authority.
Rhonda Berry provided an update of information regarding SCORE since the item was last heard at
Committee and COW (see Finance and Safety minutes dated March 4, 2008, and COW minutes dated
March 24, 2008). She distributed copies of the Powerpoint presentation that will be shown at the COW
on December 8, 2008, in order to facilitate an informed discussion of the project.