AN ORDINANCE amending the Seattle Comprehensive Plan to incorporate changes proposed as part of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment process.

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted procedures in Resolution 30261, as amended by Resolution 30412, for amending the Comprehensive Plan, consistent with the requirements for amendment prescribed by the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A; and

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 30730 and Resolution 30662 directing that certain Comprehensive Plan amendments be considered in the 2005 Comprehensive Plan Amendment process; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Council Resolution 30412, which established procedures for amending the Comprehensive Plan, a number of proposals for Plan amendments were submitted for Council consideration, both from within the City and from the public; and

WHEREAS, the Mayor reviewed the proposed amendments and made recommendations in a report to the City Council dated March 31, 2005 as to which proposals to consider and review during 2005; and

WHEREAS, on May 2, 2005, the City Council considered these proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments and adopted Council Resolution 30766, directing that City staff further review and analyze certain proposed amendments; and

WHEREAS, these proposed amendments have been reviewed and analyzed by the Department of Planning and Development and considered by the Council; and

WHEREAS, Resolution 30238 establishes a process and criteria for amending neighborhood plans, and encourages citizens who propose an amendment to a neighborhood plan to undertake public outreach with the affected community and demonstrate community support, and the City Council encourages all proponents to do the same; and

WHEREAS, the City has provided for public participation in the development and review of these proposed amendments; and

WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed and considered the Executive's report and recommendations, public testimony made at the public hearing, and other pertinent material regarding the proposed amendments; and

WHEREAS, the Council finds that the amendments to be adopted are consistent with the Growth Management Act, and will protect and promote the health, safety, and welfare of the general public; and

WHEREAS, unusual conditions exist in the Interbay area in the vicinity of W. Dravus Street, combining: a commercially zoned area

with significant buffers including industrial zoning between single-

family-zoned areas and the commercial area, topographical conditions that limit the potential for view blockage, a community that is prepared to provide street and traffic improvements through implementation of a Local Improvement District fully funded by the neighborhood, and the potential for expanded transit service; NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The Seattle Comprehensive Plan, as last amended by Ordinance 121701, is amended as follows:

A. The Land Use Element is amended to reflect desired changes in development regulations for Commercial zones for a more consistent application of maximum size-of-use limits, and the consideration of local conditions when setting parking requirements and street-level residential standards, as shown in Attachment 1 to this ordinance.

B. The Neighborhood Planning Element is amended to amend goals and policies for Downtown, resulting from a review of potential changes to Chapter 23.49 SMC, as shown in Attachment 2 to this ordinance

C. The Neighborhood Planning Element is amended to add goals and policies for South Wallingford, as shown in Attachment 3 to this ordinance.

D. The Urban Village Element and Urban Village Figure 1 are amended to incorporate areas surrounding the Henderson Street Sound Transit station into the Rainier Beach residential Urban Village, and Neighborhood Planning Element policy RB-P4 is amended, as shown in Attachment 4 to this ordinance.

E. The Urban Village Element is amended to incorporate objective criteria from Council Resolution 29232 for evaluating urban village designations, as shown in Attachment 5 to this ordinance.

F. The Transportation Element is amended to clarify the relationship of the Transportation Strategic Plan to the Comprehensive Plan, and to describe street types and street classifications, as shown in Attachment 6 to this ordinance.

G. The Environment Element is amended to add new language regarding control of litter, graffiti, junk cars, trash and refuse as shown in Attachment 7 to this ordinance.

H. Appendix A to the Urban Village Element is amended to correct minor errors, as shown in Attachment 8 to this ordinance.

I. Appendix B to the Urban Village Element is amended to add open space goals related to employment in the Urban Centers, as shown in Attachment 9 to this ordinance.

J. The Land Use Element is amended to permit consideration of an overlay zone to permit greater height in the Interbay area, as shown in Attachment 10 to this ordinance.

Section 2. Resolution 29232 is superseded by the amended Comprehensive Plan policy UV25.

Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its approval by the Mayor, but if not approved and returned by the Mayor within ten (10) days after presentation, it shall take effect as provided by Municipal Code Section 1.04.020.

Passed by the City Council the ____ day of _________, 2005, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its passage this _____ day of __________, 2005. _________________________________

President __________of the City Council

Approved by me this ____ day of _________, 2005. _________________________________ Gregory J. Nickels, Mayor

Filed by me this ____ day of _________, 2005. ____________________________________ City Clerk

Attachments:

Attachment 1: Land Use Element Amendments

Attachment 2: Neighborhood Planning Element Amendments, Downtown

Attachment 3: Neighborhood Planning Element Amendments, South Wallingford

Attachment 4: Urban Village Element and Neighborhood Planning Element Amendments for Rainier Beach

Attachment 5: Urban Village Element Amendments incorporating objective criteria for urban village designations

Attachment 6: Transportation Element Amendments

Attachment 7: Environment Element Amendments

Attachment 8: Corrections to Urban Village Appendix A

Attachment 9: Amendments to Urban Village Appendix B

Attachment 10: Amendment to Land Use Element policy LU6

9/30/05 version #4 t

Attachment 1

Policy LU109

Consider limits on the size of specific uses in commercial areas when those limits would:

* Help ensure that the scale of uses is compatible with the character and function of the commercial area;

* Encourage uses likely to draw significant traffic to an area to locate where traffic impacts can best be handled;

* Promote compatible land use and transportation patterns; and

* Foster healthy commercial development.

Allow the limited expansion of existing businesses beyond established size limits in order to support the existing character and functions of the city's businesses and business districts.

Policy LU50

In urban centers and urban villages, consider removing minimum parking requirements and setting parking maximums in recognition of the increased pedestrian, bicycle and transit accessibility these areas already provide or have planned. Parking requirements for urban centers and villages should account for local conditions and planning objectives.

Policy LU115

Conserve commercially zoned land for commercial uses by limiting street-level residential uses in areas intended to function as concentrated commercial areas or nodes. Consider allowing streetlevel residential uses outside of those areas in order to reinforce the commercial nodes and accommodate fluctuating market conditions. When street-level residential uses are permitted, seek to provide privacy for ground floor tenants and visual interest along the street-front. Street level residential requirements should account for local conditions and planning objectives.

t

Attachment 2

DT-G10 Seek to significantly expand housing opportunities in downtown Seattle for people of all income levels with the objectives of:

1. accommodating approximately 26,000 households growth by the year 2014;

2. at a minimum, maintaining the existing number of occupied low income units; and

3. developing a significant supply of affordable housing opportunities in balance with the market resulting from the growth in downtown employment. Allow housing in all areas of the Downtown Urban Center except over water and in industrial areas, where residential use conflicts with the primary function of these areas. Target public resources and private development incentives, such as density regulations and development standards that encourage housing, to promote the amount and type of housing development necessary to achieve downtown neighborhood housing goals. Address, in part, the impact of high-density commercial development on the downtown housing supply by allowing increased development density through voluntary

agreements to produce and/or preserve housing through cash contributions, floor area bonuses or the transfer of development rights.

DT-LUP10 Allow voluntary agreements to earn floor area increases above the base FAR density in certain downtown zones. Consider allowing such options as:

1. providing low-income housing and child care facilities in appropriate proportions to qualify for added floor area,

2. providing child care facilities

23. making payments to the City to fund such facilities,

34. providing certain amenity features, combined with the use of options 1 and 2 or with the use of TDRs, or both.

* Consider allowing bonus floor area for certain amenity features, such as open space, on or near the development site that directly benefit both the public and the project by serving the increased employ density allowed.

Some facilities and amenity features that may be eligible for bonuses are identified under the following Policies:

1. Policy HO 3: Housing Bonus Program

2. Policy OS 5: Open Space Bonus Amenity Features

3. Policy HS 1: Child Care Bonus

* If bonus cash contributions are provided, they should be used to address impacts associated with increased density downtown, such as impacts on housing resources and child care.

Amount of Benefits for Floor Area Increases. The nature and quantity of housing and child care facilities or contributions for such facilities under voluntary agreements, in relation to the additional floor area allowed, should generally reflect a portion of what is necessary to mitigate the impacts of increased development and the cost to provide these facilities. Facilities provided for bonuses are not expected to fully mitigate such impacts.

Additional types of facilities or amenity features may be added to address future needs, and existing types of facilities or features may be no longer be eligible for bonuses, based on changing assessments of impacts, needs, capacity, and public priorities.

Special Criteria. Because of their complexity and the need to adapt them to special circumstances, subject certain bonus features to special criteria and review by the Director of DPD. Include among bonus features subject to special criteria urban plazas, transit station access, and public atriums.

DT-HP3 Address the demand for housing generated by downtown employment growth that is not being met by the private market, and help offset the pressure of downtown growth on existing affordable housing resources, through provisions to encourage the development of affordable housing, especially for households with incomes between 0% and 80% of the median income for the region. To this end, within downtown office, retail, mixed use commercial, and mixed use residential areas with established base and maximum commercial density limits, generally allow bonus floor area conditioned upon a voluntary agreement for the provision of lower income housing or a payment to a fund for that purpose. To further downtown housing goals, limit housing developed through the bonus program to areas permitting housing within the boundaries of the Downtown Urban Center, except that additional areas may be included if such an expansion of the program would be consistent with the goals of both the Downtown Urban Center Plan and the adopted policies of other relevant neighborhood plans. Housing bonus credit Density bonuses shall not be granted for any housing developed within the Pike Market Mixed zone, where other mechanisms are available to achieve the housing objectives of this land use district.

Require that housing provided for density bonuses credit to serve a range of lower-income households, particularly those with incomes levels up to below 80% of median income, based on a percentage of the estimated additional needs resulting from new commercial or residential development. Take into account, in determining the amount of housing to be provided, the value of the increased development potential in relation to the cost to the developer, and the extent to which use of bonus floor area is desirable in light of the City's planning goals. Review bonus provisions for housing periodically to consider changes in impacts on housing need, land prices, housing production costs, progress towards planning goals, and other factors.

DT-TP1 Recognize the critical role that high capacity transit corridors play, including the transit tunnel, in supporting the distribution of development density and the movement of goods and people within and through downtown. Seek to improve the system, through actions by the City, with Sound Transit and the King County Metro Department of Transportation Transit Division, and other transit agencies that:

1. provide capacity to meet forecast transit growth through the year 2014;

2. reduce travel time by transit;

3. reduce transit rider crowding on sidewalks;

4. reduce diesel bus noise and odor; and

5. provide an attractive and pleasant street environment for the pedestrian and transit rider.

DT-TP13 Maintain minimum and maximum parking requirements to mitigate the transportation impacts of new non-residential development whilerestricting the supply of available longterm parking and to encourage use of alternatives to commuting by auto. Favor short-term parking to meet shopper and visitor needs over long-term parking. Exempt residential use from parking requirements within downtown where residents can walk or have convenient transit access to work and services, in order to promote affordable housing and reduce auto dependency.

t

Attachment 3

South Wallingford Neighborhood Plan Goals and Policies,

W-P4 Use Wallingford Neighborhood Design Guidelines for reviewing commercial and multi-family development to encourage design that is consistent with the neighborhood's character, while maintaining and promoting a vital business community. Encourage neighborhood efforts to formulate neighborhood-specific design guidelines for commercial and multifamily development.

W-G7 A neighborhood south of N/NE 40th St. that reflects the residents' desire for a pedestrian-friendly neighborhood, with strong connections to the Wallingford Urban Village and to public spaces along the shoreline, while maintaining the viability of the existing marine-industrial and commercial activities.

W-P30 Maintain the shoreline's marine industrial zoning in order to preserve the water-dependent use and the working waterfront character of the Wallingford shoreline.

W-P31 Provide opportunities for small, pedestrian-oriented businesses in South Wallingford while preserving the economic vitality of existing businesses and opportunities for their reasonable redevelopment.

W-P32 Pursue opportunities to provide public access between the residential community and the shoreline area.

W-P33 Strive to preserve existing views of Lake Union and Downtown Seattle from viewpoints and parks.

W-P34 Control impacts of regional traffic on South Wallingford's residential, commercial and recreational areas.

W-P35 Work to enhance bicycle and pedestrian access between the upland portion of the neighborhood and the Burke-Gilman Trail and shoreline. t

Attachment 4 Urban Village Element Amendments for Rainier Beach

RB-P4 Seek to preserve all single family zoned areas' character. , and e Encourage residential small lot opportunities within single-family areas within the designated residential urban village, and in the area within the residential urban village west of Martin Luther King Boulevard S., permit consideration of rezones of single-family zoned land to the Lowrise Duplex Triplex (LDT), Lowrise 1 (L1), or Lowrise 2 (L2) designations. t

Attachment 5

Urban Villages

UV25 Designate as hub urban villages areas that are generally consistent with the following criteria:

1. Zoning that allows a mix of uses to accommodate concentrations of employment and housing. It may be appropriate to limit the mix of uses in some areas to provide for concentrations of either employment or housing.

2. Sufficient zoned capacity to accommodate a minimum of 25 jobs/acre and to accommodate a total of at least 2,500 jobs within 1/4 mile of the village center, and to accommodate at least 3,500 dwellings units within 1/2 mile of the village center.

3. The area presently supports, or can accommodate under current zoning, a concentration of residential development at 15 or more units/acre and a total of at least 1,800 housing units within 1/4 mile of the village center.

4. Surroundings comprised primarily of residential areas that allow a mix of densities, and non-residential activities that support residential use.

5. Within 1/2 mile of the village center A a minimum of one-third (at least 20 acres)of the land area is currently zoned to accommodate mixed-use and/ or employment commercialactivity.

6. A broad range of housing types and commercial and retail support services either existing or allowed under current zoning to serve a local, citywide, or regional market.

7. A strategic location in relation to both the local and regional transportation network, including:

a. A high level of tTransit service with a frequency of 15 minutes or less during peak hours, and 30-minute transit headways in the off-peak hours , with direct access to at least one urban center, with the possibility of improved connections to future high capacity transit stations

b. Located on the principal arterial network, with c C onnections to regional transportation facilities

c. Routes accommodating goods movement

d. Convenient and direct,Cconnections to adjacent areas by for pedestrians and/or bicyclistse facilities

8. Open space amenities, including:

a. Direct access to either existing or potential public open spaces in the immediate vicinity

b. Accessibility to major open space resources in the general area via either existing or potential urban trails, boulevards, or other open space links, or anticipated major public investment in open space.

9. Opportunities for redevelopment because of a substantial amount of vacant or under-used land within the village.

UV29 Designate as residential urban villages areas that are generally consistent with the following criteria:

1. The area presently supports, or can accommodate under current zoning, a concentration and mix of residential development, at a density of at least 8 units per gross acre on average, with a capacity to accommodate a total of at least 1,000 housing units within 2000 feet of the village center, at a in small to moderate scale structures.

2. The area includes one or more centers of activity providing that provide or could provide commercial and retail support services to the surrounding area, including at least 10 acres of commercial zoning within a radius of 2000 feet.

3. The area is generally surrounded by single-family and/or lowerdensity multifamily areas.

4. The area is presently on the city's arterial network and is served by a transit route providing direct transit service to at least one urban center or hub village, with a peak-hour transit frequency of 15 minutes or less and 30-minute transit headways in the off-peak.

4. A broad range of retail services to serve the residential population either already exists or can be accommodated in the area at a central location generally accessible on foot.

5. The area has the opportunity to be connected by bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities to adjacent areas and nearby public amenities.

6. The area presently includes, or is adjacent to, open space available for public use, or opportunities exist to provide pubic open space in the future. t

Attachment 6

Transportation Element

A. Building Urban Villages: Land Use and Transportation

Discussion: The development pattern described in the Urban Village Element of this Plan will shape the city's transportation facilities. In particular, transportation facility design will reflect the intended pedestrian nature of the urban centers and villages and the desire to connect these places with transit service. Because Seattle is a fully built city with a mature street system, the City uses a full range of non-single occupant vehicle transportation facilities to support the desired redevelopment pattern within Urban Villages. These facilities can help create the mixed-use, walkable, transit and bike-friendly centers that this Plan envisions. However, the City recognizes that auto and service access to property will remain important for accommodating growth in centers and villages.

Outside of urban centers and villages, the City will also look for appropriate transportation designs that align transportation facilities and services with adjacent land uses.

This Element contains references to the Transportation Strategic Plan (TSP), which is the functional plan developed to implement these policies.

The TSP:

* Establishes the Seattle Department of Transportation's (SDOT) nearand long-term work program.

* Defines the strategies, projects and programs to accomplish Comprehensive Plan goals and policies for transportation.

* Provides a central resource for planning tools and transportationrelated data to use in developing future projects and programs.

* Outlines SDOT's financial plan, and describes the projects, programs and services that will be implemented through SDOT's budget over the next 20 years.

* Defines the process for determining funding priorities and leveraging project investments to meet multiple goals for SDOT and the community.

* Defines SDOT's performance goals.

The Comprehensive Plan will guide updates to the TSP.

B. Make the Best Use of the Streets We Have to Move People and Goods

Discussion: The City has a limited amount of street space, and is unlikely to expand this space significantly. To make the best use of existing rights-of-way for moving people and goods, the City must allocate street space carefully among competing uses to further the City's growth management and transportation goals.

As guided below by this Plan, the Transportation Strategic Plan (TSP) will include detailed maps and descriptions of Seattle's street classifications. Street classifications define how a street should function to support movement of people, goods and services versus access to property. Street classifications provide the basis for determining how individual streets should be used and operated. The TSP also designates street types to further define streets by relating them to the adjacent land uses and their function for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit and freight. Street types enhance the citywide street classifications with more site-specific design guidance that balances the functional classification, adjacent land uses, and competing travel needs. t

Attachment 7

Environment Element, Policy E7

E7 Control the impacts of noise, odor, and light, litter, graffiti, junk cars, trash, and refuse in order to protect human health and the livability of the urban environment. t

Attachment 8 URBAN VILLAGE APPENDICES

Urban Village Appendix A:

GROWTH TARGETS FOR URBAN CENTERS, CENTER VILLAGES, MANUFACTURING/ INDUSTRIAL CENTERS, HUB URBAN VILLAGES, AND RESIDENTIAL URBAN VILLAGES

Attachment 8 Urban Village Appendix A URBAN VILLAGE APPENDICES Urban Village Appendix A: GROWTH TARGETS FOR URBAN CENTERS, CENTER VILLAGES, MANUFACTURING/ INDUSTRIAL CENTERS, HUB URBAN VILLAGES, AND RESIDENTIAL URBAN VILLAGES

Center or Village Land Area Households (HH) Employment (Jobs) in Acres

Existing Existing Growth 2024 Existing Existing Growth 2024 Density (2004) Density Target Density (2002) Density Target (Est.) (HH/ (HH (Est.) (Jobs/ (Job Acre) Growth) Acre) Growth)

Urban Centers & Center Villages

Downtown Urban Center 952 15,700 16 10,000 27 156,960 165 29,015 195 Total 28

Belltown 220 8,640 39 4,700 61 19,760 90 4,000 108 63 Chinatown/ International 171 1,910 11 1,000 17 5,080 30 2,000 41 District 18

Commercial Core 276 3,070 11 300 12 103,790 376 10,000 412 13

Denny Triangle 143 1,290 9 3,000 30 18,020 126 9,515 193 189

Pioneer Square1 142 790 6 1,000 13 10,310 73 3,500 97

First Hill/Capitol Hill 916 22,520 25 3,500 28 37,940 41 4,600 46 Center Total 30 47

12th Avenue 160 1,450 9 700 13 4,040 25 700 30 14 Capitol Hill 397 12,250 31 1,000 33 7,300 18 900 21 35

First Hill 228 6,020 26 1,200 32 22,020 97 2,000 105 33

Pike/Pine 131 2,800 21 600 26 4,580 35 1,000 43 27

Northgate Urban Center 411 3,490 8 2,500 15 11,030 27 4,220 37 Total 38

South Lake Union Urban 340 1,210 4 8,000 27 19,690 58 16,000 105 Center Total 33 135

University Community 758 6,850 9 2,450 12 32,360 43 6,140 51 Urban Center Total2 11 53

Ravenna 123 1,400 11 450 15 1,960 16 500 20 14 21

University District 287 5,230 18 2,000 25 6,170 21 2,640 31 Northwest 23 37

Uptown Queen Anne Urban 297 4,580 15 1,000 19 15,570 52 1,150 56 Center Total 20

Manufacturing/Industrial Centers

Ballard 941 N/A N/A N/A N/A 15,320 16 2,150 19 Interbay-Northend 18 (BINMIC)

Duwamish 4,961 N/A N/A N/A N/A 64,500 13 9,750 15 14

Hub Urban Villages

Ballard 425 5,010 12 1,000 14 4,780 11 750 13 15

Bitter Lake Village 359 2,010 6 800 8 4,010 11 750 13

Fremont 215 2,170 10 500 12 6,430 30 800 34 13

Lake City 142 1,920 13 900 20 1,510 11 650 15 21

North Rainier 453 1,590 4 900 5 4,670 10 750 12 6

W. Seattle Junction 226 2,280 10 700 13 2,670 12 750 15 14

Residential Urban Villages

23rd Ave @ S 515 3,730 7 650 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A Jackson-Union

Admiral District 98 1,000 10 200 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A 13

Aurora-Licton 327 2,740 8 500 10 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Columbia City 313 1,750 6 800 8 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Crown Hill 173 1,110 6 250 8 N/A N/A N/A N/A 14

Eastlake 200 2,760 14 250 15 N/A N/A N/A N/A 16

Green Lake 109 1,520 14 250 16 N/A N/A N/A N/A 16 17

Greenwood/Phinney Ridge 94 1,500 16 400 20 N/A N/A N/A N/A 13 21

Madison-Miller 145 1,930 13 500 17 N/A N/A N/A N/A 16

MLK @ Holly Street 375 2,080 6 590 7 N/A N/A N/A N/A 10

Morgan Junction 114 1,090 10 200 11 N/A N/A N/A N/A 9 12

North Beacon Hill 131 1,170 9 490 13 N/A N/A N/A N/A 6 12

Rainier Beach 250 1,370 5 600 8 N/A N/A N/A N/A 26

Roosevelt 158 1,260 8 250 10 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 9

South Park 263 1,030 4 250 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A 7

Upper Queen Anne 53 1,446 27 200 31 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4

Wallingford 257 2,520 10 400 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Westwood-Highland Park 276 2,015 7 400 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Seattle Total 53,535 268,000 5 47,000 6 480,000 9 84,000 11

1 The Pioneer Square growth targets assume that the north football stadium parking lot and vacant floor area in existing structures are available to accommodate a substantial share of household and employment growth.

2 The University of Washington campus is part of the University Community Urban Center, but is not a distinct urban village. These numbers includes jobs and housing on the University of Washington campus not reflected in Ravenna and the University District Northwest figures. t

Attachment 9 Urban Village Appendix B: CITYWIDE OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILTY GOALS

City Open Space Goal Area

Breathing Room 1 Acre per 100 residents Citywide Open Space

Usable Open Space 1/4 to 1/2 acre within 1/4 to 1/2 mile of every Areas outside Urban resident Villages

Recreation Specific Goals for Recreation Citywide, except as Facilities Facilities such as Community Centers, modified by Village Open swimming pools and athletic fields are Space and Recreation

contained in the Parks Comprehensive Goals Plan

URBAN VILLAGE OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITY GOALS

Goal Urban Center Villages Hub Urban Residential Urban Villages Villages

Urban One acre of Village Open One acre of Same as for Hub Urban Village Space per 1,000 households Village Open Villages. Open . For the Downtown Space per Space Commercial Core 1,000 Population andone acre of Village Open households. -based Space per 10,000 jobsin Goals each urban center, or in the four contiguous urban centers that comprise the center city, considered as a whole.

Urban All locations in the village Same as for For moderate and high Village within approximately 1/8 mile Urban Center density areas: All locations Open of Village Open Space. Villages. within 1/8 mile of a Village Space Open Space that is between Distribution 1/4and 1-acre in size, or Goals within 1/4 mile of a Village Open Space that is greater than 1 acre. For low density areas: all locations within 1/4 mile of any qualifying Village Open Space.

Qualifying Dedicated open spaces of at Same as for Same as for Urban Center and Criteria least 10,000 square feet in Urban Center Hub Villages. for size, publicly accessible, Villages. Village and usable for recreation and Open social activities. Space

Village At least one usable open At least one At least one usable open Commons, space of at least one acre in usable open space, of at least one acre Recreation size (Village Commons) where space of at in size (Village Commons), Facility the existing and target least one acre where overall residential and households total 2,500 or in size density is ten households Community more. (Amended 11/96). One (Village per gross acre or more. One Garden indoor, multiple-use Commons). One facility for indoor public Goals recreation facility serving facility for assembly in Villages with each Urban Center. One indoor public greater than 2,000 dedicated community garden assembly. households. Same as for for each 2,500 households in Same as for Urban Center and Hub the Village with at least one Urban Center Villages. dedicated garden site. Villages.

t

Attachment 10

Amendment to Land Use Element policy LU6

LU 6 Limit zoning with height limits that are significantly higher than those found in single-family areas to urban centers, urban villages, and manufacturing/industrial centers and to those areas outside of urban villages where higher height limits would be consistent with an adopted neighborhood plan, a major institution's adopted master plan, or with the existing built character of the area. However, the City Council may permit greater heights on commercially-zoned sites in the Interbay area along and near W. Dravus Street between 15th Avenue W. and 20th Avenue W., through overlay zoning, zoning map amendment, or other implementing measures. t

Director's Report On the Mayor's Recommended Comprehensive Plan Amendments, 2005

Department of Planning and Development

Diane Sugimura, Director

August 1, 2005

Dear Reader:

This report accompanies an ordinance the Mayor has sent to the City Council as the annual amendments for Seattle's Comprehensive Plan process.

The suggestions for amendments came from a variety of sources, including interested citizens, public agencies, City departments and the City Council. Starting from these suggestions, Council adopted Resolution 30766 in May to narrow the list of amendments for further analysis this year. This report describes the results of that analysis and the Mayor's recommendations regarding the amendments.

The City Council's Urban Development and Planning committee has scheduled a public hearing on the ordinance for 5:30 p.m. on September 7, 2005, in Council Chambers, second floor of City Hall, 601 5th Avenue.

You may send comments on the ordinance to:

Councilmember Peter Steinbrueck

City Hall

601 5th Avenue, Floor 2

PO Box 34025

Seattle, WA 98124-4025

You may also email DPD staff at compplan@seattle.gov.

Sincerely,

Diane M. Sugimura,

Director

Director's Report

On the

Mayor's Recommended

Comprehensive Plan Amendments, 2005

Table of Contents

Introduction

Seattle's Comprehensive Plan...2

Summary of Recommended Amendments...2

Next Steps...3

1. Recommended Amendments

Commercial Code-Related Policy Revisions

Downtown Land Use Code Amendments...........................................6

South Wallingford Neighborhood Plan..............................................10

Rainier Beach Urban Village

Boundary............................................11

Urban Village Criteria

Transportation Element Amendments..............................................16

Trash and Litter in the Environmental Element. 18

Urban Village Appendix.......................................................

2. Other Amendments Considered in 2005

North Bay Overlay..............................................................

Dravus Street Area of Interbay as a Hub Urban Village.

3. Potential Amendments Deferred

Central Waterfront Plan Amendments to Shoreline Policies..................38

Northgate Urban Center Boundary and Regulatory Changes