HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Land Use and Planning Board - 11/23/2009 (4) ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1
Ben Wolters, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager
KEN T Phone: 253-856-5454
W A S H ING TO N
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent, WA 98032-5895
AGENDA
LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD
HEARING & WORKSHOP
NOVEMBER 23, 2009
7:00 P.M.
LUPB MEMBERS: CITY STAFF
Dana Ralph, Chair Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager
Jack Ottini, Vice Chair Gloria Gould-Wessen, AICP, Planner
Steve Dowell William D Osborne, AICP, Planner
Alan Gray Kim Adams Pratt, Assistant City Attorney
Jon Johnson Pamela Mottram, Administrative Secretary
Aleanna Kondelis-Haplin
Barbara Phillips
This is to notify you that the Land Use and Planning Board will hold a Public Hearing
followed by a Workshop on MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2009 in Kent City Hall, City Council
Chambers East and West, 220 4t" Avenue South, Kent at 7:00 P.M. The public is welcome to
attend the public hearing and all interested persons may have an opportunity to speak. Any
person wishing to submit oral or written comments on the proposed amendment may do so
prior to or at the meeting.
The agenda will include the following item(s):
1. Call to order
2. Roll call
3. Approval of the August 10, 2009 Minutes
4. Added Items to Agenda
5. Communications
6. Notice of Upcoming Meetings
7. PUBLIC HEARING:
1. CPA-2007-4 MIDWAY SUBAREA PLAN (Gloria Gould-Wessen)
Consideration of the Midway Subarea Plan, a planning document developed in
anticipation of future high-capacity transit improvements within the Pacific
Highway South transportation corridor.
WORKSHOP:
1. AZ-2009-1 PANTHER LAKE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE&ZONING
(William Osborne)
Discussion of the annexation zoning process, initial analysis of existing
conditions, and updates to Kent's Comprehensive Plan.
Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City in advance for more
information. For TDD relay service for Braille, call 1-800-833-6385, for TDD relay service for the hearing
impaired, call 1-800-833-6388 or call the City of Kent Planning Services directly at(253) 856-5499 (TDD).
For further information or copies of the staff report or text of the proposed amendment contact the
Planning Services office at(253) 856-5454.
You may access the City's website for documents pertaining to the Land Use and Planning Board at:
htt,o://www.ci.kent.wa.usll.)Ianninc7llanduseolanninc7board.
P:\Planning\LU PB\2009\AGENDAS\112309_LU PBH rgWkshp_Agda.doc
2
This page intentionally left blank.
3
LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
August 10, 2009
Board Members Present: Chair Dana Ralph, Vice Chair Jack Ottini, Steve Dowell,
Alan Gray, Jon Johnson, Aleanna Kondelis, Barbara Phillips
Staff Members Present: Charlene Anderson, Erin George, Kim Adams Pratt, Jeff Watling
Molly Bartlemay
3. Approval of Minutes
Ottini MOVED and Gray SECONDED a motion to APPROVE the July 27, 2009 Minutes.
Motion PASSED 7-0.
4. Added Items. None
S. Communications. None
6. Notice of Upcoming Meetings: None
7. CPA-2007-1 Shoreline Master Program Update
Planner Erin George stated that staff presented the proposed Shoreline Master Program
Update (SMP) in detail at the July 27, 2009, Land Use and Planning Board Hearing. George
stated that based on concerns from that hearing, the public access portion has been re-
evaluated. George stated that according to WAC 173.26.221.4(d)(iii)(A), existing parks and
trails can be used to meet the public access requirement. George presented three options
to address the public access requirement and stated that staff recommended option C,
which is to revise the public access section, making public access a requirement only if the
project is a public project or on public property, or if it interferes with existing public access.
George further stated that providing private community access would be required for
subdivisions of more than four (4) lots or a multi-family development.
Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services Jeff Watling stated he met with staff
after the last hearing and it was determined that all of the City's shorelines have more than
adequate public access. Watling noted the various amenities at Lake Meridian Park.
Kondelis raised questions regarding public access on Panther Lake. Watling stated that they
have started to speak with property owners and have applied for State and County grants to
purchase property to provide additional public access on Panther Lake. Watling added the
annexation vote result in November will decide if this is explored further. George presented
an aerial photo of Panther Lake showing current access points and possible new access
points through City purchase. George stated that Panther Lake will have sufficient public
access if annexed into the City.
George presented other staff recommended changes to the SMP. These changes include
adding a footnote regarding building height to the Development Standards Table in Chapter
5, changing incorrect references as listed in the staff response to Soos Creek Water and
Sewer District under response numbers one (1) and eight (8) from the previous hearing,
clarifying the term "accessory utilities" in Chapter 6, adding an allowance for a maximum of
eight (8) new swim platforms on Lake Meridian, and revising Table 6 in Chapter 5 to require
a conditional use permit for in-stream structures.
George stated that fourteen (14) new comments were received from an online survey,
which was created earlier in the drafting process of the SMP. Some concerns expressed in
these comments included wetlands protection, flood control, access to the Green River, and
commercial in parks. George explained how these concerns are addressed in the SMP.
George stated that if the Board recommends adoption, the intent would be to take the SMP
to the Planning and Economic Development Committee on August 24t" and then to Council
in September for adoption. Upon adoption, staff will submit a final locally adopted SMP to
4
the State Department of Ecology, who typically holds their own hearing with a 30-day
comment period. George stated that she anticipates the SMP will be effective Fall of 2009.
Gray pointed out numbering inconsistencies in the staff-recommended "Option C" regarding
public access section. George stated these numbers would be fixed and incorrect references
would be deleted.
Chair Ralph declared the Public Hearing open.
Bill Dinsdale, 13700 SE 166t" Street stated that he purchased two parcels on Lake Meridian
in the 1970's. Dinsdale stated that the geometry of the setback requirements would make
his setback 120 feet, which would block his view of Mount Rainier. Dinsdale provided a
picture showing his parcel and stated that his understanding was that if you drew a line
from the front of the neighboring houses, you could not construct beyond that line and that
properties should have access to the same sight line. Dowell clarified that he would be able
to construct a house closer to the lake than the house to the north. George provided an
aerial photograph showing a potential building site on the Dinsdale property. Ralph asked
for clarification regarding the averaging setback component of the new SMP. George stated
that the averaging component has not changed from the previous SMP, and explained that
the Shoreline Management Act requires protection of public views of the water, as opposed
to mountain views. Ottini asked about the option for a variance. George stated that there
is a Shoreline Variance process that Dinsdale could pursue.
Johnson MOVED and Dowell SECONDED a Motion to close the Public Hearing. Motion
Carried 7-0.
Johnson MOVED to recommend adoption of the Shoreline Master Program Update and
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Number 2007-1, as presented by staff to include the
following: 1) Option C-related to public access and all other necessary wording changes to
make the SMP consistent with the revised public access section; 2) An allowance for eight
(8) new swim platforms on Lake Meridian only; and 3) Revising Table 6 in Chapter 5 to
require a conditional use permit for in-stream structures. Johnson's motion also moved to
add a footnote regarding building height, correct references in the staff response to Soos
Creek Water and Sewer District, clarify the term accessory utilities and delete the reference
to regulation 2 and 3 on page 9. Kondelis SECONDED. Motion carried 7-0.
ADJOURNMENT
Dowell MOVED and OTTINI Seconded a Motion to adjourn. Motion CARRIED. Ralph
adjourned the meeting at 6:45 p.m.
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager
Secretary of the Board
P:\Planning\LUPB\2009\MINUTES\081009-LUPB-Minutes.doc
5
ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ben Wolters, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
4^4�� Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager
K EN T Phone: 253-856-5454
WASHINGTON
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent, WA 98032-5895
November 16, 2009
To: Dana Ralph, Chair and Land Use and Planning Board Members
From: Gloria Gould-Wessen, AICP, GIS Coordinator/Long Range Planner
Subject: Midway Subarea Plan (CPA-2007-4) (KIVA - 2074570)
For Public Hearing - November 23, 2009
SUMMARY:
The Midway Subarea Plan (the Plan) is the result of a collaborative planning effort
along the Pacific Highway South transportation corridor. The effort is called
Envision Midway and began early in 2008 with the Cities of Kent and Des Moines
working together in anticipation of the future extension of Sound Transit light rail
service into Midway. Planning Services presented a summary of the project to the
Land Use & Planning Board (LUPB) in November, 2008 and presented the draft Plan
to the LUPB in workshops on September 14t" and September 28t" of this year. As
noted through underlines (i.e., additions) and strike-throughs (i.e., deletions), the
attached Plan is a result of additional comments from the LUPB, a second
Developers Forum, transportation agencies and housing professionals. The Plan will
guide implementation measures such as a Midway Planned Action Ordinance,
Midway Design Guidelines, land use plan and zoning map designations, and other
development regulations.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Kent was awarded a Competitive Growth Management Act Planning
Grant by the State of Washington Department of Community Trade and Economic
Development (CTED) (now named Department of Commerce) for cooperative land
use planning with the City of Des Moines along the Pacific Highway South
transportation corridor. Once an interlocal agreement was signed, the two cities
shared in defining the study area, design of the public outreach, and production of
grant deliverables. Envision Midway is guided by a Mission Statement and Goals
developed through a Joint Advisory Committee comprised of Council Members from
the Kent Planning & Economic Development Committee and the Des Moines
Financial & Economic Development Committee. The public outreach is the
backbone for the Plan vision and guides its goals and policies.
6
ENVISION MIDWAY OUTCOMES:
Envision Midway public outreach was designed to assist the Cities of Kent and Des
Moines in developing subarea or neighborhood plans and implementation strategies
in preparation for the future extension of light rail into the area. Property and
business owners and tenants within the Midway Study Area and the surrounding
neighborhoods were invited to participate. The goal of the outreach was to
measure the community's concerns and identify the possibilities for the built
environment that are based on existing physical and social conditions. Participants
were also asked to look into the future and consider what Midway could be with
light rail serving the community. As noted in the Plan, numerous meetings were
held as part of Envision Midway. Presentations, handouts, and outcomes from all
public outreach are available at the project's website.1
The visioning efforts were iterative, building on each group's efforts and feedback.
The attached graphics illustrate conceptually the outcomes from Envision Midway:
A. Scenario 3.0 - Broad land uses that reflect Transit Oriented Village nodes
around proposed light rail stations separated by an existing Highway
Commercial Corridor.
B. Rail Station Location Options - Three (3) options considered by stakeholders
and public. SR-99 reflects Sound Transit's option considered for budgeting
purposes; the other options were generated from public discussion. Note the
pro & con statements and elevation drawings of the light rail.
C. Light Rail Station SR-99 East - This option reflects input from final workshops
that reviewed the above three (3) rail station location options and depicts the
Planned Action Ordinance (PAO) boundaries. This option depicts more open
space, reduced public roads, and an increase in private roads and pedestrian
connections from the other options.
PLAN OVERVIEW:
The Plan has its foundation in the extensive public outreach conducted during
Envision Midway. A subarea plan is similar to a comprehensive plan, but focuses on
a subsection of the jurisdiction. The Plan contains the following chapters and
associated sections: Introduction, Existing Conditions, The Vision, and Framework
for Midway. The Framework chapter contains the following Goals & Policies: Land
Use, Urban Design, Housing, Transportation, Park & Open Space, Implementation,
and Inter-jurisdictional Coordination.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends preliminary approval of the Midway Subarea Plan as revised. A
final public hearing will be scheduled once other planning and implementation
pieces have been considered. If there are any questions prior to the public hearing,
please contact Gloria Gould-Wessen at 253.856.5441.
GGW/pm S:\Permi0P1an=MP PLAN AMENDMENTSW07\CPA-2007-4—MIDWAY\LUPB�SubareaPlan\112309—StaffRptca.docx
Enc: Att.A: Land Use Scenario 3.0; Att. B: Rail Station Location Options; Att. C: Light Rail Station Area Concept: SR-99 East
Midway Subarea Plan
cc: Ben Wolters E&CD Director
Fred Satterstrom,AICP, Planning Director
Charlene Anderson,AICP, Planning Manager
Kim Adams-Pratt,Assistant City Attorney
File
' The website is www.EnvisionMidway.com
11/23/09—Land Use&Planning Board Public Hearing
Midway Subarea Plan—CPA-2007-4-Page 2
Scenario 3.0 `�-214th Street r 1
215 •.. I ,o 's 2 T 6
1 1 I N �e5
N A
Transit OrientedVilla e c '► Sz�B; l a
—
•High intensity transit supportive mixed-use with i ► a ` r--A 4• N's2
residential bias
_ . -
•Strongly pedestrian oriented with small walkable blocks , _ . x a 09 =
_ I-515R 5 Corridor rr
•35'to 200'height limit I Pacific Ridge Completion and Freight
I II5224it Improvement Project
•Lowered parking requirement I 22-f
- _ _
•uses: I •az �r ¢ ,.
•Market rate and affordable housing i s 222-P11
•Office I S.224th Street
Retail I v 224 PI s�?q
Hotel I o
I
• Neighborhood services
Civic uses
N -- 5227 PI• t w
•No single use,big box,industrial,or auto-dependent I s 229 se a Y N I a
uses I s S �•a"� t SEATAC
Kent Highlands
® Mixed Use - Pacific Ridge , ? ,I -
o
•Auto-accommodating community and citywide retail
and services
•Pedestrian oriented ��1 • `
•Mixed use with office or residential c�5s' Highlands
'•35'to 85'Commercial height limitLandfill► - ¢ { s 73•:�., Qo 000 � I
•35'to 200'Residential height limit ►
•Uses: ► �� M idwa
e Residential
oCommun ity,c itywide and regional retail ►► Highline
Office ►
► Community f a a
•Hotel ► Y �° i a
► College vD p s , 8� LING C
it ,, Mixed Use - Kent Highlands , a' a' S.240th Streec . ` NT
•Auto-accommodating community retail and ► � L / 19
r v� er t '� Lowe s ' o
services ti —N N� � W era-. I c 5 242 S[ n o
_a_y m00000
•Pedestrian oriented Q7 -ss a c 5243 Pi H
�lS p '^ N 5 243 SI n
•Mixed use with residential ase:sl
Q
•200'height limit 'j �'"—'s 244 A � � KING Q0n
KEHT li
► D ooa ❑ao 1
•Uses: o f 5245..C245
• Residential ► $ 24
► 5,246It Stre __ g r w
•Community Retail ► a f t- 6
•Hotel r g 5`rl1
■ Highway Commercial ,' S2d9 PI a Salt Alr
r o0 2". D `' w S 247 St .. Q
Corridor s 2Go,, o idway 4 Q y d
a _ — o andfi ll r ryya ^ M •==5 2so st a .h
•Wide range of community,citywide, ' 4' T j 5 2,1 st a fti U N ..
or regional commercial and light I r T N s 250 PI ry
g g ►
s
S.2S2nd Street f` i zsi st
industrial uses —52st Pi
►
•Primarilyauto-dependent uses, ►
p ► 1 f S252p a $252•P
with pedestrian supportive ► .
► ' r s2S3s m
facilities ► a .
•35'to 50'height limit g
g s 25s s, l N Legend
•Uses:
1 f
S 2113 5[
• Regional and citywide retail �" - d - Q ❑pen Space Framework
•Automobile sales and service , ' H N
2.`
•Light Industrial and Complete Streets
manufacturing I I•Trucking
f r oo� Circulation Framework
I � 5.260th Street � r + �
•Outdoor storage ° 000 Pedestrian& Bicycle Paths
•Office I 1
•Flex-tech I °a: r ,. a Proposed BRT Stations
•Mixed use(on west side)
I - °
v h � (Metro)
•Live-work , Woodmont J ?,
6 S 263 St- Q Proposed Secondary Bus
❑ Institutional ; . : • 52°Wetlands Stops(Metro)
� a- �
•Institutional mixed use I , ,s 2E6 StI
residential or office ♦ V
T = H er� Y�Sioft•Uses: . .' I f
College academic / JU
•College oriented retail I Poo, + - s 2s6 st- k.
•Colle 8 a oriented office) '2G9 S'.Y.
I f
•Student and faculty -1 I Rm MIDWAY
rental housing I �
y � a collaborative planning project
ATTACHMENT A S.272 n d Street
Land Use & Planning Board Hearing
November 23, 2009
8
This page intentionally left blank.
e/7 ✓i s i O t7 9
MIDWAY
a collaborative planning project
Revised Midway Light Rail Station Area Concept: SR 99
Pros:
0 Removes conflict with autos
• Removes conflict with commerce
Noe(min.29 bt k) , • Provides fast service
'�� � , Lne{min.25'semwie]
+ � • Fits into existing high capacity transportation corridor
La Plaza
Shopping-
5: Center Convenient E/W METRO link
Provides E/W pedestrian link across SR-99
Single Family
Linear Open Spate (overpass or at-grade)
01 S.234rhStreet -- • Supports major employment center (HCC)
r•s 51 _ [® Metro Park
$ , &Ride • Enhances HCC campus
" ■ �■ High development potential in 1/4 mile radius
15cruccured Parking �y
■ [SDOspaces] Allows business at station's ground level
�� t - ` -f �■ Station • Pedestrian overpass eases traffic conflicts
• No right-of-way (ROW) purchase for 30th Ave
.-'`! '� a ;'t•- ''•' .. 1 pedestrian Spine
, • Preserves intimate feel of 30th Ave `Great Street'
Retail Frontage
I I (crosshatch) Cons:
Need to acquire ROW
[ Highline � " 1
`� y. b�ten e.d R ityl • Narrow lots made smaller b ROW purchase
{ Community - .,..,.,. . Y
College ■ Need to reconfigure access to properties
• Impact to pedestrian environment
4 � �• Long pedestrian crossing at-grade of SR-99 intersection
o- Fast rail speed disconnects riders from
III ' �IYrri^,
passing community
4 Street •i►tf. ..
l JTT _VT
Multi-Family �+ - �vnti � I I
Parkside ` V
Park
Higkr� Transmission l
Line rl 5'sel6ockj F
Single Family ' Pacific Hlghway .mw.r4
" Sfn;le niQY
S.24fich Street - -
s
Midway Light Rail Station Area Concept:30th Avenue South Midway Light Rail Station Area Concept: )-5
& Pros: lz Pros:
_ New'Great Street' 5 f •Removes conflict with autos
with urban feel •Provides fast service
•New alternative N/S •Convenient METRO link from 1-5
corridor for all - - •Convenient HOV link from I-5
�+aa modes of travel } •Creates sound barrier
•New link for Des Moines& neighborhood at west
Kent over SR-51 S c.,u.
• .:'•r _�� �.• •Slow rail speed Cons:
connects riders withsp- .-. Exceeds 1/4 mile radius to major
passing community _ x13�d, __ -+ F .3 employment center(HCC)
i33Nn v. _ [+ .r°v r+,Y •Provides E/W pedestrian n - �'�-; N.�g� •Does not enhance HCC campus
_l a 90i link at-grade across SR-99 � _j, �.. (': - _ - - �' i° •Lacks visibility to regional transportation
r„„ryw,6 - ,5 •Supports major = h `._ - •' moo„ .` corridor SR-99
�_ iwu•.enl '°e,r� employment center(HCC) 1•1t: f - t•. �+.,q •Brings regional traffic into neighborhood
f / sve.. •High development potentials-. J -t• •Brings METRO links into neighborhood
in 1/4 mile radius '"r''4r - �•, _ _ t - N •Need to acquire all ROW
�-- _ !' ` P•y,,,,r,p.,� •Convenient METRO 7s l •Reduces development potential by
4
❑ w link from 1-5 _ - _ 1/2 in 1/4 mile radius
rr =- •Convenient HOV r •=� _ •Uphill walk for pedestrians going west
link from 1-5 May require transit shuttle for
_ •No impact to SR-99 rider-ship success
i - r properties .s.� •.,i
'"` + •No impact to SR-99 ° ^°• ,
street improvements
Cons:
t. -.�• — '� •Proximity to vehicular traffic t + l
�� n E' � �� •Reduces fast service to
_ i G - - , speed of auto " t ! - ,•1
' r --- ` •Brings )[regional traffic into 4
--s-z� --� ua neighborhood --- - -
i
- 7 •Brings METRO links ^` s� _ J
{ r
into neighborhood
\\ _ •Need to acquire
�- significant ROW ' F'-•
\`\ r 'I •Costly to link Des Moines& 1 �� _�. ~• ,,, '
7� J V Kent over SR-51 B
;' `r" •,s' \\ •Lacks visibility to regional
transportation
! P,rk 1� corridor SR-99 '�
11 Does not enhance �� n
HCC campus
7! •Siting conflicts with high
a. -
_ ?r tension power lines
� T 5=ze ramq.
s rr•-+r.,,,, [ it ' r •Reduces development ;
-{/ ---- Ur potential by 1/3 `-�t'i�t _ -• `-'p - -
ff f1 ��[' � f ^f? �
._.�i, Maps and Drawings by:
ATTACHMENT B - Land Use & Planning Board Hearing November 23, 2009
10
This page intentionally left blank.
Midway Light Rail Station Area Concept: SR 99 East
F7311
11
4 g I-S1SR 509 Corridor Study Area Boundary
- '_
Existin regional Completion and Freight
detention pond r ^,;i' Improvement Project
\4"
yr N �� Newstreets
New bridge-- w
c Single Family
LA Plaza
hopping �.
r Center 7 �•
�- Pedestriani Open Spa-
connections
� r �
/
S.234th Street A \ t
i
+� �f METRO Park ,
y ,
&Ride
�,. New streets-- i �' en
'y
�� — � ' r.�@s Horner R ` ♦, ` ale
UIV
S.235th Street
Light Rail Station
+ Structured park-
ing(500 spaces) Park
Highline I � I
Community I New street—------
College a I-S/SR 509 Corridor w
Pedestrian connections p Completion and Freight I
` •� sue.-�-•r !1 � Improvement Project
riri•r i
r 1 — Regional stormwater
detention facility r
New street and bridge
•
S"240th Street
r rLF^
r
;•'--*'�� -- __— Multipurpose trail
Low Density
Multi-Family `
Pedestrian .
_ connections
_ —New streets ,L
b j Single Family
Parkside r /
Park a /
' 5.245th Street
7�T7
trrr�+Yrrr3;r '
1 Park
Single Family ;f
Pros: Cons:
•Removes conflict with autos • Need to acquire some ROW
•Removes conflict with commerce • Possible need to reconfigure access to properties
r Provides fast service • Elevated rail impacts pedestrian environment
•Fits into existing high capacity transportation corridor •Wide at-grade pedestrian crossing SR-99 increases
•Convenient EIW METRO link potential for vehicle-pedestrian conflicts
r Serves urban density housing and jobs East of SR-99•EIW pedestrian link across SR-99 at new intersection MIL ■►n��T e v
� 1 1
•Supports major employment center(HCC)
r High development potential within 112 mile radius a eailaborative planning project
•Allows business development at station's ground level ATTACHMENT C
•Preserves intimate feel of 30th Ave'Great Street'
Land Use & Planning Board Hearing
November 23, 2009 W �°
12
This page intentionally left blank.
13
Midway Subarea Plan
Chapter One
Introduction
The Midway Subarea Plan (the Plan) conveys a range of actions that prepares the
area for the future high capacity light rail transit. The Plan illustrates the potential
of Midway and is intended to inform decisions of public and private entities. The
implementation of the Plan will be through design guidelines, development
regulations and incentives, capital investments, and other public and private
strategies for the transit nodes. Kent will complete a Planned Action Ordinance to
encourage redevelopment in the area, most particularly around the light rail transit
station node anticipated to be located near in the vicinity of Highline Community
College.
The Midway Study Area contains the commercial spine for Kent's West Hill
residents, as well as residents from the City of Des Moines. The shared geography
and common interests in the future of Midway prompted leadership from both
communities to engage in a collaborative visioning effort, called Envision Midway,
which resulted in the Midway Subarea Plan. The City of Des Moines is developing a
similar document. Together these planning documents will guide the cities in
creating regulations that are consistent and that will facilitate future
redevelopment, particularly for property owners east of Pacific Highway South (SR-
99). The overall thrust of the Midway Subarea Plan is a new direction toward a
walkable compact community, consisting of a mix of uses that thrive in an
economically and environmentally sustainable future.. supported by high capacity
transit.
This document contains the following sections: The Plan's Purpose; Overview of the
study area and history of development patterns; Existing Conditions of the
environment, demographics and economics, community services, and land use; The
Vision starting with a look into the future followed by details of the public outreach
process and the results; and Framework for Midway which includes the Policies and
Goals for the Midway Study Area.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 1
14
Purpose
Envision Midway Mission Statement:
To transform the Midway community into a sustainable urban area
which enhances commercial development and optimizes its
geographic location, wide range of transportation options,
educational institutions, and views.
The prospect of high capacity light rail transit prompted the Cities of Kent and Des
Moines to undertake a major planning effort called 'Envision Midway'. The mission
and goals of Envision Midway were established collaboratively by the City Councils
of the two cities and guided extensive public involvement. The outcomes from the
visioning efforts of Envision Midway guided the Midway Subarea Plan.
Envision Midway Goals:
1. Provide a mix of land uses that increase revenues, job opportunities, and
housing choices.
2. Reconcile development standards along the border between the Cities of
Kent and Des Moines to be consistent and reflect the vision for the study
area.
3. Provide for public participation in the development of land use policies,
development regulations, and implementation strategies within the study
area.
4. Provide appropriate land uses and regulations that support Bus Rapid
Transit within the Pacific Highway corridor.
5. Identify preferred alignments for light rail and the associated station and
stop locations within Kent and Des Moines.
6. Ensure design that provides a safe and inviting pedestrian environment.
Overview
The Midway Subarea Plan (the Plan) focuses on an area located along the extreme
western portion of Kent along a north/south ridge line sandwiched between the
Duwamish/Green River Valley and Puget Sound. Generally the landscape is gently
rolling with the highest point located in the northern third of the study area,
affording the potential to capture views of Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountains
to the west, and views of the Kent Valley, Mt. Rainier and Cascade Mountains to the
east (see Figure 1 - Midway Study Area). The Midway Study Area abuts the City of
Des Moines along the entire western border. It also shares boundaries with the
Cities of SeaTac and Federal Way, and Unincorporated King County.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 2
15
I 92x6 Bi � 6
q
;17-
1 �aar
f 1VV 9 r'
st211lyw3B['bL--_
ml m� ax�a I r ry Legend
City Limits
d O Midway Subarea
_ exro Midway Transit Village Overlay
JI 0 Midway Subarea Parcels
H
'n� I
/ I op C,,A KENT
Planning Services�S.PM.er 2C09 No 3-6
Figure 1: Midway Subarea.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 3
16
Different portions of the study area have historically been known by different
names, including Midway, Saltair Hills, and Woodmont. These neighborhood
boundaries were never formalized and so sometimes overlapped. Midway is
centered around the intersection of Kent-Des Moines Road and Pacific Highway
South and runs south to Saltair Hills. Saltair Hills is defined by the single-family
neighborhood west of SR-99 between South 248t" Street and South 252nd Street
and was part of the 1958 Saltair Annexation. The southern half of the study area is
part of the area known as Woodmont, which extends between S 252nd Street and
beyond South 272nd Street.
Highway 99 (a.k.a. Pacific Highway South) defines Midway. The highway drew
commerce to its edges, and like its northern counterpart - Aurora - Midway's street
network creates large blocks ranging from 1/2 to 3/4 of a mile long. Some
properties are so large there are no streets other than direct access off SR-99.
Interstate-5 also serves the Midway Study Area, with future connections provided
by an extension of SR-509 from nearby Seattle-Tacoma International Airport,
approximately 4 miles to the north.
History of Development:
The name Midway' was a marketing tool used to denote the area's location halfway
between Seattle and Tacoma. Back in the 1930s and 1940s, the new highway
brought people from around the region to the Spanish Castle (located at the
intersection of SR-99 and Kent-Des Moines Road [SR-516]) for a night out with
Gordon Green's Orchestra. The Spanish Castle continued operating into the late
1960s where it became a place for teens to dance to local bands like The Wailers,
Paul Revere and the Raiders, Sonics and national acts like Jerry Lee Lewis and the
Beach Boys. Another icon was the Midway Drive-in Theater which operated from
the 1940s to the mid-1980s and was the largest single screen drive-in theater in
the area. Once closed, it became an off-site parking lot for Highline Community
College students and on weekends a huge flea-market.
The Midway area has constantly been evolving. Many of the historic motels and
small businesses that once served the weary traveler have made way for the new
auto-oriented development, namely strip malls and big box stores with large
expanses of parking. The most recent historic use to give way to progress was the
Midway Drive-in Theater. Its huge neon sign was as iconic regionally as the
Hollywood sign in Los Angeles. Along with the typical auto-oriented retail shopping
area, one will find light industrial, outdoor storage yards, long-haul truck sales and
service, mobile home parks and a couple of small apartment complexes. Highline
Community College (HCC), located off S 240t" just west of SR-99 in the City of Des
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 4
17
Moines, was dedicated in January 1963 and recently completed a master plan to
grow the campus in partnership with Central Washington University. There are two
(2) closed landfills located in the study area (i.e., Midway and Kent-Highlands
Landfills). They are being prepared for reuse and redevelopment by the property
owner City of Seattle Public Utilities (SPU).
A new wave of redevelopment in Midway started approximately three (3) years ago
when Kent (along with adjacent cities) completed the Pacific Highway Rehabilitation
Project. Kent invested $21 million dollars to build sidewalks, street trees,
pedestrian scale lighting and a planted median, turning SR-99 into a safe and
attractive roadway. Two (2) HOV lanes were added to the existing five (5) lane
highway for the purpose of accommodating King County's "Transit Now" program
and its Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system. Scheduled to begin service in 2010, BRT
uses technology to provide a fast and reliable transit system that connects riders
with the SeaTac Airport Light Rail Station. One of the first redevelopment projects
was a Lowe's Home Improvement super store where the old Midway Drive-in was
located. Fred Meyer at South 252nd Street remodeled their existing store. Both
projects constructed additional retailing space that abuts the highway for a more
pedestrian-friendly atmosphere. There have also been a couple of 3-story office
buildings constructed - one to accommodate Highline Community College and the
other housing the Carpenters Union.
The catalyst for the next phase of development in Midway will be the expansion of
Sound Transit's light rail service south from SeaTac Airport. Funding to expand
light rail to 55 miles was approved by Central Puget Sound voters in November,
2008. The additional 36 miles will extend rail north from Seattle to Lynnwood, east
to the Redmond Overlake Transit Center, and south to Star Lake/Redondo Transit
Center located at South 272nd Street. Expansion of the southern route is expected
sometime in the next 10 to 20 years.
r
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 5
18
Chapter Two
Existing Conditions
A thorough examination of existing conditions is essential to understanding
opportunities and challenges in the Midway Study Area. This section examines the
environmental conditions, followed by demographics and economic conditions,
overview of community services, and concluding with existing land uses and
regulations.
Environmental
Midway Study Area is largely developed, but there are areas that are restricted
from development due to steep slopes, wetlands, or undevelopable closed landfills.
Generally, the study area sits at a high point of a gently undulating ridge that is
contained by Puget Sound approximately 1 mile to the west and the Kent Valley to
the east. The steep slopes and unstable soils on the eastern edge of the study area
have constrained development and remain wooded with predominately deciduous
second growth trees. The topography of the study area provides view opportunities
in some locations. There are two (2) large former landfills that provide a sense of
open space due to the open grassy fields and undeveloped nature of these
properties. The Midway Landfill is surrounded by development and can be seen
from I-5. The Kent-Highlands Landfill, however, is contiguous with the wooded
steep slopes on the eastern edge of the study area and adds to a relatively large
habitat.
There are natural open spaces within the study area that contain wetlands and are
a part of the Puget Sound and Green River Watersheds. The flows of these
watersheds are illuminated by their names and contain two (2) basins related to the
Midway Study Area (see Figure 2 - Midway Subarea Drainage Basins). The Puget
Sound Watershed is located west of SR-99 to South 240t" Street where it runs to
the east, taking in the subarea to the south. Within this watershed is the McSorley
Creek Basin consisting of 811 acres with 25.7% (N209 acres) as impervious.'
There is one wetland in the study area located off SR-516. It is considered the
headwaters of Massey Creek and flows into Puget Sound. A rather large wetland (>
10 acres) is located just outside the study area along the southeastern corner. It is
the headwaters for McSorley Creek and flows through Saltwater State Park into
Puget Sound. Both are wooded wetlands. The Green River Watershed is located
' City of Kent Drainage Master Plan - September 2008.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 6
19
I l
I\ R�
Legend
Midway Subarea
.g
_} (� Midway Subarea Parcels
Wetlands
Drainage Basin
McSorley Creek
Ti Fz Midway Creek
� 1 1&
�
KENT
Planning Services-November 2009 Na 5ce�
Figure 2: Midway Subarea Plan Drainage Basins and Existing Wetlands.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 7
20
east of SR-99 to South 240t" Street and then continues south generally along the
east side of Military Road. This watershed contains the Midway Creek Basin which
consists of 933 acres with 34.6% (N 35 acres) as impervious. At the base of the
Kent-Highlands Landfill are associated wetlands; however, they are outside the
study area.
Pacific Highway South (SR-99) runs through the Midway Study Area, and Interstate
5 flanks much of its eastern border. Seattle-Tacoma International Airport is located
4 miles to the northwest. The noise and pollution from the various modes of
transportation moving through the study area have an impact. Other pollutant
sources are the closed landfills. Seattle Public Utilities have created and
implemented a mitigation plan for the toxins within the landfills, and the United
States Environmental Protection Agency has not yet taken them off the National
Priorities List of hazardous waste sites. Additional properties within the study area
have been identified on State and Federal brownfield lists. To date, there has been
no assessment of these additional properties or testing conducted to better
understand their status as brownfields.
Demographics and Economics
South King County plays a major role in the economic vitality of the Puget Sound
Basin, and the City of Kent is a large contributor to that prosperity. However,
economic and demographic information specific to the Midway Study Area is
limited. Demographic information is available from the 2000 U.S. Census and the
area's economic vitality can be assessed from business license data. This section
attempts to provide an understanding of the demographics and economics of the
Midway Study Area.
The City of Kent recently participated in a study that looked at growth rates of key
economic indicators as well as housing affordability and employment
demographics.2 The analysis collected 2008 economic and financial statistics from
business databases as well as state and local government records and compared
the South King County region as a whole to all of King County and the State of
Washington. The data on Kent represent true growth rather than growth as a
result of annexations. The following provides a profile of the City of Kent based on
specific indicators, along with information on Midway from the 2000 U.S. Census.
2 South King - North Pierce County Economic Region ECONOMIC ANALYSIS & STATISTICAL
PROFILE, Herbert Research, Incorporated September 2008.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 8
21
Population Trends:
Kent is the second largest city in South King County with a population of 88,380
and in 2008 South King County was home to 25.9% of the total population in King
County. Between 2006 and 2008, Kent's population grew by 1.55%. During the
same time, King County's population grew by 2.66%. The median age for residents
in Kent is 34.91 years.
Based on the 2000 Census, the median age in the Midway Study area was 31.8
years. It is lower than the citywide data represented above. There are a high
percentage of families with young children living in the study area. As the
population in Kent has grown, one of the most notable changes has been an
increase in ethnic diversity. As often occurs with the settlement patterns of recent
immigrants, there are concentrated communities of kinship and social networks.
The study area is home to a growing Latino population. The Hispanic/Latino
population citywide is approximately 7-8% of the total population, but nearly 20%
within the study area.
Housing Types and Values:
In 2008, Kent had 36,045 housing units. Kent grew between 2006 and 2008 by
0.43% with single-family units growing at an annual rate of 1.34%. During the
same time, King County was adding housing at an annual rate of 0.63%. The
percent of owner occupied housing units (46.7%) and renter occupied housing units
(49.08%) in 2008 is skewed to rental units, which include apartments, rented
condominiums and single-family homes.3 New construction of multi-family housing
units in Kent (0.15%) is very slow compared to South County as a whole (4.59%).
The median value of all owner-occupied housing units in the City of Kent was
$281,566 in 2008.
Although there is significant single-family housing to the east and west, there is
little housing within the Midway Study Area itself, and all could be considered
affordable. There are six (6)seven_C71 mobile home parks with 2-22-215 spaces for
mobile homes or recreational vehicles and eleven (11) associated apartments.
There are five (5) apartment complexes consisting of 123 apartments. And there
are seven (7) single-family homes, some of which are used for housing and others
used for business.
Household Income and Jobs:
The average mean household income within South King County increased between
2000 and 2008 from $56,104 to $66,000, roughly 2.2% annually. As of 2008, the
3 These statistics do not include mobile home ownership.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 9
22
City of Kent's average mean household income was $62,475, slightly lower than the
overall average for South King County (i.e., $66,000). The share of total
population in Kent that is of working age (i.e., 16-64) is 67%, similar to South King
County's working age population of 66.7%. The number of jobs per working-age
person in Kent is 1.27, a little higher than the average for South King County at
1.22 jobs per person. In 2007, there were 76,758 jobs in Kent with 28% of those
jobs in the manufacturing sector.
The employment sector within the Midway Study Area is dominated by retail and
composed of mainly small businesses (with the exception of Lowe's and Fred
Meyer). A small segment of employment is manufacturing (i.e., boat building,
cabinetry, counter tops) and there are a variety of rental businesses for fleet
vehicles, trucks and heavy equipment. In 2005, Puget Sound Regional Council
(PSRC) provided employment data that identified 3,721 jobs within the study area.
Highline Community College has a large presence in Midway and engpleying
employs �61,217 ,
Based on the 2000 U.S. Census, the median household income in the study area
was $27,284 while the median household income in the City of Kent was $46,046.
The number of households living below poverty level in 2000 in the study area was
34.6% while in the State of Washington it was 7.6%.
Community Services
The Cities of Kent and Des Moines share a common yet irregular city boundary line
which complicates the provision of public services to the Midway Study Area. The
line is an artifact of an unconventional annexation process that would not be
possible today. The result is that Des Moines and Kent Police and Fire support each
other in ways that ensure service is provided no matter on which side the
emergency call originates. The Community Services within the Midway Subarea are
illustrated in Figure 3.
Police and Fire:
The City of Kent has one substation located within the study area and another
located nearby. The Midway Substation located at 25440 Pacific Highway South
provides a presence along SR-99. The West Hill Substation located at 26512
Military Road South houses police, as well as Fire Station 73 with three (3) engines.
Water and Sewer:
Highline Water District provides potable water to the Midway Study Area.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 10
23
w,
i
VIi away Intermediate B !
I I• ew, in
a i
7tlxir�ier Iigi o l r'
�a"�sfdle sue► I zl 1 : •y s
ij
4iglhfihe ICpm unity{Cgl�e I g g
� iN [s
ar si e Elementary e�
— 1 unn c rt�pry
KIP07YV ta
,� I r -fi� I ��1 a• —
r I Jp
� J
oodmo��.2 r 3�59 a � Legend
EleMentaryl � n • Public scnanl
Q King County Library
OOI . Police Station
C
Kent Trails
- rf11 k O Midway Subarea
-Kent Parks
Midway Subarea Parcels
it s 1p N
bark T in
Planning Services-Navember2f1g9 NO SceIe
--
Figure 3: Midway Subarea Community Services.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 11
24
Midway Sewer District provides sewer service to the area. Both agencies have their
headquarters located in the study area at 23828 30th Ave South.
Education:
Highline and Federal Way School Districts serve the area with public education for
grades K-12. Highline Community College serves a diverse student population that
is primarily commuter based.
Parks and Open Space:
There are several parks and recreational open spaces within or adjacent to the
study area. Des Moines' Parkside Park, located at S 244th Street and 25th Avenue
S is a 4.4 acre park with a play area for children and a walking path close to an
extensive wetland within the park. Saltair Vista Park, located at S 246th Street and
26th Place in Kent, is a small neighborhood park with a play area for children, picnic
tables and benches. There are no parks located east of SR-99.
Library:
King County Woodmont Library is located at 26809 Pacific Highway South in Des
Moines and serves the residents of the Midway Study Area.
Land Use Profile
This section takes a closer look at the distribution and location of various uses of
land within the Midway Study Area in order to better understand what exists today
and to consider the capacity for future growth in households and employment. The
Midway Study Area has been described as consisting of auto-oriented strip malls
and big box retailers; light industrial uses; sales and repair of automobiles, RVs,
long haul trucks, and heavy equipment; office; hotels; and affordable housing (i.e.,
mobile home parks and small apartments). Highline Community College, located in
the City of Des Moines, is a significant presence in Midway serving 18,355 students
from around southern Puget Sound. The majority of these land uses are housed
within single story buildings with only a handful of multi-story buildings serving the
study area.
The City utilizes various data resources and methodologies to predict future growth
of employment and households.
For the 2004 Comprehensive Plan, staff
used Buildable Lands Program methodology which generally determines capacity for
growth based upon land use intensity achieved by actual development within the
previous five (5) years. The 2008 Transportation Master Plan, adopted June 17,
2008 (Ordinance 3883j, utilized existing and forecast employment and household
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 12
25
numbers from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). The PSRC forecast relies
on existing zoning and recent —development to allocate forecast numbers. The
Midway Subarea Plan is utilizing a modified buildout scenario that relies on capacity
for new development based on the vision rather than forecast or achieved
development.
The most recent analysis of employment and households citywide was conducted
for the 2008 Transportation Master Plan (TMP). The data for the TMP were
distributed to Kzones (i.e., Kent's transportation analysis zones) for the
transportation model. The Midway Subarea Plan proposes new roads and additional
density of uses within the Transit Oriented Community nodes, which requires the
existing Kzones to be divided into smaller areas. The data from the 2005 Baseline
and 2031 Forecast used in the TMP are distributed to these smaller areas based on
percent area of the new Kzones to original Kzone.
The Midway Subarea Plan utilizes baseline and the 2031 feFecast data frem the
The 2005
base'0 eBaseline (i.e., existing land uses) and 203 feFe, ast data , e used in the
TMP were extracted from various sources. Employment baseline data were
provided by PSRC and originate from the Washington State Employment Security
Department, 29942005 extract, based on standard industrial classification code
(SIC) or the North American Industry Coding System (NAICS). PSRC also provided
household baseline data extracted from housing permits submitted by the City of
Kent as of 20042005 and geo-coded by PSRC. in 2996, Kent's
tFanspeFtatien The baseline-2005 Baseline land use data produced for the
Transportation Master Plan suggest a near 50/50 split of housing and jobs €eF the
Medway Study (see Table 1).
Table 1
Midway Study Area
2006 2005 Baseline Land Uses by Kzone
Kzone SFDU MFDU RETAIL FIRES GOV EDU WTCU MANU
25 1 66 49 57 19 0 24 1
87 43 475 132 518 20 0 9 1
110 592 511 261 159 0 0 10 197
405 6 0 52 5 2 0 12 0
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 13
26
406 1 81 60 70 23 0 30 1
407 1 61 46 53 18 0 23 0
408 20 59 39 40 12 0 15 7
TOTAL 663 1254 639 903 94 0 123 207
TOTAL HOUSING 1,917
TOTAL JOBS 1,966
Keene SFDU MFFDU RETAIL FIRES GAFF EDU \A� MA*U
26 114 329 16S 4 A 72 0 82 2
87 46 41-7 -1-1$ 458 20 0 8 4:
1" -14 0 99 44 4 0 22 0
140 47-8 7- 3 241 445 0 0 9 204
TOTAL 649 1,499 623 845 96 - 424 207
TOTAL HOUSING 48
TGTA�QBCJ 1,852
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), in conjunction with the State Office of
Financial Management (OFM), provided a forecast for housing and employment
used in the TMP (see Table 2). Gen9paFiRg the
293 feFe,. st When compared with the 2996 2005 baselineBaseline, the 2031
Forecast in Table 2 has a 14% increase in housing declines in Kzene 25
and -
GveFall, a 78% increase in employment deubles within the study area and h
gains enly slightly.
Table 2
2031 PSRC Forecast Land Uses of Midway
Kzone SFDU MFDU RETAIL FIRES GOV EDU WTCU MAN
25 1 94 149 202 12 0 12 20
87 88 544 347 167 39 0 217 4
110 611 511 364 494 30 0 30 49
405 19 7 29 102 27 59 16 1
406 1 117 184 249 15 0 15 25
407 1 88 139 189 12 0 12 19
408 21 76 105 142 9 0 9 14
— — — — — —
TOTAL 741 1437 1317 1544 145 59 312 131
TOTAL HOUSING 2,178
TOTAL JOBS 3,508
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 14
27
2005 Baseline and feFeeast 2031 Forecast data are provided in two different
formats. The 2005 Baseline (a.k.a_ existing) data of households and employment
are provided as9eocoded point data based on address and applied to Kzones. The
PSRG2031 feFeeast Forecast data are provided within the geography of PSRC
Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZ). Distribution of the 2930-2031 PSRC
household and employment forecasts to the smaller geography of Kzones is
accomplished mathematically based on percent of Kzone within a TAZ. The forecast
numbers reflect market trends within the region and do not represent the capacity
available within the zoning district to absorb households and employment. Because
t 20hre z -04
Tablle 2
2031: PSRG Forecast Land Uses of MiidwajYF
Study Area by 1(zone
Keene SFDU MFDU RETAIL FIRES GOV EOV \A� MANU
25 3 35% 666 766 47 0 47 7S
87 88 544 347 467 39 0 217 4
1" 40 14 67 24-7 58 127 33 7
1" 63-2 S29 376 SIG 31 0 347 60
TOTAL 763 -1,115 -1,351 _17669 41q6 4-27 32-9 43--2
TOTAL HOUSING 2,298
TATATVTRL SOBS -37TJ
2005 Baseline data are geeEeded by point, the accuracy is n9eFe reliable than the
PSRG 2031 PSRC ferecast Forecast data distributed by percent geography.-
DiStFibutien ef the fereeast numbers is net an exact science when fereeasts travel
are cenverted freng the larger TAZ to the smaller Kzene levels. It should be noted
that the Midway Study Area is not completely contained within the geography of the
City's Kzone system. Kzone 25 and the new 405, 406, 407, and 408 Kzones are+s
completely within the study area, however, Kzones 87; Viand 110 are not.
The Midway Subarea Plan proposes to increase the capacity in the study area by
changing the Land Use Plan Map and development regulations " associated
with the Transit Oriented Communities . TT—=� The
higher density of land uses will support the future high density capacity transit
planned by Sound Transit. Compact high density uses are envisioned for the transit
node near in the vicinity of Highline Community College. The station location -at
near South 272nd Street has far less potential to accommodate growth due to a
large wetland that reduces the buildable land area within the City of Kent and
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 15
28
relatively new development. , - "Growth can occur within the Cities of Des
Moines and Federal Way near the South 272nd Street transit node.
The methodology to determine capacity is based on the Midway vision and reflects
buildout at the transit nodes. Most properties are considered redevelopable, with
the exception of LaPlaza Shopping Center, Lowe's, the new office building housing
Highline Community College and the gas stations. The vision considers the norm to
be 6-story structures with a maximum of 16-story structures. The model also
assumes little surface parking with most parking enclosed or under ground. One
parking garage associated with the light rail station is considered. Infrastructure at
the Midway Transit Oriented Community assumes 6.3 acres of new parks, 9.3 acres
in regional surface water retention/detention facilities, approximately 2,601 linear
feet of new roads and sidewalks and 2,085 linear feet of improvements to 30t"
Avenue. There is no new infrastructure at the 272nd Street transit node. Floor-
area-ratio (FAR) is applied to determine buildout for new construction, and land
uses are divided into residential (i.e., an average of 900 sq. ft. per dwelling unit)
and employment (i.e., 500 sq. ft. per job). The employment is distributed by
sector based on PSRC distribution percentages for the 2031 Forecast. The result is
that the
Seuth Land Use Scenario 3.0 (see The Vision for details)
provides a increase of 7-8329% increase in employment in Kzene 25 and -a--9-3an
increase of 517% nnei=ease-in households from the 2005 Baseline.
This capacity reflects a modified buildout that may not be absorbed by 2031 see
Table 3). but the zening ehange dees illustFate the petential feF gFewth.
Table 3
Midway Study Area Capacity
Based on Envision Midway Land Use Scenario 3.0
KZONE SFDU MFDU Retail FIRES GOV EDU WTCU MANU
25 0 1330 302 977 47 0 152 0
87 99 632 347 167 40 0 217 4
110 638 2003 446 272 32 0 303 138
405 0 3924 91 133 0 0 27 0
406 0 831 516 928 0 0 103 0
407 0 1693 544 744 0 0 143 0
408 0 671 177 1504 0 0 88 0
TOTAL 737 11084 2423 4725 119 0 1033 142
TOTAL HOUSING 11,821
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 16
29
TOTAL JOBS 8,442
The State Office of Financial Management (OFM) and the PSRC recently revised the
2031 forecast of households and employment, establishing new targets for the
Central Puget Sound region to use for planning purposes in determining its ability to
absorb the projected growth. Presently, the King County suburban cities along with
the Cities of Seattle and Bellevue, and King County are working on the allocation of
these 2031 growth targets to local jurisdictions. The result will ultimately revise
household and employment targets for Kent. Providing additional capacity in the
Midway Subarea will help Kent's ability to absorb future growth targets.
T-ab'e 3
Midway Study Area Capaeiity
Based an Enviismen Midway Land Use Seenarie 3.G
- RG 2030 F&reed
Kze+fe 3ebs Heasehel 3ebs Heasehekls
-26 i/� 364 c,� C/
87 7-75 632 775 6-32
J W -500 -54 SM 3,9 24
TOTAL 3-,7--15 1 2—I't8 9-,2-29 44—,2-74
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 17
30
Chapter Three
The Vision
The vision for Midway was conceived from a series of workshops, meetings and
design charrettes held in 2008 and early 2009. This visioning effort brought
together diverse stakeholders to consider what the future would look like. Envision
Midway was both the process and the product, and the narrative below illuminates
the vision.
The Next Generation — Midway in 2050
Midway continues to draw business, families and visitors because of its central
location in the Puget Sound Basin, convenient rapid light rail transit service, and
spectacular views. Midway is an urban vie-community where buildings hug the
edge of generous sidewalks that allow commerce to spill out onto them, making
them interesting, inviting and safe public spaces. Buildings are constructed out of
quality materials and designed with consideration to human scale, while taking full
advantage of views to Puget Sound, the Olympic and Cascade mountain ranges, Mt.
Rainier and the Kent Valley. With its emphasis on architectural details, Midway is a
safe, comfortable and aesthetically pleasing environment that projects a sense of
permanence. Welcoming plazas and pedestrian thoroughfares connect private
activities with public amenities.
There is diversity in the built form in Midway and the uses that are housed within.
Retail shops, restaurants, and local services can be found on the first floor. Offices
are located on the second and third floors with housing layered on top and
occupants capture views toward the mountain and the water from a variety of five
and six story buildings. In some areas, the buildings contain one use like housing
or Class-A office and they stretch to the height of 200 feet. The combined mix of
uses creates a 17/7 place where a broad spectrum of people live, work, shop, and
play.
The light rail transit station, located across from Highline Community College, is the
center of this bustling urban vecommunity known as Midway. Light rail
connects the area to Seattle and beyond to Shoreline and Lynnwood, and east into
Bellevue and Redmond, lessening the need for an automobile and the obligatory
parking. METRO brings riders along the SR-516 spine west from Des Moines
Normandy Park, and parts of Burien and from the east - Kent, Covington, Maple
Valley, and Auburn. Bus Rapid Transit continues to serve as an express service
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 18
31
along SR-99 connecting Federal Warr, Des Moines, and Kent residents to light rail.
Highline Community College and t"nTC bFalgeh
ean9pus &ftheir partnership with Central Washington University have expanded the
campus to off site.; The intellectual capital generated by these institutions has
attracted a variety of technology and medical innovation. The
proximity of Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, attFaet a vaFiety ef teehnelegy,
medical mnnevatmen _and international commerce have generated the need for office
space. _ Midway's transit oriented urban vie-community transitions to
a more auto-oriented area around South 246th where regional retail and light
industrial uses dominate. When you reeehUggn-Leaching South 272nd Street, the
light rail line ends at the Star Lake/Redondo transit station and another transit node
emerges complete with a mix of uses and pedestrian activities.
Across from the Midway light rail station is an urban park with expansive hard
surfaces to accommodate heavy uses, and a quick transition into a large green
open space that slows down the pace of life in this urban villagecommunity. A
broad walkway meanders through the park and large shade trees connect the public
to a more linear path that heads south about one-half mile. Here people can walk,
run, skate, or ride their bicycles next to a series of naturalized stormwater
detention ponds. Eventually one reaches a smaller park overlooking Puget Sound
and Mt. Rainier. One can access the recreational activities located at the reclaimed
Midway Landfill or the wetlands farther to the south, using public pedestrian
connections through private developments.
Building Partnerships and a Vision
From the onset of the subarea planning effort, the need to cultivate partnerships
was clear. The primary partnership was between the City of Kent and the City of
Des Moines and was driven by the possibility that light rail would serve Midway. An
interlocal agreement between Kent and Des Moines laid out a set of deliverables
that were tied to a Growth Management Grant from the State Department of
Community, Trade and Economic Development (now named Department of
Commerce). The direction from Kent and Des Moines City Councils was a
commitment to build a livable, long lasting community that was economically and
environmentally sustainable.
There were other significant Envision Midway partners from transportation
agencies, large property owners such as Seattle Public Utilities (SPU), od..eati na
0nstit tier-s,Highline Community College and adjacent cities. All were invited to
participate in the Stakeholders Committee. The development community was also
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 19
32
included. Progressive developers with regional and national experience and local
housing experts were invited to a Developers Forum to provide feedback on the
initial public visioning and a follow-up Developers Forum confirmed the vision was
achievable. All of these partnerships, together with input from residents, property
owners, and businesses within the Midway Study Area are the foundation for
Envision Midway and will be critical in the successful implementation of the Midway
Subarea Plan.
r-
Visioning Process
The visioning process was iterative and attempted to reach all constituents. The
outcomes of each meeting were shared to ensure participants could benefit from
the larger discussion, evaluate and revise ideas generated by others and remain
engaged as the project moved forward. The Stakeholders Committee and the
public were asked to consider land uses, regulatory and design standards, and were
charged with identifying light rail station locations and rail alignment options. In an
effort to reach as many community members as possible, a project website was
developed where meeting schedules and results and other materials were posted.'
The intent was to ensure project transparency and to solicit comment from the
greater community. A unique opinion poll posted on the Envision Midway website
was based on a computer generated video that reflected the vision for Midway and
allowed the viewer to walk through a 'virtual reality' of Midway at a light rail
station.
A total of nine (9) meetings were held in 2008 and 2009 with the public and
stakeholders, and by early in 2009, six (6) meetings were held with decision
' The project website is www.EnvisionMidway.com.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 20
33
makers in an effort to develop a land use scenario that reflects the community's
wisdom and vision for Midway. Additional meetings will be held that will refine the
Plan further.
Visioning Products
The first products from the visioning process were three distinct (3) land use
alternatives for the Midway Study Area. The alternatives illustrated the potential
land use patterns; identified a vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle circulation
framework; and considered public spaces. The alternatives are briefly described as
follows:
Alternative 1 - Transit Oriented Village: The high intensity mixed-use transit
supportive development stretched from South 216th Street to South 240th
Street and all land uses south of 2401h were auto-oriented and called an
Employment Village.
Alternative 2 - Transit Oriented Centers: High intensity mixed-use transit
supportive land uses were located at nodes where high capacity transit
stations were located at South 216th Street, just north of South 240th Street,
and at South 272nd Street. In Des Moines, Mixed-Use defined the area
between the first two nodes and in Kent there were Mixed-Use and
Employment Village land uses between the nodes.
Alternative 3 - Transit Oriented Corridor: High intensity mixed-use transit
supportive land uses stretched from South 216th Street to South 246th Street
and another node was located at the South 272nd Street transit station.
Between the two transit oriented nodes was Transit Supportive Mixed Use.
The above alternatives were evaluated by a group of progressive developers with
regional and national experience, local housing experts, and large property owners
(i.e., SPU and HCC) at a Developers Forum. From their critical review, staff created
a new land use option. The new alternative - Land Use Scenario 1.0 - condensed
the mixed-use areas into nodes around future light rail stations. The intent was to
strategically focus an intensity of uses around the stations and maintain a large
portion of the existing auto-oriented retail and light industrial uses. This land use
pattern would minimize sprawl of strip commercial development and allow an urban
vmiiagecommunity to mature as envisioned. Land Use Scenario 1.0 was further
refined to reflect additional comments from Envision Midway workshops and
meetings.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 21
34
Participants in Envision Midway considered three (3) light rail station and rail
alignment options. To facilitate public discussion, the focus was on the station in
the vicinity of Highline Community College. Detailed illustrations were created,
listing the advantages and disadvantages of the different alternatives.
The SR-99 station option represented one that Sound Transit considered for
budgeting purposes. Their rail alignment was located along the west side of SR-99
as an elevated structure, with the Highline Community College Station supported by
a 500-stall parking structure and a new traffic signal for pedestrians to cross SR-99
safely. Based on Sound Transit's planning, the first station south of SeaTac Airport
would be South 2001h, followed by a station near Highline Community College, with
the line ending at South 272"d. Sound Transit had not considered a station at
South 216th in Des Moines.
The 301h Ave South station option came out of the public process. Both the public
and the Stakeholders Committee thought a 30th Ave alignment could create a more
pedestrian friendly environment, where the train and automobiles moved at a
slower pace than would be the case along SR-99. The I-5 station option was
considered because the Cities of Des Moines and Federal Way Comprehensive Plans
express the desire for locating future light rail on I-5 and not on SR-99.
After completing the Envision Midway public outreach and compiling the feedback, a
fourth station option was developed. This fourth option reflects the additional
comments from representatives of Highline Community College who wish to
preserve their east parking lot, thereby negating transit oriented development
within their boundaries. The fourth option places the light rail station on the east
side of SR-99, connecting the station directly to an area poised for transit
supportive development. The East SR-99 station option reflects the desires of the
college, as well as some local businesses.
Visioning Outcomes
Land Use Scenario 3.0 reflects the conclusion of the Envision Midway public
visioning process and is the=visienrused for Kent's Midway Subarea Plan (see Figure
4-3 - Envision Midway Land Use Scenario 3.0). There are five (5) categories of land
uses identified in Scenario 3.0, three of which pertain to the City of Kent.
1. The Transit Oriented Village land use represents nodes of intense transit-
supportive mixed use that are pedestrian-friendly with a mix of services,
office, and residential activities.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 22
35
2. The Kent-Highlands Landfill and surrounding area is identified as mixed use
that accommodates automobiles and supports pedestrian oriented uses at a
high density, but is also auto-accommodating.
3. The Highway Commercial Corridor allows a wide range of auto-oriented uses
including retail, light manufacturing, and housing.
The public believed it was important to connect the surrounding residential
communities to the new light rail station. I-5 and SR-516 are barriers for
pedestrians and vehicles. Scenario 3.0 connects the community located to the east
of Midway over I-5 with a bridge that provides a safe multimodal option to the
transit station. A bridge over SR-516, connects 30th Ave South and the community
to the north.
Another outcome from Envision Midway was identification of a preferred station
location and alignment. The Stakeholders Committee selected a preferred station
location and alignment. Participants were asked to review and discuss three (3)
hypothetical light rail station locations and rail alignments (see Visioning Products).
Eighteen committee members were each given five (5) large dots to place on one
or more options, indicating their preference. SR-99 was the preferred station
location (50 dots), followed by 30th Ave (15 dots), and I-5 (4 dots). The public
also preferred the SR-99 alignment, with 30th Ave coming in second. An alignment
along I-5 was seen as antithetical to the tenets of transit oriented development by
separating the potential transit oriented development along SR-99 from a station
along the interstate.
There were several key results that resonated throughout the public process. There
was desire for this transit oriented development to be built well, with excellent
materials and design. There was agreement that tall buildings would fit into
Midway and capture the spectacular views to the east, west, and south. The
participants also saw the need for the Cities of Kent and Des Moines to work
together in the future to ensure services are coordinated and development
regulations are compatible.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 23
36
Scenario 3.0 5.216thStreet 1{
• J 63,5
®Transit Oriented Village
•High intensity transit supportive mixed-use with y r
resideri bias -
_ d
•S"ngly pedestrian oriented with small walkable blocks _i ^'• I"515R 509 C.-d., ,
•35'to 200'height limit Pacific Ridge Cmperwa andr 0v
•Lowered parking requirement
Ucesr
Market rate and affordable housing _J
Office S.224th Street
=Retail II `4Rd „•�-
Hotel
Neighborhood services t-
•Grit,uses 3
•No single use,big box,industrial,or auto-dependent
uses
® Mixed Use-Pacific Ridge as I Kent Highlands
•Auto-accommodating community and citywide retail
and services
•Pedestrian oriented ''�� • I
•Mixed use with office or residentialY - } Highlands
Landfill
•35'to 85'Commercial height limit Q•
•35'to 200'Residential height limit i f
Uses: Mid
Community,cityvdde and regional retail 'Highline /� IIL"�
Office Community I ��
How College r f
Mixed Use-Kent Highlands
g S.240th Street - •
•Auto-accommodating community remit and
services
•Pedestrian oriented -
•Mixed use with residential g
•200'height limit "' s.,r --_ i PLC_o-
•Uses, s,,. j sr.,cr
^0.esiden[ial s wo co
Community Retail sie,s'
Hotel
Highway Commercial It Air
Corridor
.o u
•Wide range of community,citywide,or regional commercial and light
itich ial uses 5.252nd`5am r
•Primarily auto-dependent uses, I t
with pedestrian supportive -
facilities
1 �r
•35'to 50'height limit ! !r = Legend
Uses- !
Regional and citywide remit r1s ` Open Space Framework
Aummohile sales and service
Lightlndusvial and 6F_�Complete Streets
manufacturing
Circulation Framework
Trucking S.26oth Street
Outdoor storage •
Office '� .' ! noo pedestrian&Bicycle Paths
Ni Q Proposed BRT Stations
Mixed use(on west side) 1 (Metro)
Uve-work _ Wi�odmont �
s ai:si O Proposed Secondary Bus
WetEagds,
Institutional '� Stops(Metro)
� ' -
•Institutional mixed use
residential or office
•Uses: / ♦. f - a}7✓/.j/OI?
^College academic i J
x
College oriented retail 9aoD S I - !� y ..,„ in
College oriented officel MIDWAY
Studentand faculty ( ':
renuil housing sr "� L51 a col agaratirt phoolog project
1f t S.272nd Street
Figure 4-3: Envision Midway Land Use Scenario 3.0.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 24
37
The public believed it was impertant te eenneet the SUFFeUndiHg residential
of Midway ever 1 5 with a bridge that pFeVides a safe multimedal eptien te the
to
hypethetmeal light Fail statien leeatmens arid Fail aliginngents (see Visiening PFeduets).
Eighteen eeffingottee ngengbeFs were each given five (S) large dets te place en ene
eF Mere eptiens, indicating their preference. SR 99 was the preferred statien
aleng 1 5 was seen as antithetical te the tenets of transit oriented develepment by
There were several l(ey results that Fesenated thmugheut the piziblie pFee lecatmen and alignment. Participants were asked tE) review and discuiss three (3)TTh
� fTe
was desire feF thms transit eFaented develepffient te be built we", with excellent
ngatermals and design. There was agreengent that tall buildings weuld fit inte
Midway and captUFe the spectacular views te the east, west, and south. The
participants alse saw the need feF the Cities ef Kent and Des Meines te w
together On the future te ensure services are ceerdinated and develeprigent
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 25
38
Chapter Four
Framework for Midway
The planning effort for Midway was guided by principles outlined in the Growth
Management Act and Kent's Comprehensive Plan. The public investment in high
capacity light rail transit drove the Midway Subarea Plan's early visioning efforts.
The framework below reflects a synthesis of statements made at public workshops,
Stakeholders meetings, and workshops held for elected officials and provides
guidance for the goals and policies of the Midway Subarea Plan:
A flourishing economy: Midway will be home to a range of employment
opportunities that are synergistic with programs at Highline Community
College and Central Washington University and unique to the businesses and
employment needs of international trade and the Kent Valley industry.
Vibrant mix of neighborhoods: Midway will contain a broad range of housing
types for a broad range of incomes. Shopping, services and transit will be
conveniently located within walking distance from residences.
Supportive parks and open space: Midway will have parks to serve the
nearby residents, employees, and visitors. The large open spaces that are
undevelopable within the Kent-Highlands and Midway landfills will be
converted to passive use wherever possible. If possible, the large wetlands
will be used both for passive recreation and education.
A sense of place: Midway's neighborhoods will be distinct from Kent's
Downtown and East Hill business areas. Midway will build on its roadside
past and -ethnic heritage, with eyes toward the future. Public investment in
street lights and furniture will be consistent and coordinated with the City of
Des Moines.
Multimodal transportation system: Midway's improved public transportation
system with Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Sound Transit light rail will provide
convenient and fast access to the north and south. With greater demand,
reliable east/west transit connections will be provided. SR-99 will continue to
act as a highway, while the side streets will be bicycle- and pedestrian-
friendly.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 26
39
Views: Midway will be dotted with high-rise buildings that ensure views are
maintained and access to sunlight is available.
Sustainabiiity and design: State-of-the-art techniques, materials, and design
will be used to enhance and support the built and natural environment and
create a more livable community.
Midway Subarea Plan Goals & Policies
The Midway Subarea Plan is guided by Kent's Comprehensive Plan Framework
policies and the goals and policies of elements in the Comprehensive Plan. The
following goals and policies are specific to Midway and are the result of extensive
community visioning efforts. These goals and policies set the stage for developing
implementation measures to achieve the goals.
Overall Goal:
Create a dense, pedestrian-friendly, sustainable community that provides jobs,
housing, services and public open space around nodes of high capacity mass transit
while maintaining auto-oriented uses between the transit oriented nodes.
Land Use:
The community vision for the Midway Subarea is one that supports high capacity
transit stations with compact, high density uses. The uses include retail, office,
education, research, medical, and residential. These high density transit station
nodes are served by a series of small, walkable blocks and pedestrian throughways
that not only move people, but act as the public square for commerce, relaxation
and entertainment. The more auto-oriented portion of the subarea outside of the
transit nodes is enhanced to make pedestrian movement more comfortable and
appealing. The goal of the Land Use Policies is to structure the activities around
the high capacity transit station nodes and the auto-oriented portion of the Midway
Study Area.
Goal MLU-1: Increase employment opportunities and housing choices in support of
rapid light rail and mass transit options within the Pacific Highway South (SR-99)
Transportation Corridor.
Policy MLU-1.1: Focus high density retail, office, and residential
development within designated Transit oFiented-Oriented IJFban
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 27
40
VI+ageCommunitiess where future light rail stations and mass transit services
are located.
Policy MLU-1.2: Allow stand-alone land uses as part of a mix of uses near
and within Transit Oriented Comm u n itiestFansit eFiented YFban Villages, with
the exception of single-family residential land use which should be in
vertically mixed use structures.
Policy MLU-1.3:- Disallow additional stand-alone 'big box', drive-through, or
other auto-oriented development within designated Transit Oriented
CommunitiestFansot eFoented YFban Villages.
Policy MLU-1.4: Disallow outdoor storage of trucks, heavy equipment, and
contractor storage yards as an accessory or primary use within designated
Transit Oriented Communities.
Policy MLU-1.45: Establish a minimum building height of twe stei=ies ei= 35
feet--in designated transit oriented Urban Villages.
Policy MLU-1.-56:- Establish a minimum and maximum floor area ratio (FAR)
or other mechanism to ensure levels of development supportive of future
light rail transit investments within designated Transit Oriented
Comm u n itiestra nsmt ermented Urban Villages.
Goal MLU-2: Promote a mix of land uses that support local and regional needs in
an auto-oriented commercial and light industrial area along the Pacific Highway
South (SR-99) Transportation Corridor.
Policy MLU-2.1:- Designate areas for a mix of retail, light industrial or live-
work uses that are accessible from SR-99.
Policy MLU-2.2_ Allow 'big box' and drive-through uses along the Pacific
Highway South (SR-99) Transportation Corridor and outside the designated
Transit Oriented CommunitiestFansot eFmented IJFban Villages.
Policy MLU-2.3: Allow outdoor storage of trucks, heavy equipment, and
contractor storage yards.
Goal MLU-3: Establish a multimodal street network within designated Transit
Oriented Communities tFaigsmt ermented IJFban Villages that is safe, interesting and
encourages walking, bicycling and transit use.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 28
41
Policy MLU-3.1: Create a network of attractive and identifiable pedestrian
linkages within commercial and residential uses to nearby public amenities,
transit facilities, and streets.
Policy MLU-3.2: Create pedestrian or vehicular throughways at a minimum of
every 400 feet to connect commercial and residential uses with public parks,
trails, streets or other public amenities.
Policy MLU-3.3: Identify and designate streets within designated Transit
Oriented Communities transit oriented Urban Villages as multimodal.
Urban Design
The built environment is the framework where urban life occurs. A successful
urban environment is a place that pays attention to design details. There is a
pedestrian scale, where the first floor provides interest and the opportunity for
interaction. From a distance, buildings become more abstract and are seen more
as a piece of art. The Transit Oriented Communities
will look and feel like urban centers. Buildings will be constructed close to the
sidewalks making it imperative they are interesting and constructed of quality
materials. The Urban Design Element of the Midway Subarea Plan focuses on these
details to ensure that Midway becomes a desirable place where people want to live
and do business.
Goal MUD-1: Create a place that is distinctive, aesthetically beautiful, evokes
permanence of the built environment, and supports social interaction in the
dynamic urban center of the designated Transit Oriented Comm unitiestFaHsit
ermented Urban Villages.
Policy MUD-1.1: Ensure quality and durable materials and interesting
architectural details are incorporated into new and remodeled structures,
including structures for parking, mechanical services, or solid waste
collection.
Policy MUD-1.2: Provide an interesting built environment by encouraging a
diversity of building heights and footprints, continuous building fagades that
are modulated, windows located at ground floor, and shelter for pedestrians
from inclement weather.
Policy MUD-1.3: Create public plazas, building entrances, and pathways that
are integrated into the private and public realm to encourage social
interaction and to facilitate the use of public transportation.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 29
42
Policy MUD-1.4: Establish methods to ��L-vertically layer the height
and size of development and stagger high-rises to maximize view potential.
Policy MUD-1.5: Use screening to minimize the visual impact of mechanical
systems at street level or roofs.
Policy MUD-1.6: Provide visual interest at entrances to stand-alone or
internal structured parking facilities.
Policy MUD-1.7: Reduce the visual impact of surface parking by using
measures such as minimizing curb cuts, enhancing the landscaping at
entries, and prohibiting surface parking between buildings and sidewalks.
Policy MUD-1.8: Encourage public and private art in public open areas and on
buildings.
Goal MUD-2: Create a-Transit Oriented Communities
based on urban form that is environmentally sensitive and sustainable.
Policy MUD-2.1: Promote environmentally sustainable building design that
takes into account sun orientation, water and energy conservation, and
practices such as the US Green Building Council LEED certification.
Policy MUD-2.2: Emphasize natural drainage systems wherever feasible,
including, but not limited to, green roofs or walls, rain gardens and so forth.
Policy MUD-2.3: Apply landscaping standards that emphasize
environmentally sustainable practices through plant selection, horticultural
practices, and water retention, diversion and conservation.
Goal MUD-3: Create streetscapes that provide for ease of movement, personal
safety, pleasant aesthetics, and a stage for public engagement.
Policy MUD-3.1: Design streets to be urban in character, easy and safe for
pedestrians to cross, and where vehicular movement is slowed by design
utilizing street calming measures such as on street parking, chicanes
elevated pedestrian crossings or other methods.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 30
43
Policy MUD-3.2: Ensure a safe and attractive pedestrian environment along
the street system through the use of streetlights, street trees, plantings,
minimized number of curb cuts and other streetscape elements.
Policy MUD-3.3: Establish a pallet of easy-to-maintain streetscape elements
and features that are unique to the Transit Oriented CommunitiestFargit
erffiented Urban Villages.
Policy MUD-3.4: Provide pedestrian amenities along the public and private
sidewalks such as seating, human scale lighting, transit shelters, and shelter
from the weather within the designated Transit Oriented CommunitiestFans-i
Policy MUD-3.5: Build pedestrian areas large enough for commercial
activities to spill out onto the sidewalks without significantly impeding
pedestrian movement in designated Transit Oriented Comm unitiestransit
Policy MUD-3.6: EnCOUFage .Ensure a network of pedestrian public access
through private development to assure pedestrian connectivity to adjacent
public open spaces.
Policy MUD-3.7: Disallow drive-through features in new development in
designated Transit Oriented Communities ti=ansit eFiented UFban Villages and
phase out grandfathered drive-through uses during redevelopment.
Policy MUD-3.8: Establish sign regulations for the designated Transit
Oriented Communities tFansot eFmented YFban Villages that acknowledge the
human scale and the slower vehicular movement along 30t" Avenue South,
other internal street systems and internal pathways.
Policy MUD-3.9: Establish sign regulations for the designated Transit
Oriented Communities ti=ansit eFiented Uitan Villages that acknowledges the
more auto-centric environment for development adjacent to SR-99.
Policy MUD-3.10: Work with Puget Sound Energy and other utility providers
to underground or relocate overhead wires along 301" Ave South and South
240t" Street.
Goal MUD-4: Support transit use and pedestrian environment through parking
management, design, and standards.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 31
44
Policy MUD-4.1: Establish methods to encourage the use of alternative
modes of transportation, including maximum parking standards and shared
parking agreements.
Policy MUD-4.2: Reduce surface parking supply in designated Transit
Oriented CommunitiestFansot eFoented UFban Villages.
Policy MUD-4.3: Encourage structured parking in designated transit oriented
development areas.
Housing
Housing is key to the success of the Transit Oriented Communities tl=anS;} eFiented
Urban Villages anticipated in the Midway Study Area. Housing is also important
within the auto-oriented portions identified in the Midway Subarea Plan.
Redevelopment at the Transit Oriented Communities
may eliminate existing affordable housing, displacing families and the elderly. The
community who participated in the vision for Midway was adamant that
replacement housing be created so that people did not have to move far from the
community where some have lived for over 30 years.
Goal MH-1: Promote a diversity of housing types that supports a full range of
incomes and household structures.
Policy MH-1.1: Encourage market rate and workforce housing within in the
designated Transit Oriented Communities tFansit eriented Urban Villages
within mixed use buildings or as stand-alone multifamily residential
development.
Policy MH-1.2: Create an Affordable Housing Commission to consider options,
policies, and partnerships for resolving issues surrounding the potential
displacement of existing affordable housing_
Policy MH-1.23: Promote affordable workforce housing in new housing stock,
with a target of 50% of new owner or rental units affordable for households
earning 120% of median income or less. Regulatory incentives, public
investments, and other strategies will assist in realizing a mix of housing
types to create a diverse transit-supported community.
Policy MH-134: Provide for live-work housing options at medium densities
within the auto-oriented Highway Commercial Corridor.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 32
45
Transportation:
In the 215t Century, transportation will consist of several components - cars,
transit, trains, bicycles and pedestrians. In Midway, all modes of transportation will
need to work together to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by reducing vehicular
trips. To support a pedestrian-friendly Transit Oriented
Community, a new street grid system consisting of small walkable blocks needs to
be created. There exists an excellent north/south spine in 30th Ave South requiring
only some east/west connections to create a system of public spaces where those
who work, live, or visit can move safely, easily, and enjoyably. Extending 301h Ave
south to South 246th St. will support the anticipated development surrounding the
high capacity transit coming to the area.
Goal MT-1: Establish a connected street system that encourages walking and
bicycling, supports transportation investments, including existing and future mass
transit, and connects surrounding single-family neighborhoods to Midway while
protecting them from the impacts of spillover traffic.
Policy MT-1.1: Design and develop streets within the designated Transit
Oriented Communities that provide a safe
experience that has aesthetic value to all users of the public right of way.
Policy MT-1.2: Consider a bridge to connect the West Hill single-family
neighborhood east of I-5 to the Transit Oriented Community tFaf ,t��
YFbaiq Village-located near South 240th St.
Policy MT-1.3: Work with the City of Des Moines and Washington State
Department of Transportation to consider connecting the Pacific Ridge
Neighborhood north of SR-516 to Midway via a 30th Ave South bridge over
SR-516.
Policy MT-1.4: Identify and designate particular streets to be shared with
bicycles.
Policy MT-1.5: Identify and, where feasible, connect local and regional bicycle
and pedestrian trails to the designated Transit Oriented Comm unitiestFansit
Goal MT-2: Create design guidelines for a street hierarchy within the designated
Transit Oriented Community that addresses the
pedestrian and environmental needs.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 33
46
Policy MT-2.1: Design and build 'green streets' where street trees,
landscaping and sustainable stormwater drainage systems enhance the
public domain aesthetically and environmentally.
Policy MT-2.3: Provide safe mid-block pedestrian crossings on internal streets
when urban block sizes exceed 600 linear feet and through-block passages
every 400 linear feet for pedestrian connectivity to public amenities within
the designated Transit Oriented Comm u n itiestFa nsit eFiented IJFban Villages.
Policy MT-2.4: Provide on-street parallel parking that ensures a safe
pedestrian environment within the designated Transit Oriented
Community . (not along SR-99)
Policy MT-2.5: Work with transit agencies to ensure safe access to local and
regional transit, including but not limited to covered bus shelters.
Policy MT-2.6: Work with the City of Des Moines and SeaTac to ensure access
to existing or proposed multi-modal trails within their jurisdictions.
Goal MT-3: Integrate high capacity light rail transit service and associated station
locations into the urban design and functionality of the street systems.
Policy MT-3.1: Work with Sound Transit during all phases of planning for the
extension of light rail into Midway to ensure Kent's preferred rail alignment
and station location are realized.
Policy MT-3.2: Work with Sound Transit to provide an elevated crossing over
SR-99 at the proposed light rail station near Highline Community College.
Policy MT-3.3: Work with Sound Transit and additional partners to establish a
shared parking structure in the vicinity of the future light rail station at
Midway.
Policy MT-3.34: Integrate any proposed parking structure aeeempan
aassociated with the light rail station into the urban landscape by adding
commercial uses at ground floor, an active pedestrian plaza, and art to
enhance the pedestrian environment and minimize the impact of vehicular
traffic.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 34
47
Policy MT-3-.45: Work with transit agencies and private entities to ensure
communities, businesses, and park & ride facilities located outside of the
one-half mile radius around the future light rail stations are connected to the
high capacity transit system.
Policy MT-3.56: Ensure proposed development is compatible with future light
rail improvements by identifying and preserving rights of way necessary for
future transportation projects.
Goal MT-4: Design and fund street improvements identified through the Midway
Planned Action Ordinance (PAO) and accompanying Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) to serve the Transit Oriented Communi IJFb
VI+age and Kent-Highlands area.
Policy MT-4.1: Develop a new street grid system of local public streets
consisting of small pedestrian friendly sized blocks no larger than 400 feet
within the PAO.
Policy MT-4.2: Establish methods to achieve significant increases in non-SOV
(single occupancy vehicle) trips from and within the Transit Oriented
Communities.
Policy MT-4.23: Whenever possible, limit access along South 2315t Way, state
routes and highways, using instead local streets or private internal circulation
roads to connect land uses and public amenities within the PAO area.
Policy MT-4.34: Work with Washington State Department of Transportation
on improvements to SR-99 identified in the PAO/EIS and on the extension of
SR-509 to best serve the surrounding community.
Park & Open Space
Dense, compact urban areas require public places for social interaction and
personal relaxation. The vision for Midway's Transit Oriented Communities tFansit-
acknowledges the need for open space and identifies
several public and private development options for providing exercise, relaxation,
and gathering places.
Goal MP&OS-1: Create an aesthetically pleasing, functional, and effective parks
and open space system in designated Transit Oriented Communities t1=anSit eFient„d
Urban Villages through public-an-d private investments and other partnerships.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 35
48
Policy MP&OS-1.1: Wherever possible, integrate city owned properties that
have recreational or educational potential with public parks and plazas.
Policy MP&OS-1.2: Utilize undeveloped right-of-way for a linear park with
multi-purpose trail.
Policy MP&OS-1.3: Identify, acquire, design and construct a large civic
plaza/park to serve employees, residents and visitors in the Transit Oriented
Community located near South 240t" Street.
Policy MP&OS-1.4: Work with Seattle Public Utilities - property owners of the
Kent-Highlands and Midway landfills - to design and develop passive or
active recreational opportunities on portions of the landfills identified as
undevelopable.
Policy MP&OS-1.5: Provide access to wetlands at South 272"d Street for
educational and passive recreational opportunities.
Policy MP&OS-1.6: Engage with neighboring jurisdictions, school districts,
and others in an effort to share existing facilities through joint use
agreements.
Policy MP&OS-1.7: Consider shuttle service from Midway to Kent park
facilities located in the valley in an effort to expand recreational access.
Goal MP&OS-2: Create a joint-use regional drainage infrastructure for development
and recreational purposes.
Policy MP&OS-2.1: Consider the opportunities for a regional stormwater
detention facility to contribute aesthetically, recreationally and
environmentally to the urban landscape of the Transit Oriented Community
at South 2401"
Policy MP&OS-2.2: Establish a funding mechanism to build the detention
pond and associated recreational and aesthetic features.
Policy MP&OS-2.3: Program the detention facility as a community focal point
for ecosystem education and neighborhood adopt-a-park.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 36
49
Policy MP&OS-2.4: Encourage natural drainage systems in public and private
development where feasible, as an alternative or offset to traditional
stormwater treatment and controls.
Implementation
The vision for Midway is ambitious, transforming the existing auto-oriented retail
activities into a more compact, dense, transit supported urban Vie-community
where light rail transit stations are planned. The subarea plan identifies new roads
and bridges, parks and trails, and a regional stormwater detention facility for the
Transit Oriented Communities tFansot oriented Urban Villages located at South 240t"
and South 272nd. These changes and improvements will come over time, and a
successful implementation strategy will require a city funding strategy utilizing
existing revenue sources and new financing tools.
Goal MI-1: Provide an effective process and appropriate tools that will implement
the vision for the Midway Subarea Plan.
Policy MI-1.1: Implement the Midway Subarea Plan using a combination of
development regulations and incentives, capital investments, and other
public and private strategies.
Policy MI-1.2: Establish a mechanism that identifies needed infrastructure
and amenities to support the designated Transit Oriented Community t-rafnsA
at South 240t" and create a financial strategy that
shares the development cost for those improvements across the various
parties that directly benefit from the improvements.
Policy MI-1.3: Utilize tools such as master planned development,
development agreements or other processes to facilitate site planning and
permit process.
Inter-jurisdictional Coordination
Envision Midway was a joint visioning effort by the Cities of Kent and Des Moines,
engaging numerous agencies and institutions that have a stake in the outcome.
The shared city boundary on the west side of SR-99 needs to be consistent to
facilitate future development. Continued discussion and coordination needs to
occur since many of the changes anticipated in this plan will take decades to be
realized.
Goal MIC-1: Reconcile regulatory differences between the City of Kent and the City
of Des Moines along the shared city boundaries to facilitate economic growth and
stability.
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 37
50
Policy MIC-1.1: Continue to work with the City of Des Moines to create
consistent land use regulations along the shared boundary west of SR-99 and
within the Transit Oriented Community located
at South 240th Street.
Policy MIC-1.2: Wherever possible, ensure design guidelines and
development standards are consistent with the City of Des Moines.
Policy MIC-1.3: Enter into interlocal agreements to facilitate development
where private properties are within both the City of Kent and the City of Des
Moines.
Goal MIC-2: Continue coordination with regional and state transportation agencies
on matters of transportation investments, planning and construction.
Policy MIC-2.1: Coordinate with Sound Transit, King County METRO,
Washington State Department of Transportation, and Puget Sound Regional
Council to ensure facilities and services are provided over time.
S:WermitlPlan\COMP PLAN AMENDMENTS k2007\CPA-2007-4 MID WAYISubareaPlan\Final 111009.doc
Draft - Midway Subarea Plan 38
51
ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ben Wolters, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager
KEN T Phone: 253-856-5454
WASH I N G T G N
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S
Kent, WA 98032-5895
November 16, 2009
TO: Chair Dana Ralph and Land Use and Planning Board Members
FROM: William D. Osborne, AICP, Planner
RE: Panther Lake Annexation Zoning [AZ-2009-1]
For November 23, 2009 Workshop
BACKGROUND: Per RCW 36.70A.070 of the Washington State Growth
Management Act (GMA), the City of Kent has adopted policies relating to managing
development and urban services within its designated Urban Growth Area (UGA).
The Panther Lake area has been included within Kent's UGA since the original
adoption of the Kent Comprehensive Plan. With annexation of the Panther Lake
area resulting from the November 3, 2009 election, the City of Kent must adopt
Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Districts Map designations and submit the
ordinance for state review 60 days prior to the effective date of the annexation -
July 1, 2010. Per RCW 35A.14.340, the City of Kent must hold two public hearings
on the proposed annexation zoning, each hearing held thirty days apart.
SUMMARY: Over 75% of the land area in the Panther Lake annexation is
designated for single-family residential development of what King County calls
medium density (4 to 8 dwelling units per acre). Approximately 15% of the land
area is designated as greenbelt,' the equivalent King County designation for Urban
Separators. Slightly less than 7% of the Panther Lake area is designated for
multifamily residential densities (12 dwelling units per acre or more), and
commercially-designated land amounts to barely more than 1.5% of the total area.
The existing conditions in terms of physical development, planning and zoning are
very similar between Panther Lake and the contiguous boundary areas of Kent.
Staff is currently suggesting analysis of zoning for the annexation area that is
generally consistent with existing King County zoning.
At the November 23rd meeting, staff would like to discuss Comprehensive Plan Map
and Zoning Districts Map designations with the Board, so that we may bring a
recommendation to the Board in January 2010.
WO/pm P:\Planning\ANNEXATIONS\AZ-2009-1 Panther Lake\LUPB\11-23-09\WorkshopMemoZoning.DOC
Attach: Descriptive Statistics of Panther Lake Annexation Parcels by Land Use&Zoning Designations
Draft Kent Suggested Equivalent Designations Map
cc: Ben Wolters, ECD Director
Fred Satterstrom,AICP, Planning Director
Charlene Anderson,AICP, Planning Manager
Project File
52
This page intentionally left blank.
Area_by_PantherLkZoning
Descriptive Statistics of Panther Lake Annexation Parcels by Land Use & 53
Zoning Designations
Kent Equivalent Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation
Parcel Count, Square Feet and Percent of Whole by Kent Equivalent Zoning
District Designations
King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation
Parcel Count, Square Feet and Percent of Whole
per Kinq County Zoninq Districts
NS
NCC
6 nb (NBC) NB
319,816 6
0.27% 319,816
0.27%
MU
CC/CC-MU
24 cb (CBC) CB CBSO
1,492,987 22 2
1.25% 1,067,672 425,315
0.90% 0.36%
SF-1/US
SR-1
230 gb R1 R1S0
17,464,012 220 10
14.67% 14,908,029 2,555,983
12.52% 2.15%
SF-4.5
SR-4.5
767 um (UR-4-12) R4 R4SO
9,571,232 761 6
8.04% 8,901,084 670,148
7.48% 0.56%
SF-6
SR-6
5,812 um (UR-4-12) R6 R6SO
72,444,386 5,758 54
60.85% 69,840,853 2,603,533
58.67% 2.19%
SF-8
SR-8
834 um (UR-4-12) R8 R8SO R8PSO
9,431,351 807 23 4
7.92% 9,252,660 142,586 36,105
7.77% 0.12% 0.03%
LDMF
M R-G
53 uh (UR-12+) R12 R12P R12SO
6,363,415 47 1 5
5.35% 4,720,880 251,452 1,391,083
3.97% 0.21% 1.17%
MDMF
MR-M
15 uh (UR-12+) R18 R18SO
1,254,385 13 2
1.05% 956,695 297,690
0.80% 0.25%
MR-H
7 uh (UR-12+) R24 R24SO R48
706,167 5 1 1
0.59% 534,977 43,560 127,630
0.45% 0.04% 0.11%
*Not inclusive of reductions for critical areas and associated buffers
P:\Planning\ANNEXATIONS\AZ-2009-1 Panther Lake\LUPB\11-23-09\PantherLakeZoningDigest.xls
54
This page intentionally left blank.
55
Panther Lake (with Current King County Zoning) R-4
LIJ
0R-6 R-6 R-6
°_° r R-6 R-6
Q S 192 sr S192 ST SE 192 SIT J
LU
f
R-1 v R-6 V R-8 NB �.LL R-6 Q
�--� R-8 R-6 �R-6
R-6 a R-1 R-6
R-1 R-1 �
- R-fi n
7 R-6
5 2Q0 5T SE 2QQ ST _
R-6
R-6 n
i:, i:, �.
- I N R-1 ..
R-8 lP
Co ❑— E�O�
:QD---- S
R-6 CB R-fi n R-6 J RA-5
r` = R-12 + J
UUU R-1
S 208 5T 5E 208 5T
A - ..
R-8/
CO R-12 -
1� R-6 R-18 R-6
.SR-. R-fi
R-6 R-1 -
� RA-5
R-8 R-6
J
L R-6 LQLJ_ Rom : U)
R-6 o R-6 w
R-6 a
C 5 • (J N
R-6 r
RA2 R-6 R-4 R-1 RA-5
n R-6
r R-6� L _ta4`� ° ❑ R-4
w
y
R-6 R-6
R-6 R-$
r
R-6 � R-4
R-1
I Q
a� R-4
I
MR-GN_�� _V I �_j R-6
11
a
o MRT-16 SR-6
CC-Mu
-
5 240 ST uO MR-M MR-D
l �$ � ,
�, 9 SE 240 ST
° CC N .I NCC al
o n �
L I i + SRAS
SR-8
O-MLI-- I. r 1 4 n
Legend Legend
QProposed Annexation Area Kent Zoning Neighborhood Convenience Commercial
King County Zoning Single-Family(SR-1) Community Commercial
-CB(Community) Single-Family(SR-3) Community Commercial/Mixed Use
INS(Neighborhood) Single-Family(SR-4.5) Gateway Commercial
RA-2-5(Rural Residential) Single-Family(SR-6) General Commercial
RA_5 Single-Family(SR-8) General CommerciallMixed Use
R-1 (SR-11Urb Sep) Duplex Multifamily ��commercial Manufacturing I
R-4 Tow nhouse/Condo(MRT-12) Commercial Manufacturing II
R-6 r Townhouse/Condo(MRT-16) -Oifioe
R-8 I Garden Density Multifamily -OffioelMixed-Use
n R-12 Medium Density Multifamily Industrial Park
R-18 High Density Multifamily Industrial Park/Commercial
-R-24 Mobile Home Park Limited Industrial
- R48
City of'Kent Planning
0 1,320 2,640 3,960 5,280 November 12, 2009
Feet Panther Lake
Land Use & Planning Board Workshop
November 23, 2009