Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-16-2024 Agenda
Planning Commission Meeting J uly 16, 2024 - 6:30 P M City Hall Council Chambers A GE NDA I .P UB L I C PART I C IPAT IO N A .P ublic P articipation I nformation The City of A uburn P lanning Commission Meeting scheduled for Tuesday, J uly 16, 2024, at 6:30 p.m., will be held in-person and virtually. To attend the meeting virtually, please click one of the links below, or call into the meeting at one of the phone numbers below: J oin Z oom Meeting: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/7999102307 Meeting I D: 799 910 2307 One tap mobile +12532158782,,7999102307# US (Tacoma) +12532050468,,7999102307# US Dial by your location • +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) • +1 253 205 0468 US • +1 669 444 9171 US • 888 475 4499 U S Toll-free • 877 853 5257 US Toll-free Meeting I D: 799 910 2307 Find your local number: https://us06web.zoom.us/u/kbL sn6aJ 7H I I .C AL L T O O RD E R A .RO L L C AL L/E S TAB L I S HM E NT O F Q UO RUM B .P L E D G E O F AL L E G I ANC E I I I .P UB L I C C O M M E NT Comment from the audience on any proposal for action by the Commission. I f the comment is related to an action subsequently listed here as a public hearing, the comment should be provided at the time of the public hearing. I V.AP P RO VAL O F M INUT E S A .J une 18, 2024 Minutes from the P lanning Commission Meeting Page 1 of 435 V.I NT RO D UC T I O N A .P resentation Overview (S teiner) B rief overview of upcoming Element Presentations and Public Hearing schedule. V I .P UB L I C HE ARI NG S A .Utilities E lement (S teiner) P ublic Hearing for the public testimony and Planning Commission deliberation on the Utilities E lement B .Transportation E lement (S weeting) P ublic Hearing for the public testimony and Planning Commission deliberation on the Transportation E lement V I I .O T HE R B US I NE S S A .Community Development E lements P lanning Commission Action P lanning Commission to take action on L and Use E lement, Housing E lement, Historic P reservation E lement, Economic Development Element, and Climate E lement of the Comprehensive P lan Update. B .Transportation E lement Planning Commission Action P lanning Commission to take action on Transportation E lement of the Comprehensive P lan Update. V I I I .C O M M UNIT Y D E V E L O P M E NT RE P O RT I X.AD J O URNM E NT The City of Auburn Planning Commission is a seven member advisory body that provides recommendations to the Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land use plans and related codes such as zoning. Planning Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. Actions taken by the Planning Commission, other than approvals or amendments to the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, are not final decisions; they are in the form of recommendations to the city council which must ultimately make the final decision. Page 2 of 435 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: June 18, 2024 Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting Date: June 28, 2024 Department: Community Development Attachments: June 18, 2024 Draft Minutes Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff:Teague Meeting Date:July 16, 2024 Item Number: Page 3 of 435 Planning Commission Meeting J une 18, 2024 - 6:30 P M City Hall Council Chambers MINUT E S I .P UB L I C PART I C IPAT IO N A .P ublic P articipation I nformation The City of A uburn P lanning Commission Meeting was held in person and virtually. I I .C AL L T O O RD E R Chair J udi Roland called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street. A .RO L L C AL L/E S TAB L I S HM E NT O F Q UO RUM Commissioners present: Chair J udi Roland, Vice Chair P hillip S tephens, J ulie Berry, K ent Sprague, W illiam Stewart, A aron VanderP ol, and Lynn Walters. S taff members present: P lanning S ervices Manager A lexandria Teague, A cting City A ttorney Doug Ruth, S enior Planner J osh S teiner, City Clerk S hawn Campbell and A cting Deputy City Clerk Gerri Blackwell. B .P L E D G E O F AL L E G I ANC E Chair Roland led those in attendance in the P ledge of A llegiance. I I I .P UB L I C C O M M E NT No one came forward to speak. I V.AP P RO VAL O F M INUT E S A .May 21, 2024 Minutes from the Special P lanning Commission Meeting Commissioner Sprague moved and Commissioner Berry seconded to approve the May 21, 2024, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. MO T I O N C A R R I E D UNA NI MO US LY. 7-0 Page 1 of 4Page 4 of 435 V.I NT RO D UC T I O N A .P resentation Overview (S teiner) B rief overview of upcoming Element Presentations and Public Hearing schedule. P lanner S teiner provided the Commission with an updated P ublic Hearing schedule and presentation on the E lements of the Comprehensive Plan that have not yet been shared with the P lanning Commission. V I .P UB L I C HE ARI NG S A .S tormwater P lan Element (Carlaw) S taff presentation on the proposed changes to the Comprehensive S tormwater P lan. Chair Roland opened the Public Hearing at 6:36 p.m. E ngineer Carlaw provided the Commission with a recap of the 2024 Comprehensive S torm Drainage Plan including the updated appendices. He noted that the Department did not receive any public comment on the P lan. No one came forward to speak. Chair Roland closed the Public Hearing at 6:42 p.m. Chari Roland reopened the P ublic Hearing at 6:43 p.m. Dave K rone 322 Clay S treet NW Dave expressed concerns regarding Storm Water drainage near the E nvironmental Park. E ngineer Carlaw stated there is no current plan to update the Storm Water Drainage P lan in the Environmental P ark. Chair Roland closed the Public Hearing at 6:48 p.m. Commissioner Stephens moved and Commissioner S prague seconded to approve the Stormwater Plan E lement as presented. MO T I O N C A R R I E D UNA NI MO US LY. 7-0 V I I .O T HE R B US I NE S S A .Capital Facilities E lement (Steiner) S taff P resentation of the proposed changes to the Capital F acilities Element. P lanner S teiner provided the Commission with a presentation on the Capital Facilities E lement including the core changes required by regulatory requirement per R C W 36.70A.070, reviewed the difference between the Capital Facilities P lan and the Capital Facilities E lement of the Page 2 of 4Page 5 of 435 Comprehensive P lan, items that had been removed from the Capital Facilities E lement and put into other E lements of the Comprehensive Plan, collaboration from other City Departments, and Capital Facilities types. He stated the Department plans to hold a P ublic Hearing on J uly 2, 2024, with action at the October 23, 2024, Planning Commission Meeting. The Commission discussed future plans for contaminated wells, breaking out specific municipal facilities from the plan, future expansion of the Capital Facilities E lement, and level of future service. Director Gaub explained the levels of service targeted plans to the Commission. B .Comprehensive Plan D E IS (S teiner) S taff to provide update on Comprehensive P lan D E I S, public meetings, and E I S schedule. P lanner S teiner provided the Commission with a presentation on the Comprehensive P lan Draft E nvironmental I mpact Statement (D E I S). He explained the various options and alternatives for growth impacts, the updated numbers for the Commissions preferred alternatives will be included in the Final E nvironmental I mpact Statement (F E I S), he reviewed the public outreach for comments, the F E I S is expected back in a couple months and the final steps to adopt the F E I S . The Commission discussed the purpose of the preferred alternative land use, and the option of no action. V I I I .C O M M UNIT Y D E V E L O P M E NT RE P O RT Manager Teague stated the Department is working on Code updates, the P lanning Department is fully staffed, the lobby at the Annex has been remodeled, and projected development projects within the City. The Commission asked about the demolition of the A uburn Avenue Theater, future plans for the existing P olice Department building, updating lanes to Kersey, the Diamond Valley Development, and items on the J uly 2, 2024, Planning Commission meeting agenda. I X.AD J O URNM E NT There being no further business to come before the P lanning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 7:39 p.m. A P P R O V E D this 16th day of J uly, 2024. ____________________________ ____________________________ J UD I R O L A ND, C HA I R S hawn Campbell, City Clerk The City of Auburn Planning Commission is a seven member advisory body that provides Page 3 of 4Page 6 of 435 recommendations to the Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land use plans and related codes such as zoning. Planning Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. Actions taken by the Planning Commission, other than approvals or amendments to the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, are not final decisions; they are in the form of recommendations to the city council which must ultimately make the final decision. Page 4 of 4Page 7 of 435 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Presentation Overview (Steiner) Date: June 28, 2024 Department: Community Development Attachments: 1 - 2024 Comp Plan PC Memo 7-16-24 Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff:Steiner Meeting Date:July 16, 2024 Item Number: Page 8 of 435 Memorandum To: Judi Roland, Chair, Planning Commission Planning Commission Members From: Josh Steiner, Senior Long-Range Planner, Comm. Dev. Dept. Alexandria Teague, Planning Services Manager, Comm. Dev. Dept Jacob Sweeting, City Engineer, Public Works Date: July 16, 2024 Re: Special Meeting: 2024 Comprehensive Plan - Planning Commission Each city and county in Washington state is required to conduct a periodic update of its comprehensive plan and development regulations per RCW 36.70A.130 (The Growth Management Act or GMA). In general, the purpose is to ensure consistency with the Puget Sound Regional Council Vision 2050, the Countywide Planning Policies (for Auburn this means both Pierce and King County), any changes in state laws over the intervening time, and to respond to changing conditions within the local community. Tonight, public hearings on the Utilities Element and Transportation Element will be conducted. Planning Commission will also deliberate and take action on a recommendation to City Council for adoption of the Land Use, Housing, Historic Preservation, Economic Development, and Climate Elements. These Elements are indicated as “Package 1”. Future Planning Commission deliberation and action on remaining Elements and Systems Plans, indicated as “Package 2”, is expected at the October 23, 2024 meeting. This meeting is open to the public and has been advertised appropriately as a regular meeting. The table below illustrates current, past, and upcoming Planning Commission meetings for the Comprehensive Plan update, as well as subject. Subject Public Meeting Public Hearing Deliberation and Action Planning Commission – Package 1 Land Use N/A Housing N/A Historic Preservation N/A Economic Development N/A Climate N/A Planning Commission – Package 2 Page 9 of 435 Sewer Plan September 17 Transportation July 16 July 16 Parks and Open Space N/A PROS Plan TBD TBD Stormwater Plan N/A Capital Facilities October 23 Water System Plan October 23 October 23 Utilities Element July 16 October 23 Planning Commission Action – Recommendation for Adoption to City Council Package 1 July 16 Package 2 October 23 For reference, the current adopted Comprehensive Plan Elements can be found here. Feel free to contact Josh Steiner, Senior Planner, at jsteiner@auburnwa.gov or 253-804-5064 with any questions. Included Attachments: Attachment A – Transportation Planning Commission Presentation Attachment B – Draft Comprehensive Transportation Plan Attachment C – Draft Transportation Element Attachment D – Utilities Element Planning Commission Presentation Attachment E – V3 Draft Utilities Element Attachment F – 2024 Periodic Comprehensive Plan Staff Report – Package 1 Attachment G – Draft Volume 1 - Land Use Element Attachment H – Draft Volume 2 - Housing Element Attachment I – Draft Volume 6 - Economic Development Element Attachment J – Draft Volume 8 - Historic Preservation Element Attachment K – Draft Volume 9 - Climate Element Attachment L – Draft Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment Attachment M – Draft Comprehensive Plan Zoning Map Note: V1 = Currently adopted Plan showing staff edits V2 = Clean version of V1 with staff edits incorporated V3 = Clean version of V2 with edits incorporated, showing edits in response to public comments, Planning Commission comments, and/or agency comments. May include maps or other figures that have been amended by staff since V2 in response to comments. If V1 is not available, please see currently adopted Element via link above. Page 10 of 435 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Utilities Element (Steiner) Date: July 3, 2024 Department: Community Development Attachments: D - 2024 Utilities Element Presentation E - V3 Utilities Element Draft 7-16-2024 Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff:Steiner Meeting Date:July 16, 2024 Item Number:PH.1 Page 11 of 435 AUBURN VALUES SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION CITY DEPARTMENTS 2024 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN –UTILITIES ELEMENT JOSH STEINER, AICP, SENIOR PLANNER PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 16, 2024 Department of Community Development Planning Building Development Engineering Permit Center Economic Development Community Services ● Code Enforcement Page 12 of 435 (3) A Utilities Element consisting of: (a)General location, proposed location, and capacity of all existing and proposed utilities including, but not limited to, electrical, telecommunications, and natural gas systems. Forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities; (b)Identify all public entities that own utility systems and endeavor in good faith to work with other public entities, such as special purpose districts, to gather and include within its utilities element the information Core Changes to Utilities Use Element SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – UTILITIES FACILITIES ELEMENT Regulatory Requirements (RCW 36.70A.070) Page 13 of 435 Capital Facilities Element – Inventory, Level of Service, Future Plans, Growth, Essential Public Facility Policies, Municipal Buildings Policies Element and Plan Alignment SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – UTILITIES FACILITIES ELEMENT How the Elements and Plans Fit Together Capital Facilities Plan – Project Finances and Financial Policies. Combined with CFE, satisfies GMA Comp Plan Requirements. Utilities Element – Overview of City- owned and Privately-Owned Utilities, and References to Other Plans, Privately - Owned and Solid Waste Policies Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Systems Plans – Technical Information and Policies Privately-owned Utility Plans– Technical Information and Policies. Not included as part of Comp Plan. Page 14 of 435 Consolidate Private Utilities and City-owned utilities policies and information into one Element City-owned utilities was located in Capital Facilities Element and Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate information from Systems Plan and Reference Overall formatting and refinements for readability Few comments from agencies Multi-Department Effort Core Changes to Utilities Element SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – UTILITIES ELEMENT Element Update Framework Page 15 of 435 City -Owned and Operated Utilities Water Stormwater Sewer Private Utilities Electricity and Natural Gas Puget Sound Energy provides services to most of city Enumclaw Natural Gas serves residential customers in Auburn Adventist Academy area Telecommunications Conventional Telephone service by CenturyLink Cellular Telephone towers throughout city, regulated by FCC Cable television provided by Comcast through aerial and underground cables Solid Waste Provided by Waste Management Core Changes to Utilities Element SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – UTILITIES ELEMENT Capital Facilities Types Page 16 of 435 July 16th – Public Hearing Requested updates based on feedback Next Steps SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – UTILITIES ELEMENT October 23rd – Planning Commission Action (same night as Capital Facilities Element and Water Comprehensive Plan action) Page 17 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element Page 18 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal Table of Contents Intent of the Utilities Element ................................................................................................................. 1 Values .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 City-Owned and Operated Utilities ...................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Conditions and Trends ........................................................................................................................... 2 Utility Services ............................................................................................................................................. 2 Sewer Systems ............................................................................................................................................ 5 Private Utilities ............................................................................................................................................... 8 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 8 Vision ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 Electricity and Natural Gas .................................................................................................................. 8 Telecommunications ...............................................................................................................................9 Solid Waste ................................................................................................................................................. 10 Goals and Policies ........................................................................................................................................ 10 Page 19 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | UE- 1 Intent of the Utilities Element The Utilities Element required by the Department of Commerce per RCW 36.70A.070, and consists of the general location, proposed location, and capacity of all existing and proposed utilities including electrical, telecommunications, and natural gas systems. This Element generally describes these “privately-owned” services, and solid waste services, provided within the city, however Auburn does not own or operate these services and relies on outside service providers such as Puget Sound Energy and Waste Management to provide these services. This Element includes descriptions those “privately-owned” utilities note above as well as summaries of city-owned and operated utilities such as water, sewer, and stormwater. Detailed information for both privately-owned and city-owned utilities can primarily found in the Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Systems Plans adopted by the City and that are incorporated by reference in the Comprehensive Plan, and by contacting privately-owned utility providers. Values Character: Private utilities will provide a positive contribution to the quality, aesthetics, and functionality of the community. Wellness: Utility infrastructure and systems support the delivery of safe and efficient electricity, gas, and telecommunications. Service: Utility infrastructure and systems support the City’s goals of providing accessible and transparent government services and processes. Economy: Businesses are served by utility infrastructure meeting or exceeding the needs for market entry and future growth. Celebration: Telecommunication systems are fully utilized to reach a broader cross- section of the community in a way that brings people together for civic activities, cultural events, and social awareness. Environment: Siting, installation, and maintenance of utilities will ensure protection, preservation, and respect of the wildlife habitat, water quality, and environmentally sensitive features. Sustainability: When designing, constructing, and maintaining utilities, a long-term investment horizon is favored over concepts that only provide short-term benefits and outcomes. City-Owned and Operated Utilities Page 20 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | U E -2 Introduction This section provides overall policy direction for the different utility services provided by the city, including water, sewer, and stormwater facilities. A key provision of the Growth Management Act is concurrency. In general, concurrency seeks to ensure that development is permitted only if adequate public facilities are, or can be guaranteed to be, available to support new development. Concurrency requires that facilities needed to maintain a locally adopted level of service be provided “concurrently” with development. Concurrency places the finance function of local government in a much more prominent role in the land use development process. While the concept of concurrency is new to many jurisdictions, it has been used in Auburn since the adoption of its 1986 Comprehensive Plan. Conditions and Trends Accommodating Growth The provision and sizing of public facilities such as streets or waterlines and sewer lines can influence the rate or timing of development and is an important means of managing growth. Timed provision of facilities also ensures that new development can be assimilated into the existing community without serious disruptions or adverse impacts. This Plan establishes policies to allow development when and where all public facilities are adequate or can be made adequate, but only if such development can be adequately served by public facilities and services consistent with the adopted level-of-service standards. Utility Services The following services are owned and operated by the City of Auburn. Water System The City of Auburn (City) manages the water utility in accordance with established water- system policies that govern various facets of utility operations. City policies are established by the City in order to provide a vision or mission of the water utility and to provide a framework for the design, operation, and ongoing wellbeing of the City’s water utility. The policies included in this Water Comprehensive Plan are developed specifically for the City’s multi-source municipal water system and seek to provide consistent treatment to all utility customers and to provide documentation to current water- system customers as well as those considering service from the City. It should be noted that what is included in these policies is limited to those things related to the water system and its design, maintenance, and operation. There are other policies and criteria that pertain to the water utility the City has in place regarding land use, development, and financial components, which are not directly addressed in this plan, that could still have an impact on the needs of the water system. These Page 21 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | U E -3 policies and criteria may include factors such as zoning regulations, building codes, infrastructure requirements, and financing options. These additional factors will be considered when planning for the water system, to meet the needs of the community in a sustainable and effective matter. The City’s Water Comprehensive Plan is based upon the following mission statement for the water utility: “The City will provide for the efficient, environmentally sound and safe management of the existing and future water system within Auburn’s service area.” • The City’s Water utility policies are grouped within goal statements that are headlined under the following categories: • Business Practices • Service Area • Operations and Maintenance • Financial • Planning • Environmental Stewardship • Design and Construction Page 22 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | U E -4 Map U-1 – Water Utility Providers Page 23 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | U E -5 Stormwater Systems This chapter describes a set of overarching goals for the City’s Storm Drainage Utility and policies for complying with these goals. UE-83 City Comprehensive Plan Consistency The City Comprehensive Plan is the City’s growth management plan and contains policies for protecting critical areas and natural resource lands, designating urban growth areas, preparing comprehensive utility plans, and implementing them through capital investments and development regulations. Therefore, the City Comprehensive Plan provides a framework of policies for development, expansion, and maintenance of the Storm Drainage Utility reflected in this Storm Drainage Comprehensive Plan. UE-84 Storm Drainage Comprehensive Plan Policy Goals The City’s Storm Drainage Utility policies are grouped within goal statements that are headlined under the following categories: • System Planning • Operations and Maintenance • Fiscal Responsibility • Environment and Regional Coordination Taken together with the City Comprehensive Plan and Auburn City Code (ACC) these goals define how the Storm Drainage Utility shall be operated and maintained. Several policies have been developed within each goal, many of which are also based on the Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual (SWMMWW) and the City’s Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Stormwater Permit (NPDES). Sewer Systems The City desires to employ recognized best business practices that result in an efficient and cost-effective operation of the Sanitary Sewer Utility. The City shall identify the key business functions within the Sanitary Sewer Utility (e.g., billing, permitting, asset management, and planning) and develop supporting best business practices for each. The City understands that defining and implementing best business practices is a long-term effort and will require a stepwise approach. Given that the Sanitary Sewer Utility is made up largely of physical assets that have the greatest value and deserve the greatest commitment to operate and maintain, the City shall continue to prioritize the business practice of asset management. Page 24 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | UE-6 Asset management is a systematic approach to maintaining assets in good working order to minimize future costs of maintaining and replacing them, especially to avoid costly deferred maintenance. The best practices for asset management involve systematically basing choices on an understanding of asset condition and performance, risks, and costs in the long term. Asset best practices include: • Having extensive knowledge about assets and their costs for maintenance and replacement (i.e., detailed inventories); • Maintaining Levels of Service; • Taking a life-cycle approach to asset management planning; and • Implementing the planned solutions to provide a reliable, cost-effective service. Since the adoption of the 2016 Comprehensive Sewer Plan, the Sanitary Sewer Utility has compiled an inventory of assets and their conditions for approximate 70% of its currents assets. The Sanitary Sewer Utility shall continue implementing the above best practices during the next planning period. Sewer Comprehensive Plan Policies, Standards, and Guidelines This Plan presents policies and standards related to system development, maintenance, funding, and generally how the Sanitary Sewer Utility should operate. These policies define limits and outline how the wastewater collection system should be operated and maintained and are grouped within goal statements that are headlined under the following categories: • Service Area • System Planning • Operations and Maintenance • Environmental Stewardship • System Performance and Reliability • Fiscal Responsibility Page 25 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | U E -7 Map U-2 – Sewer Utility Providers Page 26 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | U E -8 Private Utilities Introduction The Growth Management Act requires the City of Auburn to include a Private Utilities Element within its Comprehensive Plan. The element should pro- vide a framework for the efficient and predictable provision and siting of utility facilities and ser- vices within the City, consistent with each serving utility’s public service obligations. This element covers private utilities (those not provided by the City of Auburn), and includes electricity, telecommunications, and natural gas. City-owned water, sewer, and stormwater utilities are described within the Capital Facilities Element (Chapter 3) of this Comprehensive Plan. Investor-owned utilities in the state of Washington are regulated by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission. State law regulates the rates, charges, services facilities, and practices of utilities. Any changes in policies of these aspects of utility provision require WUTC approval. The primary responsibility for the planning of private utilities rests with utility providers. Clearly, however, planning cannot take place without open lines of communication between the City and utility providers. The City acknowledges that some private utility providers are not willing to provide capacity or future construction plans, as some of this information may affect their competitiveness or be considered proprietary. Private utilities, however, must recognize that not pro- viding relevant information may hinder the City’s ability to assist them in their projects. Vision Private utilities in Auburn are planned, designed, and constructed in a manner that adequately supports the future growth scenarios predicted in the City’s Land Use Element and that meets the needs of residents, visitors, and businesses. Sustainability is a principle that guides decisions for where utilities are placed, how they are constructed, how they are operated and maintained, and how all aspects of design, construction, and operation are funded. Electricity and Natural Gas Puget Sound Energy provides electrical and natural gas service to the City of Auburn and its potential annexation area. PSE is an investor-owned private utility that provides service to approximately 1.2 million customers in a service area that covers 6,000 square miles. Electricity PSE builds, operates, and maintains an electrical system consisting of generation, transmission, and distribution facilities. Facility technology for electricity transmission may change in the future in order to respond to the need for more Page 27 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | UE-9 efficient facilities, address various electromagnetic field and health concerns, and diversify resources. Utility policies should be updated in the future to consider changes in technology, facilities, and services. Natural Gas The Northwest Pipeline Corporation and Enumclaw Natural Gas also have gas lines in the southeastern portion of the City. Northwest Pipeline Corporation’s only customer in Auburn is Enumclaw Natural Gas. Enumclaw Natural Gas serves Auburn residential customers in the area of the Auburn Adventist Academy. Telecommunications Telecommunications includes a wide range of services including conventional telephone, cellular telephone, and cable television. Telecommunications technology continues to change rapidly. The City of Auburn owns and maintains a robust fiber optic Metropolitan Area Network (MAN) that connects most City owned building facilities and traffic signals throughout the Auburn area. Conventional Telephone Conventional local telephone service to the City is provided by CenturyLink. CenturyLink is a global provider of telecommunications services. Calls are switched at facilities called central offices. Typically, four main lines leave each central office – one in each direction. Auburn’s central office is located in downtown Auburn. Several carriers provide long distance service to the area. These providers have underground fiber-optic cables passing through the City of Auburn. Cellular Telephone Cellular telecommunications provide mobile telephone communications via radios that send and receive signals from a network of receivers mounted on utility poles, towers, buildings, or other structures on private property or within a right-of-way. Cellular communication companies offer digital voice, messaging, and high-speed wireless data services to customers. Cellular telephone service within the City, its potential annexation areas, and the Puget Sound region overall is provided by multiple private companies. Cellular providers are regulated by the Federal Communications Commission. Technology and business practices in the area of telecommunications continue to change rapidly. Cable Television Page 28 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | U E -10 Cable television service is provided by Comcast through a combination of aerial and underground cables. The locations of existing and planned cable lines are shown on Map 6.4. Solid Waste The City of Auburn contracts with WM for collection of municipal garbage, recycling, and yard waste. Waste Management disposes of Auburn’s garbage at a King County Solid Waste transfer station. Recycling is processed at WM’s material recycling facility in Tacoma, WA. WM takes the yard and food waste to either DTG in Tacoma, WA or Cedar Grove in Maple Valley, WA to be converted into compost. There is a small area of Auburn that was recently annexed. This area is serviced by Republic Services. Republic Services takes the garbage to a King County Solid Waste transfer station, the recycling is processed at their material recycling center in Seattle, WA, and yard and food waste is taken to Cedar Grove in Maple Valley, WA. There are approximately 20,200 Waste Management accounts as of 2024. Goals and Policies Goal # 1 – Service Area Allow the development of private utilities to meet the needs of the existing community and provide for its planned growth consistent with serving utilities’ public service obligations. Policies: U-1. Private utility providers will utilize the City’s Comprehensive Plan Map for guidance regarding future land uses and intensities in order to determine and plan for future service. Private utility facilities and systems should be consistent with the uses and densities allowed by the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. The City will make this information easily available to utility providers. The City will also coordinate with utility providers on pending development proposals (both public and private). In return, the City expects a cooperative posture toward coordinated and timely expansion of infrastructure. U-2. Private utility companies should strive to provide utility services to all segments of the Auburn population and areas of the community in an equitable manner that prioritizes easy access and that offers pricing structures that strive to reduce barriers that otherwise exclude portions of the community. U-3. Construction of facilities and provision of services by private utility providers within the City of Auburn shall be in compliance with all of the goals and policies of this Comprehensive Plan. Page 29 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | U E -11 Goal # 2 – Compatibility in the Community Prioritize visual quality of private utility facilities consistent with the serving utilities’ public service obligations. U-4. The City shall require that new private utility distribution, service, and telecommunication lines be located underground within all new developments. The City will also work with utility companies to relocate existing distribution, service, and telecommunication lines underground as a part of new development whenever it is technologically feasible, and as part of City capital roadway projects whenever it is economically and technologically feasible. Expansions and upgrades completed by private utilities will be required to be underground unless they meet appropriate exemptions. U-5. To reduce visual clutter, antennas, relay mechanisms, and similar structures should be located on existing poles, structures, or buildings whenever possible. When deemed feasible and necessary to minimize impacts on adjacent uses or views by the City, visual screening may be required. U-6. The location of utility facilities is often dependent upon the physical requirements of the utility system. All utility facilities should be sited, designed, and buffered (through extensive screening and/or landscaping) to fit in with their surroundings harmoniously and safely. When sited within or adjacent to residential areas, special attention should be given to minimizing noise, light, and glare impacts. U-7. Utility service boxes and cabinets should be designed, oriented and/or treated with in a manner intended to reduce the likelihood of graffiti tagging, contribute to Auburn’s arts and culture programming, and to enhance the overall appearance of the community. U-8. Generator and back up generators that are located within residential areas should be visually screened and incorporate techniques that mitigate noise impacts consistent with local and state requirements. U-9. Substations and maintenance buildings within residential areas should be screened, landscaped and/or designed in a manner that provides visual compatibility. Goal # 3 – Safety and Efficiency Prioritize the safe and efficient installation, maintenance and operation of private utility facilities consistent with the serving utilities’ public service obligations. Policies: U-10. Common utility trenches should be encouraged and coordinated by both private and public providers whenever possible. U-11. Decisions regarding private utility facilities within Auburn should consider the safe, adequate, and efficient availability of these utilities to other jurisdictions. Page 30 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | UE-12 Goals # 4 – Sustainability and Equity Prioritize equitable access to the services offered by private utility facilities and ensure that the location, installation and maintenance of private utilities is carried our in an environmentally sensitive manner. Policies: U-12. The City shall consider the environmental impacts of proposed utility facilities as a part of its environmental review process. When requested by the City, the utility provider shall furnish documentation of current research results and/or provide additional information related to determination of the potential environmental impacts, if any, from the proposed facilities. U-13. Private utility companies are recognized as providers of important services necessary for maintaining current and future lifestyles as well as contributing to equitable community outcomes. U-14. Private utilities that are permitted to operate within Auburn offer various technological means for accessing information, education, services, and assistance. Because Auburn believes that all residents should be afforded equal access to education, information and services private utility providers should seek to recognize and reduce access barriers. Table 1 - List of Utility Providers Provider Contact Info Map # City of Auburn Water Customer Service Center 1 East Main Street 2nd Floor Auburn, WA 98002 253-931-3010 U-1 Lakehaven Water and Sewer 31627A 1st Ave S P.O. Box 4249 Federal Way, WA 98063 253-941-1516 U-1 Lake Meridian Water 27224 144th Ave SE Kent, WA 98042 253-631-3770 Office U-1 City of Kent Water Kent City Hall 220 4th Ave S, Kent, WA 98032 253-859-3373 U-1 Bonney Lake Water Public Services Center 21719 96th ST E Buckley, WA 98321 253-447-4319 U-1 Logandale Water Assoc. PO Box 1254 Auburn, WA 98071 U-1 Hazelwood Heights Water Assoc. 30224 108TH Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 U-1 Page 31 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | UE-13 Rocky Acres Water System 28120 105TH Ave SE Auburn, WA, 98092-4075 U-1 Crestview West Water System PO Box 194 Kent, WA 98035-0194 U-1 Crestview Tracts Water System 11237 SE 286th St Auburn, WA 98092 U-1 Derbyshire Scenic Acres Water System 11628 SE 282ND ST Auburn, WA 98092-4051 U-1 Wells Water Assoc. 28804 124th Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 U-1 Auburn Park Community Assoc. U-1 South Auburn Community Assoc. 3005 C ST SE Auburn, WA 98002-8829 U-1 City of Auburn Sewer Customer Service Center 1 East Main Street 2nd Floor Auburn, WA 98002 253-931-3010 U-2 Lakehaven Water and Sewer 31627A 1st Ave S P.O. Box 4249 Federal Way, WA 98063 253-941-1516 U-2 City of Kent Sewer Kent City Hall 220 4th Ave S, Kent, WA 98032 253-859-3373 U-2 Soos Creek Water and Sewer District 14616 SE 192nd St Renton, WA 98058 253-630-9900 U-2 City of Auburn Stormwater Customer Service Center 1 East Main Street 2nd Floor Auburn, WA 98002 253-931-3010 N/A – Consistent with City boundary Puget Sound Energy – Electricity and Gas www.pse.com 1-888-321-7779 N/A – Consistent with City boundary Comcast www. business.comcast.com 1-855-237-7896 N/A – Consistent with City boundary Goal # 4 - Solid Waste To provide area residents and businesses with a universal and compulsory system for collection and disposal of all solid waste, including ample waste reduction and recycling opportunities intended to maximize diversion of the City’s waste stream away from costly landfills, incineration, or other solid waste disposal facilities, and to conserve exhaustible resources. Policies: Page 32 of 435 DRAFT for July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Utilities Element | U E -14 U-15. The King County Solid Waste Management Plan and Solid Waste Interlocal Forum, except as modified by City of Auburn Ordinance No. 4413 and this Plan shall form the basis for solid waste management activities within the City. U-16. The City shall continue to fund solid waste collection, disposal and waste reduction and recycling programs and services through the existing solid waste utility, with supplemental funding provided through available grants. U-17. The City shall implement solid waste management programs and services that provide ample opportunities and incentives to maximize the community’s participation in local and regional waste reduction and recycling efforts. U-18. The City’s solid waste management programs shall be developed to make waste reduction and recycling efficient, reliable, cost-effective, and convenient for all residents and businesses. U-19. The City encourages and should promote the use of products manufactured from recycled materials, and the use of materials that can be recycled. City Departments and contractors shall use recycled and recyclable products whenever and wherever feasible. U-20. The City shall implement solid waste reduction and recycling programs that have the cumulative effect maintaining the 50 percent waste reduction and recycling goal (recycling tons/total solid waste stream). U-21. The City shall periodically monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of Auburn’s waste reduction and recycling programs to ensure that local and state goals and policies are being met. U-22. The City shall promote the recycling of solid waste materials by providing opportunities for convenient recycling and by developing educational materials on recycling, composting and other waste reduction methods. Page 33 of 435 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Transportation Element (Sweeting) Date: July 3, 2024 Department: Community Development Attachments: A - Transportation Planning Commission Presentation B1 - Draft Comprehens ive Transportation Plan 7_3_24 B2 - Draft Comprehens ive Transportation Plan 7_3_24 B3 - Draft Comprehens ive Transportation Plan 7_3_24 B4 - Draft Comprehens ive Transportation Plan 7_3_24 C - V3 Trans portation Element Draft 7-16-2024 Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff:Sweeting Meeting Date:July 16, 2024 Item Number:PH.2 Page 34 of 435 A U B U R N V A L U E S S E R V I C E E N V I R O N M E N T E C O N O M Y C H A R A C T E R S U S TA I N A B I L I T Y W E L L N E S S C E L E B R A T I O NCITY DEPARTMENTS2024 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – ELEMENT/SYSTEM PLAN TRANSPORTATIONPUBLIC HEARING OVERVIEWJACOB SWEETING, CITY ENGINEERPLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGJULY 16, 2024Page 35 of 435 22024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN –TRANSPORTATION 32024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN –TRANSPORTATION ~Previously Presented Slides~42024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN –TRANSPORTATIONPage 38 of 435 A U B U R N V A L U E S S E R V I C E E N V I R O N M E N T E C O N O M Y C H A R A C T E R S U S TA I N A B I L I T Y W E L L N E S S C E L E B R A T I O NCITY DEPARTMENTS2024 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – ELEMENT/SYSTEM PLAN TRANSPORTATIONJACOB SWEETING, CITY ENGINEERPLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETINGJUNE 4, 2024Page 39 of 435 1)Overview/Intent of Plan and Relationship to Comprehensive Plan2)Regulatory Requirements and/or Alignment3)Overview of What is Changing Compared to Previous Element/Plan4)Key Goals, Policies, or Considerations5)Potential Implications of Proposed Changes2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN –TRANSPORTATIONSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONPage 40 of 435 Overview/Intent of Plan and Relationship to Comprehensive PlanSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN –TRANSPORTATIONComprehensive PlanTransportation ElementComprehensive Transportation Plan (System Plan)IG0 Page 41 of 435 Slide 7 IG0 Should this just say Comprehensive Plan? Ingrid Gaub, 2024-05-21T01:40:04.585 JS0 0 yes Jacob Sweeting, 2024-05-21T16:10:52.615 Page 42 of 435 Key Goals & PoliciesSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN –TRANSPORTATION Overview of What is Changing Compared to Previous Element/PlanSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN –TRANSPORTATION Overview of What is Changing Compared to Previous Element/PlanSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN –TRANSPORTATION Overview of What is Changing Compared to Previous Element/PlanSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION2024 PERIODIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN –TRANSPORTATION Comprehensive Transportation Plan 24 Page 51 of 435 CHAPTER 1 CHAPTER 2 CHAPTER 3 CHAPTER 4 CHAPTER 7 APPENDIX A CHAPTER 6 CHAPTER 5 Table of Contents Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................1 1.1. Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................................................................3 1.2. Goals, Policies, and Actions ...............................................................................................................................................................3 1.3. Public Involvement .................................................................................................................................................................................4 1.4. Regulatory Compliance ......................................................................................................................................................................4 1.5. Agency Coordination .............................................................................................................................................................................5 1.6. Land use/Transportation Relationship .....................................................................................................................................7 Multimodal Network .............................................................................................................................9 2.1. Multimodal Level of Service Standards ...................................................................................................................................11 2.2. Streets System ........................................................................................................................................................................................13 2.3. Active Transportation ........................................................................................................................................................................26 2.4. Transit ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................31 2.5. Freight ........................................................................................................................................................................................................40 2.6. Airport .........................................................................................................................................................................................................44 Safety ........................................................................................................................................................45 Policies .....................................................................................................................................................47 4.1. Goals ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................49 System Management, Maintenance, and Operations ............................................................75 5.1. Staffing .........................................................................................................................................................................................................77 5.2. Equipment/Fleet .................................................................................................................................................................................79 5.3. Facilities ......................................................................................................................................................................................................80 5.4. Asset Management .............................................................................................................................................................................81 Funding ...................................................................................................................................................85 6.1. Financial Summary .............................................................................................................................................................................87 6.2. Financial Planning & Programming .......................................................................................................................................88 6.3. Funding Sources ..................................................................................................................................................................................89 6.4. Revenue Shortfall Contingency ................................................................................................................................................94 6.5. Funding Strategies, Project Prioritization ...........................................................................................................................94 Monitoring & Evaluation ....................................................................................................................95 7.1. Annual Updates ......................................................................................................................................................................................97 7.2. Multi-Year Updates .............................................................................................................................................................................98 7.3. Accomplishments Since the Last Plan Update (2019) ................................................................................................98 Maps & Interactive Links ...................................................................................................................99 Map 1. 2024 Adjacent Cities and Counties .................................................................................................................................100 Map 2. 2024 Bike Route Network .....................................................................................................................................................101 Map 3. 2024 Existing Bike Facilities ................................................................................................................................................102 Map 4. 2024 Existing Sidewalks ........................................................................................................................................................103 Map 5. 2024 Transit Bus Routes/Stops .........................................................................................................................................104 Map 6. 2024 Level of Transit Service ..............................................................................................................................................105 Map 7. 2024 Roadway Classifications ...........................................................................................................................................106 Map 8. 2024 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) .......................................................................................................107 Map 9. 2024 Federal Functional Classifications ....................................................................................................................108 Map 10. 2024 Freight Network ...........................................................................................................................................................109 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN Page 52 of 435 APPENDIX B APPENDIX C Project Summaries ..............................................................................................................................111 Planned Projects & Programs ..............................................................................................................................................................112 List of Bike Improvements to Encourage Mode Shift .......................................................................................................146 Plan Checklists ....................................................................................................................................149 GMA Requirements Checklist ...........................................................................................................................................................150 PSRC Requirements Checklist ...........................................................................................................................................................152 Outreach ...............................................................................................................................................157 Public Outreach ..........................................................................................................................................................................................158 Roadway Classification Changes ..................................................................................................185 Roadway Classification Changes ....................................................................................................................................................186 APPENDIX D APPENDIX E LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Vehicle LOS - Illustration of Roadway Delay..........................................................................................................................................16 Figure 2. TDM Strategies .........................................................................................................................................................................................................18 Figure 3. Regional Center Mode Split Goals...............................................................................................................................................................18 Figure 4. Existing Intersection Level of Service .....................................................................................................................................................20 Figure 5. Changes in Trip Generation ...........................................................................................................................................................................23 Figure 6. Intersection Level of Service in the 2044 Future Preferred Land Use Alternative ..................................................24 Figure 7. Existing Bike Facility Statistics as of January 2024 .........................................................................................................................27 Figure 8. Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) ..............................................................................................................................................................................28 Figure 9. Bikeway Standards ...............................................................................................................................................................................................29 Figure 10. Bikeway Network Assessment Statistics as of January 2024 ................................................................................................30 Figure 11. Types of Transit Services in Auburn ..........................................................................................................................................................32 Figure 12. Auburn Neighborhoods with Transit Needs and Gaps ..............................................................................................................38 Figure 13. FGTS Truck Route Classification .................................................................................................................................................................41 Figure 14. Local Residential Street Before and After SOS Rebuild .............................................................................................................81 Figure 15. Plan Website Homepage..............................................................................................................................................................................158 Figure 16. Online Survey - Location Specific Feedback ..................................................................................................................................159 Figure 17. Open House Photos .........................................................................................................................................................................................165 Figure 18. Other Outreach Event Photos ..................................................................................................................................................................166 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. State Highways ............................................................................................................................................................................................................15 Table 2. Vehicle Intersection Delay LOS Table ..........................................................................................................................................................16 Table 3. Intersections Operating Below the LOS Standard per 2022 Traffic Counts .....................................................................19 Table 4. Improvement Projects in the Initial 2044 Preferred Land Use Future Model ................................................................21 Table 5. Intersections Operating Below the LOS Standard ............................................................................................................................23 Table 6. Pedestrian Facility LTS Table ............................................................................................................................................................................28 Table 7. Bicycle Facility LTS Table .....................................................................................................................................................................................30 Table 8. Transit LOS Table ......................................................................................................................................................................................................37 Table 9. Freight LOS Standards .........................................................................................................................................................................................43 Table 10. Transportation System Elements ................................................................................................................................................................77 Table 11. Equipment Assigned to Street Division or Traffic Signal Division .........................................................................................79 Table 12. Additional Equipment Available for all M&O Teams .......................................................................................................................79 Table 13. 2024 to 2044 Expense and Revenue Forecast ...................................................................................................................................87 Table 14. Capital Project and Program Cost Summary and Revenue Forecast ...............................................................................89 Table 15. Potential Grant Program for Consideration ..........................................................................................................................................91 Table 16. 2024-2044 Forecast ..............................................................................................................................................................................................92 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 53 of 435 Plan Overview CH.1 Introduction Overall purpose, goals, policies, and actions of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Summary of other Plan elements, including public outreach efforts and agency coordination, regulatory compliance, and the relationship between land use and transportation. CH.2 Multimodal Network Multimodal level of service (LOS) standards. Streets system and functional classification of City streets. Existing and future LOS conditions. Transportation demand management strategies. CH.3 Safety Where to find additional safety information, with reference to the City's Comprehensive Safety Action Plan. Goals, policies, and actions to establish the framework for Auburn's transportation system vision. CH.4 Policies Overview of existing and needed staffing and resources to manage, maintain, and operate Auburn's transportation system. CH.5 System Management, Maintenance, and Operations 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN Page 54 of 435 Planning tools and funding mechanisms available to the City to finance the maintenance and improvement of Auburn's transportation system. CH.6 Funding Strategy to regularly re-evaluate and update the Comprehensive Transportation Plan to incorporate changes and ensure consistency with other plans. CH.7 Monitoring & Evaluation PLAN OVERVIEW CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 55 of 435 PAGE 1 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN IN THIS CHAPTER Plan Purpose, Goals, Policies, and Actions Public Involvement Regulatory Compliance Agency Coordination Land Use/Transportation Relationship CHAPTER 1 Introduction Page 56 of 435 The transportation system is a vital component of Auburn's social, economic, and physical structure. The primary purposes of the transportation system is to support the movement of people and goods within the City and connect the City to the broader region. The transportation system influences patterns of growth, development, and economic activity by providing access to adjacent land uses. Planning for the development and maintenance of the transportation system is a critical activity promoting the efficient movement of people and goods, ensuring emergency access, and optimizing the role transportation plays in attaining other community objectives. PAGE 2PAGE 2 INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 57 of 435 AUBURN Emerald Downs City Hall Library Downtown 1.1. PURPOSE Auburn's Comprehensive Transportation Plan ("the Plan or CTP") evaluates the transportation system by identifying key assets and improvement needs, which guides the future of the transportation system. This Plan is multimodal, addressing multiple forms of transportation in Auburn including streets, active transportation, transit, and freight. Evaluating all modes enables the City to address its future transportation needs in a comprehensive and balanced manner. The Plan provides policy and technical direction for development of the City’s transportation system through the year 2044. Major updates are required every 10 years, with an implementation report required every five years. 1.2. GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS Transportation goals, policies, and actions establish the framework for realizing the City’s vision of its transportation system. Policies provide guidance for the City, other governmental entities, and private developers, enabling the City to achieve its goals in accordance with the Plan. Adopted goals, policies and actions to support them are included in Chapter 4. The policies presented in the Plan will be followed by the City in its evaluation of individual projects, programs, and other actions to address its transportation infrastructure needs. The goals, policies, and actions make reference to the City of Auburn Engineering Design Standards (EDS) that provide specific guidelines and standards for design of the City’s transportation system. The Plan reflects the current and future needs of the Auburn community and, in doing so, seeks to: • Enhance the quality of life for all Auburn residents • Encourage a healthy, sustainable, and equitable community through active transportation • Promote a transportation system that supports local businesses and enhances economic development opportunities • Create a transportation system that is efficient, uncomplicated, and welcoming to visitors • Provide a balanced, multimodal transportation system that addresses both local and regional needs 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 3 Page 58 of 435 1.3. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Public outreach is a critical component of the comprehensive planning process. Throughout the year 2023, City staff attended several public events and provided a webpage with a survey for public participation. The information provided on the webpage was available is English, Spanish, Ukrainian, Russian, and Tagalog, which are prevalent languages in Auburn. As part of the adoption process, the Plan is also reviewed by the Transportation Advisory Board and the Planning Commission. Detailed description of the public involvement and comments received is in Appendix D. 1.4. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE 1.4.1. GMA and PSRC Requirements Washington State’s 1990 Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that transportation planning be directly tied to the City’s land use decisions and financial planning. This is traditionally accomplished through the adoption of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The City of Auburn is a member of the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), the regions Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). PSRC is responsible for developing a long-range regional transportation plan and near-term regional transportation improvement program. PSRC establishes policies, procedures, and programs for award of Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and other federal funding. PSRC has established requirements for agency comprehensive transportation plans that must be met to maintain eligibility for PSRC managed grant funding. Appendix C includes a list of GMA and PSRC Auburn fulfills this mandate by adopting the Comprehensive Transportation Plan as the Transportation Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. INTRODUCTION PAGE 4 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 59 of 435 requirements and provides page/policy references where the requirement is satisfied in the Plan, the goals, policies, and or actions. 1.4.2. ADA Compliance The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) went into effect on January 26, 1992. ADA requires that all facilities constructed after this date are readily accessible and usable by persons with disabilities. The City is committed to providing public infrastructure without barriers to those with disabilities and achieving compliance with ADA. In 2020, the City adopted its first ADA Transition Plan for facilities in the public right-of-way. This document guides the process to reach full compliance with the ADA requirements for facilities in the public right-of-way. It addresses pedestrian pathways such as sidewalks, trails, curb ramps, and cross walks and traffic control devices such as pedestrian pushbuttons and pedestrian signals. The ADA Transition Plan includes the following elements: •Overview and Background •Self-Evaluation •Policies and Procedures The ADA transition plan will be updated regularly to reflect new data and the progress towards full ADA compliance. Public comments are accepted and will be considered during the updates. The City will make all reasonable modifications to policies and programs to ensure that people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to enjoy all its programs, services, and activities. The City’s current ADA Transition Plan is available here and included as part of this Plan by reference. 1.4.3. Title VI Compliance In accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), the City assures that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin, or sex be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity funded directly or indirectly with federal funds. The City further assures every effort will be made to ensure non-discrimination in all its programs and activities, whether those programs and activities are federally funded or not. The City works closely with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Office of Equal Opportunity to provide required Title VI assurances, plan, and annual reporting. The City’s Title VI information and reports are available here. 1.5. AGENCY COORDINATION Auburn’s transportation system is influenced by what happens outside its jurisdiction and/or boundaries: growth in neighboring communities, infrastructure maintenance by regional agencies, new capacity projects, and competing needs for transit service. The Plan calls for effective inter-jurisdictional collaboration to address shared transportation issues. The Plan also recognizes that other jurisdictions, particularly state agencies and transit providers, are responsible for a major share of the transportation facilities serving Auburn. 1.5.1. Tribe The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) is situated in the southeastern portion of the City and in unincorporated King County, generally to the east of Auburn Way South (SR 164) and south of SR 18. MIT owns significant attractions in or near Auburn including the Emerald Downs Racetrack, Muckleshoot Bingo, the Muckleshoot Casino Hotel and Resort, and the White River Amphitheatre. These activity centers generate a relatively large number of vehicle trips. Residential, industrial, and commercial development on tribal lands is expected to increase in the future and must be evaluated during transportation planning efforts. The City and MIT coordinate on a variety of transportation planning issues to accommodate the capacity needs derived from traffic generated by tribal land uses and to ensure the tribe has a functioning transportation system for its members. The City and the MIT have established a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to partner on pedestrian improvement projects along the Auburn Way South corridor. The partnership has provided for pedestrian access and safety improvements on, and along, the Auburn Way South corridor. During July 2015, the State Legislature passed a 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 5 Page 60 of 435 transportation package which included $15 million for the SR 164 East Auburn Access project along SR 164 between SR 18 and the Auburn plateau area, which was intended to create and develop an affordable, long-term improvement to congestion and safety issues, while also planning to accommodate future growth in the area. MIT is the lead agency on the project and the City has been involved in the alternatives development and evaluation process. The current status of the project is unknown and the City’s traffic modeling does not include project improvements. The City’s traffic modeling and planning approaches will be updated, as needed, to address progress on this project by MIT. 1.5.2. State The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has jurisdiction over three major routes connecting Auburn to the region: SR 167, SR 18, and SR 164 (Auburn Way South). SR 164 is considered a City of Auburn street and a state route and is subject to the City Streets as Part of State Highways Guidelines agreement. SR 164 is also designated by the State as a Highway of State Significance, which has implications regarding applicable level of service standards and concurrency. Chapter 2 includes additional information regarding SR 164 and other State transportation facilities in Auburn. Auburn coordinates with WSDOT to study these corridors and implement roadway improvements. WSDOT also serves an important role as administrator of federal and state transportation funds. 1.5.3. Transit Agencies Sound Transit provides a variety of regional transit services for King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties. In Auburn, Sound Transit provides commuter rail, parking, and express bus service. Auburn Station also serves as a hub and transfer station for local transit service provided by King County Metro Transit and Pierce Transit. The transit chapter provides more detail on current Sound Transit services, remaining needs for regional transit service, and the role Auburn plays in coordinating with the agency. King County Metro Transit (KC Metro) provides local bus, Metro Flex, vanpool, and paratransit services for the Auburn area. Planned service for the City of Auburn is described in the Metro Strategic Plan for Public Transportation 2021-2026, and in Metro Connects Long Range Public Transportation Plan, which was adopted by the King County Council in 2021. The City has developed an employee Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program in cooperation with WSDOT. Details of the CTR program are summarized in the Active Transportation and Transit chapters of this plan. Pierce Transit operates the 497 Lakeland Hills Express route which provides AM and PM direct service between Lakeland Hills and Auburn Station. This is a partnership route with the City, KC Metro, and Pierce Transit providing funding through an inter-local agreement. 1.5.4. Counties King County Road Services Division is responsible for maintaining and regulating the roadway network in King County, including the Totem and Klump portions of King County, which are islands of unincorporated King County within the greater jurisdictional boundary of Auburn. King County Road Services has a number of programs and plans in place that regulate development and other activities affecting their roadway network. Under the GMA, King and Pierce Counties have adopted Countywide Planning Policies to guide development in both incorporated and unincorporated areas of their jurisdictions. The policies support county and regional goals to provide a variety of mobility options and establish LOS standards that emphasize the efficient movement of people and not just vehicles. The Countywide Planning Policies are also important because they provide direction for planning and development of potential annexation areas. 1.5.5. Regional Government The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) sets policy for King, Pierce, Kitsap, and Snohomish Counties through its long-range planning document, Vision 2050, and its regional transportation plan, Transportation 2040. Auburn’s transportation plan is required to be consistent with PSRC’s regional planning documents and policies. PSRC encourages future growth to be concentrated in regional growth centers. Regional growth centers are locations with significant business, governmental, and cultural facilities, and serve as focal points INTRODUCTION PAGE 6 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 61 of 435 for planned growth, economic development, and transportation infrastructure investments.1 The PRSC Planning documents seek to provide a multimodal transportation system that serves all travel modes, creating opportunities for the use of alternatives to single occupant vehicles. Other important PRSC policy themes are a focus on maximizing the efficiency of the transportation system through transportation demand management (TDM) and transportation system management (TSM) strategies, as well as completing critical links in the network. 1.5.6. Neighboring Cities The City of Kent shares Auburn’s northern border and several regional transportation corridors including S 277th Street, SR 167, Auburn Way North/Central, and West Valley Highway. Most recently, Auburn has completed coordination with Kent on the annexation of S 277th Street from Auburn Way North to the Green River into the City of Auburn to allow the widening of S 277th Street between Auburn Way N and L Street NE. The City of Federal Way is located west of Auburn. Several roadways, most notably SR 18, connect Auburn and Federal Way. Auburn and Federal Way regularly coordinate on both vehicular and active transportation improvements affecting both jurisdictions. The City partners with its southern neighbors in many respects, including street system planning, transit planning, and regional trail planning. Auburn is also working with Sumner, Pacific, and Algona on roadway improvement projects, including the financial support of the Sumner and Pacific projects to widen Stewart Road. The City coordinates primarily with Bonney Lake for provision of water service in the Pierce County portion of the City. However, efforts to coordinate transportation systems and services will likely occur in the future. Partnerships with neighboring cities will continue to be an important factor in successful transportation planning. 1.6. LAND USE/TRANSPORTATION RELATIONSHIP Land use and the transportation system are intertwined, each influencing the needs and development of the other. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate how existing transportation systems can be improved to best support both existing and proposed land uses. It is equally important to consider potential transportation system needs when developing future land use plans. This 2024 Comprehensive Transportation Plan was developed concurrently with the City’s Comprehensive Plan that included reviewing, evaluating, and revising projected land use throughout the City. 1.6.1. Land Use Characteristics and Transportation Systems A broad overview of Auburn’s existing land use designations shows industrial (light and heavy) designations in the west side of the valley floor portion of the City, extensive commercial development (light and heavy) located along Auburn Way N, Auburn Way S, and A Street SE, and sizable heavy commercial designated areas near the SR 18 and 15th Street SW interchange and between 15th Street NW and 37th Street NW (Emerald Downs). Residential development generally exists along the east side of the valley floor and the surrounding hillsides of West Hill, Lea Hill, and Lakeland Hills. A major land use activity in Lea Hill to the east includes the Green River College located on SE 320th Street. The existing land use element identifies Industrial as the City’s second most predominant zoning designation (Residential being first). Consequently, the City’s land use plan establishes a development pattern that has traffic generated by these industrial uses directed towards the State Highway System. Another key feature in the land use element is a Heavy Commercial designation at 15th Street SW, adjacent to SR 167 and SR 18. This commercial designation is the site of The Outlet Collection. The Outlet Collection generates high volumes of local and regional traffic that utilize State highways and City streets. Auburn's "Auto Row", along Auburn Way N, to the north of downtown also generates large volumes of local and regional traffic. 1 PSRC, https://www.psrc.org/our-work/centers 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 7 Page 62 of 435 Downtown Auburn is near the geographic center of the City, located generally east of the Interurban Trail, north of SR 18, west of F Street SE/NE, and south of 3rd Street NW/NE and 4th Street NE. Downtown Auburn is designated as a Regional Growth Center by the PSRC as part of Vision 2050. Designated regional growth centers are identified for housing and employment growth, as well as being eligible for regional transportation funding. Downtown Auburn contains a mix of land uses including residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Commercial uses in Downtown are focused along Main Street, Auburn Way, and A Street SE. Historically, this commercial development has served predominantly local needs. However, the presence of Auburn Station, MultiCare, City Hall, and new development projects, combined with regulations and policies that encourage transit-oriented developments (TODs), downtown commercial development will serve a broader range of needs in the future. Downtown Auburn also has the City’s most robust active transportation infrastructure, including both extensive pedestrian and bicycle facilities. This provides the opportunity for both residents and employees to rely on proximate transit services at Auburn Station, combined with a robust active transportation system for a portion of their transportation needs. The City’s Comprehensive Plan land use map focuses residential development in the eastern portion of the valley and in the West Hill, Lea Hill, and the Lakeland Hills area. Access to the State Highway System in Lea Hill is limited to SR 18 at SE 304th Street. Future impacts on the State Highway System in the Lea Hill area will primarily be commuter traffic due to the predominance of residential comprehensive plan designations in that area, and continued growth of Green River College. The development of Lakeland Hills will also principally result in increased commuter traffic. 1.6.2. Future Land Use The Washington Office of Financial Management (OFM) produces population and employment forecasts for each county which are then allocated to cities through the Countywide Planning Policies. Cities must plan to accommodate the required levels of housing and employment growth allocated through this process. King and Pierce Counties have allocated Auburn a combined target of 12,096 new housing units (12,000 in King County and 96 in Pierce County) and 19,520 new jobs (all in King County) between the baseline of 2019 and 2044. Based on the available land capacity as zoned in 2023, Auburn showed a deficit of capacity for both the 2044 housing unit and jobs targets. The future land use map developed with the 2024 Comprehensive Plan was developed to accommodate the 2044 housing and jobs targets through new zoning and land uses in various corridors and nodes throughout Auburn, and in the Downtown area in particular. Development of the future land use map involved evaluating alternative land use scenarios and testing them against various factors. Further information regarding this process is included in the Comprehensive Plan. This Comprehensive Transportation Plan is based on the Preferred Land Use Alternative documented in the Comprehensive Plan. This land use alternative was a combination of two alternatives that each focused on centralizing housing and employment growth with either corridors or centers approach. Both alternatives included intense housing and employment growth focused in the Downtown area by expanding and increasing development density and intensity. The combined alternative targets employment and housing along the Auburn Way North and I Street NE corridors where frequent transit is planned to start operating in 2026. Focused growth in employment and housing was also identified at locations of known future development plans. These areas include the Outlet Collection Mall area along 15th Street SW, the Icon Materials mining operations and adjacent lands along the east side of Kersey Way (known as the Segale development area), and at vacant or underdeveloped land areas on Lea Hill and West Hill. INTRODUCTION PAGE 8 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 63 of 435 PAGE 9 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN DRAFT 3/5/2024 IN THIS CHAPTER Multimodal Level of Service Standards Streets System Active Transportation Transit Freight Airport CHAPTER 2 Multimodal Network Page 64 of 435 The transportation network includes facilities for several modes of transportation, which must integrate well together, and support or complement each other, to provide the best possible mobility options throughout the city. While it is important to limit vehicle congestion and traffic delays, it is equally important to provide alternative transportation options, which can encourage active transportation and reduce the need to increase vehicle capacity on the roadways. The availability of transit service, bike facilities, and sidewalks will become more important to achieve a comprehensive multimodal transportation network, which is composed of the vehicular traffic network (roads) which serves cars, trucks, and buses, and the active transportation network, which includes bike and pedestrian facilities. Some roads are more heavily used by trucks, and are identified in the freight network. Transit routes are also identified. Based on the primary function of the roads, special considerations are made to carefully prioritize specific modes, and protect other modes where there are overlaps, such as freight corridors along bikes routes. PAGE 10 MULTIMODAL NETWORK CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DRAFT 3/5/2024 Page 65 of 435 2.1. MULTIMODAL LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS Prior to this Plan, as with comprehensive transportation plans for most other agencies in Washington, the City of Auburn’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan only included LOS standards for motorized vehicles (vehicle LOS). Without adopted multimodal LOS standards (MMLOS), there were no metrics by which the effectiveness of the active transportation and transit systems could be measured and evaluated. With MMLOS, the City of Auburn can ensure that transportation system improvements are planned, funded, and implemented to develop a comprehensive, connected, and versatile transportation system. One of the main goals of MMLOS is to realize a transportation system that doesn’t rely on adding more vehicular capacity alone to address growing needs to move people and goods. The MMLOS approach supports providing other transportation modes including walking, bicycling, and transit to address these needs. The City of Auburn's MMLOS have been developed with the strategic and focused intent of maximizing potential mode shifts from driving cars to walking, biking, and riding transit. The standards work towards this by setting higher level of service standards for walking and biking in areas where doing so will best support existing and planned transit service. These principles, many of which can be promoted by thoughtful transportation systems planning, encourage healthier communities by increasing physical activity and decreasing air pollution caused Transportation level of service (LOS) standards are metrics that indicate how well transportation facilities are moving people and goods. In 2023, Washington enacted House Bill (HB) 1181 which required agencies to develop MMLOS. MMLOS expand the transportation system metrics to include other travel modes such as transit, walking, and biking. Auburn’s multimodal transportation network primarily includes the modes of travel highlighted below, which are explained and assessed in more detail throughout the Plan. Separate sections have been included in the Plan that address the following elements for each mode: • General description and overview • Existing facilities and/or services • LOS standards • Existing LOS evaluation and existing deficiencies • Future LOS evaluation and future deficiencies • Strategies, projects, and programs to address existing and future deficiencies The City of Auburn envisions a transportation system that will help promote healthy community principles by coordinating land use, the active transportation system, and transit in a manner that encourages walking and bicycling. PSRC has identified several elements that contribute to the desirability of walking, bicycling, and transit use in their Vision 2050 “Update Paper on Health”: • Concentrating complementary uses such as restaurants, retail, and grocery stores proximate to residences and employment. • Linking neighborhoods by connecting streets, sidewalks, and trails. • Designing for safe and welcoming pedestrian and bicycle facilities. • Enhancing transit opportunities and active transportation connections to transit facilities. • Reducing and mitigating the effects of parking. Motorized vehicles moving people on streets Pedestrians and bicyclists Buses and trains moving people Trucks and trains moving goods STREETS ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION TRANSIT FREIGHT 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 11 Page 66 of 435 by vehicle emissions. Auburn has historically planned for a transportation system that incorporates many healthy community principles, such as transit facility planning and regional trail planning. In addition, the Downtown Plan calls for a mixed-use, high density, pedestrian-oriented downtown. Improving the active transportation system also helps address the findings of the citywide Health Impact Assessment process, which recommended that the City improve sidewalk connectivity; improve the pedestrian environment; eliminate natural and man-made mobility barriers for pedestrians and bicyclists; improve access to transit; and improve vehicle safety, and pedestrian safety. In the future, Auburn shall continue to promote these principles through long-range planning efforts, capital facility improvements, development review, and community activities involving active lifestyle elements. MMLOS is vital to providing an equitable, effective, sustainable, and environmentally balanced transportation system. MMLOS allows a more strategic approach towards moving people and goods as compared to the historic approach of only using vehicle LOS standards. Products of the historic approach are visible all around us where we see wide multi-lane roadways with narrow or missing sidewalks, neighborhoods and commercial areas with little to no transit services, and an incomplete, often sporadic bicycle network. These deficiencies in the transportation system are understandable given that LOS standards are used to identify where the transportation system is not adequately functioning and, subsequently, used to plan and prioritize improvements to address those issues. If vehicle LOS is the only standard in place, the resulting transportation investments are focused on moving goods and people with motorized vehicles while other modes receive little funding relative to vehicle capacity. MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 12 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 67 of 435 2.2. STREETS SYSTEM The City has 249 centerline miles of public roadways. The City’s planned arterial street network is mostly established with existing roadways with only a few new arterials that have yet to be constructed. Many of the City’s arterial and other streets were not built to current City design standards as the network itself is a product of almost a century of evolving standards and design approaches. Many older roads, including those inherited through several annexations, do not include robust pavement sections and do not accommodate active transportation users. The annexed county road networks present a challenge as they were originally set to provide access to rural areas and not to accommodate existing and future planned higher density housing and commercial areas. The network challenges are most prevalent on the City’s West Hill and Lea Hill areas where connectivity is mostly provided by two-lane county roadways that don’t form a fully connected network. Constructing new roadways or re-aligning existing roads to improve the network connectivity is heavily constrained by topography, environmentally sensitive areas, existing development, and jurisdictional boundaries. Almost 400,000 vehicle trips use Auburn's streets everyday. Most of the City’s arterial and collector roadways have adequate vehicle capacity on sections of roadways without intersections. Where capacity issues do occur, they are mostly at controlled intersections of arterial and/or collector streets. An inventory of the City’s street system is maintained using the City’s asset management software and geographic information systems (GIS). The inventory includes spatially referenced roadway segments generally delineated between roadway centerline intersections. Each roadway segment includes a set of data associated with it such as roadway width, number of lanes, classification, posted speed, pavement condition index, and initial construction, maintenance/repair, and replacement history. This data is used to generate the maps included in Appendix A. 2.2.1. Functional Classification of City Streets The street system functions as a network. Functional classification is the hierarchy by which streets and highways are defined according to the service they provide. There are three main classes of streets in Auburn: arterials, collectors, and local streets. Map 7. 2024 Roadway Classifications in Appendix A provides the currently adopted classification of Auburn’s existing and planned streets. Streets are classified using the Federal Functional Classification system guidelines, as shown in Map 9. 2024 Federal Functional Classifications in Appendix A. The Auburn EDS establishes typical roadway cross sections for each City street classification. Some City streets have specific cross sections and other design elements that have been established through specific studies and/or design efforts. The following City studies or standards are included in this Plan by reference and establish roadway cross sections and other design elements for the studied roadways: • R Street SE Corridor Study • Lea Hill Road Corridor Study • BNSF Railway and A Street SE Crossing Study • Downtown Division Street Promenade Project • Downtown Urban Standards as Presented in the EDS • Other studies that have, or will be prepared and approved, by the City Engineer with consultation and input provided by the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) and the City Council Designation of functional classifications allows for the preservation of the right-of-way for future transportation corridors, whether the corridor provides access to car, transit, bike, or pedestrian use. Functional classification helps establish corridors that will provide for the future movement of people and goods, as well as emergency vehicle access. Proper designation is crucial to the planning effort; as development occurs, accommodation for the appropriate transportation corridors should be incorporated into development plans. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 13 Page 68 of 435 The following describes the different classifications used by the City, in order from highest classification to lowest: Principal Arterials are designed to move traffic between locations within the region and connect with the freeway system. Design emphasis is placed on providing movement for both inter- and intra- City traffic. As such, these facilities typically carry the highest traffic volumes and are designed to accommodate longer-distance trips, provide the highest level of mobility, and have the highest speed limits of all City streets. Principal arterials will generally carry moderate to high level of large truck traffic. Direct access to adjacent land uses is permitted, although these streets are most likely to have limited or managed access in an effort to enhance safety and preserve capacity. Active modes also use these streets, but rely on sidewalks and other dedicated facilities to safely navigate vehicle traffic. Principal arterials are the framework street system for the City and usually extend beyond the City limits, connecting with neighboring jurisdictions. Principal arterials are heavily utilized as bus routes, carrying both local and regional service. Minor Arterials connect collector and local industrial streets to principal arterials and freeways. They serve moderate length trips, provide slightly less mobility than principal arterials, and distribute traffic to smaller geographic areas. Minor arterials may serve secondary traffic generators such as business centers, neighborhood shopping centers, major parks, multifamily residential areas, medical centers, larger religious institutions, and community activity centers. Minor arterials will generally carry moderate to low levels of large truck traffic. Direct access to adjacent land use is permitted but may sometimes require limited or managed access in an effort to enhance safety and corridor capacity. Active modes also use these streets, and often rely on sidewalks and other dedicated facilities to safely navigate vehicle traffic. Collectors and Rustic Collectors carry traffic originating from local streets, neighborhoods, and recreational areas to minor and principal arterials. Collectors typically serve only local truck trips and are not typically intended for use by large trucks. Collectors are intended to have a residential neighborhood feel and encourage active transportation. Collectors may accommodate some local transit routes. Rustic collectors are located in areas with less intensive land uses associated with the Residential Conservancy land-use designation and along environmentally sensitive corridors such as Green River Road. Rustic collectors are intended to have a less urban feel and generally don’t have separate bike or pedestrian facilities. Rustic collectors do not typically carry fixed route transit services. Local, Local Industrial, and Local Rustic primarily provide direct access to adjacent land uses and connect with other local streets to eventually connect to collectors and arterials. Local streets are not intended to connect traffic between collector and arterial streets, also known as cut-through traffic. Local street networks generally consist of shorter roadway segments between intersections with collectors and arterials and often have cul-de-sacs and looping configurations. Local streets generally do not serve fixed route transit. Local streets are the most common streets in the City and are intended to have a residential neighborhood feel with relaxed and comfortable driving, biking, and walking experiences. Local streets are not intended to serve large truck traffic. Rustic residential streets are a type of local street that serve areas associated with the Residential Conservancy zoning designation. Rustic residential streets are intended to have a less urban feel and typically do not have separate walking and biking facilities. Local industrial streets serve primarily industrial and manufacturing land uses. They are intended to accommodate large trucks and provide a more urban or industrial setting. Alleys are the lowest classification of City street and provide vehicular access to abutting properties generally from the rear or side. Alleys also provide access for garbage collection and emergency vehicles and serve as corridors for city and non-city utilities. Alleys can also serve additional purposes including access management and the alleviation of traffic operations issues on streets with higher classifications (not related to level of service issues). Alleys generally connect to local streets and are short in length without separate walking or biking facilities. 2.2.2. City Street Classification Changes In preparing the Plan, the roadway classifications and street network were reviewed to evaluate if revisions were needed to reflect current and future needs. Previously, the City classified its local and collector streets as being either residential, non-residential, or rustic. There was some ambiguity and inconsistency in the non-residential designation as the name implied that the classification was intended for all commercial, industrial, and non-rustic streets. However, the typical roadway cross sections in the EDS for non-residential streets included wide vehicle travel lanes to accommodate large trucks. The EDS also specified a pavement section for non-residential roads that was very robust, again, intended to serve large trucks. Throughout the City, roads previously classified as non-residential included roads serving MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 14 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 69 of 435 multi-family housing, commercial areas, multi- use areas, and industrial areas. Except some heavy commercial and industrial areas, the wide lanes and robust pavement section specified in the EDS were generally not desirable for these roadways. To address this issue, the decision was made to discontinue the use of the non-residential collector classification. Streets previously classified as non- residential collectors were updated to be reflect the new classification approach. The local street classifications were updated to be either local, local industrial, or local rustic. Streets previously classified as local non-residential streets that serve industrial areas and large volumes of truck traffic were updated to be local industrial streets. Streets that were not local rustic or local industrial were classified as local streets. In addition to the change in roadway classification categories, the assigned classification to various City streets were updated to reflect current and future land-use, traffic volumes, and other factors. A summary of these changes is provided in Appendix E. 2.2.3. State Highways State highways include SR 18, SR 167, and SR 164. A description of each highway is provided in Table 1. 2.2.4. Private Streets and Shared Driveways Private Streets can be appropriate for local access in very limited usage. They provide direct access to City streets and are not intended to connect between two or more public streets immediately adjacent properties. Shared Driveways, sometimes referred to as access tracts provide public right-of-way access for one or more properties. A driveway serving only one property but utilizing an access easement or tract across another property for access to the public right- of-way is also considered a shared driveway. They are most common in panhandle lots or rear lots that do not have street or alley access. Shared driveways have become very common in subdivision projects that are trying to meet density requirements while also working around critical areas and other constraints. Access tracts are privately owned and maintained. 2.2.5. City Streets LOS Streets are based on the amount of delay experienced by drivers at intersections and how the queue of vehicles waiting at those intersections may block other intersections, driveways, and travel lanes. Previously, the City also included corridor delay as a vehicle LOS standard. Corridor LOS is no longer considered because intersections generally control how well the roadway network functions. If a roadway corridor is congested, most often it is the result of delays and queuing at the intersections along the corridor. The City’s established policies and actions related to providing an efficient and effective multimodal network include provisions to support efficient, effective, and resilient roadway corridors. Previously the City vehicle LOS standards ROUTE 18 • Connects I-5 to I-90 through Auburn • Within the City limits, has interchanges with SR 167, West Valley Highway, C Street SW, SR 164/Auburn Way S, Auburn Black Diamond Road, and SE 304th Street providing access to downtown Auburn and Lea Hill • Classified as both a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS) and a National Highway System (NHS) route for the entire corridor segment • A full control limited access highway, allowing access only at interchanges within the City limits 167 • Also known as the Valley Freeway • Serves as an alternative to I-5, connecting south King and north Pierce Counties to the I-405 corridor to the north • Designated as both HSS and NHS • Within the City limits, SR 167 has interchanges with SR 18, S 277th Street, 15th Street NW, and 15th Street SW • A full control limited access highway, allowing access only at interchanges within the City limits 164 • Also known as Auburn Way South • A 15-mile roadway corridor beginning at the SR 18 interchange with Auburn Way S • The corridor is aligned southeast through the City, connecting through the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe lands and unincorporated King County before terminating in the City of Enumclaw at its junction with SR 410 • A City street which is part of a state highway • Functionally classified as an urban other arterial by WSDOT, and also a Highway of State Significance (HSS) • Subject to WSDOT Complete Streets requirements Table 1. State Highways 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 15 Page 70 of 435 also included reference to other factors like pavement degradation, safety impacts, and general roadway geometry. Since those factors don’t have a metric or rating that can be used to determine how well a facility is functioning, they are no longer included as a vehicle LOS standard. Instead, those are addressed with other goals and policies throughout the Plan and provided for with standards established in the EDS. The vehicle LOS methodology used in the City of Auburn for intersection delay is based on the current edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) which assigns intersections with a letter designation from ‘A’ through ‘F’ based on control delay. Control delay is the total elapsed time from a vehicle joining the intersection queue until its departure from the stopped position at the head of the queue. This includes the time required to decelerate into the queue and accelerate back to free-flow. Table 2 shows the LOS ratings for intersections based on the type of intersection control and maximum expected delay times. The Plan policies establish LOS "D" as INTERSECTION TYPE LEVEL OF SERVICE A B C D E F AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY (SECONDS PER VEHICLE) Stop Control*0 – 10 >10 – 15 >15 – 25 >25 – 35 >35 – 50 > 50 Traffic Signal or Roundabout Control**0 – 10 >10 – 20 >20 – 35 >35 – 55 >55 – 80 >80 * LOS for stop-controlled intersections with one or more uncontrolled approaches is evaluated based on the movement with the highest delay. ** Intersections with roundabouts are also evaluated using V/C ratio. Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition LOS A-C Intersection Operation: Free flow Degree of Delay: Negligible to moderate delays LOS D Intersection Operation: Less stable flow Degree of Delay: Long delays LOS E Intersection Operation: Unstable flow Degree of Delay: Substantial delays LOS F Intersection Operation: Unpredictable flow/wait through multiple cycles Degree of Delay: Excessive delays Figure 1. Vehicle LOS - Illustration of Roadway Delay Table 2. Vehicle Intersection Delay LOS Table MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 16 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 71 of 435 the minimum standard for most intersections with the exception being signalized intersections of two or more principal arterial roadways which have a LOS "E" minimum standard. Intersections with roundabout control are evaluated using both the letter designation "A" through "F" grade for control delay and the volume/capacity ratio (V/C ratio). The City has adopted WSDOT's Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) approach for roundabouts and established 0.90 as the maximum allowed V/C for each lane group. Another metric used for Vehicle LOS standards in Auburn is based on the length of the queue of vehicles backed up at an intersection. This is a pass/ fail metric based on whether or not all intersection approaches fit within the available queue storage under projected 95th percentile queue lengths. If any approach does not fit within the available storage, the intersection queuing LOS standard is "failed." If all approaches fit within available storage, the intersection queuing LOS standard is "pass." As outlined in the Plan policies, the queuing standard is that the 95th percentile queue shall not extend across an adjacent driveway, alley, or street intersection, except if the driveway, alley, or street intersection is within the functional intersection boundary of the queue in which case the queue may extend to the limit of the functional intersection boundary. Additionally, queuing for a designated turn lane shall not exceed the turn-lane storage area and cause a blockage of adjacent lane(s). 2.2.6. Vehicle LOS Standards - State Highways Amendments to the GMA in 1998 added new requirements for local jurisdictions to address state- owned transportation facilities, as well as local transportation system needs in their comprehensive plans (RCW 47.06.140). House Bill 1487, adopted by the Washington State Legislature in 1998, requires that the transportation element of local comprehensive plans include the LOS standards for HSS. HB 1487 clarified that the concurrency requirement of the GMA does not apply to HSS or other transportation facilities and services of statewide significance. HB 1487 also requires local jurisdictions to estimate traffic impacts to state-owned facilities resulting from land use assumptions in the Comprehensive Plan. WSDOT has identified a LOS D standard for all urban HSS, according to the State Highway System Plan (HSP). All state highways within the City of Auburn, including SR 18, SR 167, and SR 164, are classified as urban HSS, and therefore have a LOS D standard. 2.2.7. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) In 1991, the State of Washington adopted its Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) law. The law's intent is to reduce traffic congestion and air pollution by shifting drive-alone commutes to other modes. Today, more than 1,000 worksites take part in the CTR program statewide and the program is well known nationally as an example of impactful TDM. The law requires local jurisdictions to adopt ordinances detailing requirements for employers to implement employee commute trip reduction programs that encourage the reduction of the number of trips and miles people drive alone to work. In 2010, City of Auburn adopted Ordinance 6218, codified by Auburn City Code Chapter 10.02, which provides these requirements for employers within the City limits. Reducing congestion includes strategies to reduce demands on the transportation system. The State of Washington emphasized the importance of TDM by adopting a CTR law. That law requires all major employers, with over 100 employees at a single site and arriving between the hours of 6:00 and 9:00 AM, to develop programs and strategies to reduce the number of commuter automobile trips made by their employees. Transportation demand management reduces demand on the street system. While TDM and TSM employ different strategies, they share many of the same benefits. Both reduce the peak vehicle demand, increase the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce the need for costly capacity expansions, help improve LOS, and contribute to an enhanced quality of life for those who use and benefit from the transportation system. TDM strategies include those shown in Figure 2 on the next page. The City of Auburn will continue to encourage drivers of single occupancy vehicles to consider alternate modes of travel such as carpools, vanpools, transit, active transportation travel, and alternative work schedules, and has identified mode split goals for the Regional Growth Center. The goals were developed in consideration of the current mode splits for the Auburn Regional Growth Center, the current mode splits for all designated Regional Growth Centers, and the 2040 mode split targets identified by PSRC for all designated Regional Growth Centers. The existing and 2035 mode split goals for the Auburn Regional Growth Center are summarized in Figure 3 on the next page. The mode split goals for the Regional Growth Center reflect the desire to significantly reduce automobile travel as a share of work trips, with the most significant increase in transit trips. The reduction in the vehicle mode split will be the result of the right 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 17 Page 72 of 435 Figure 2. TDM Strategies Through vanpools and carpools Ride-sharing For high-occupancy vehicles Preferential Parking CARPOOLSONLY Car Sharing Programs Transit Use Incentives To discourage single occupancy vehicle (SOV) travel Parking Management Telecommuting To compress the work week or shift the commute outside the typical commute hours Alternative Work Schedules S M T W T F S Encouraging non-motorized travel through design features Urban Design Figure 3. Regional Center Mode Split Goals 2010 Existing 2035 81% 56% 8% 8% 6% 27% 2% 4% 3% 5% SOV HOV Transit Bike Walk MODE mix of land use changes, transportation investments, and roadway pricing tools. Additionally, factors such as shifting demographic trends, preferences, and technology may contribute to mode shifts above and beyond the identified goals. MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 18 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 73 of 435 2.2.8. Existing and Future Vehicle LOS Conditions Existing Conditions In 2022, the City collected average daily traffic counts from arterial and collector streets and peak hour turning movement counts at 157 intersections in Auburn. These observations formed the basis for the existing conditions analysis of traffic operations in Auburn. Existing turning movement counts were analyzed using Synchro traffic operations software to calculate the LOS at each study intersection for the busiest hour during the weekday AM (7:00 - 9:00 am) and PM (4:00 - 6:00 pm) peak periods. Wherever possible, HCM 6th edition analysis was used. In some cases, due to incompatible intersection channelization and/or phasing settings, HCM 2000 was applied. Of the 157 intersections evaluated, the 11 (or 8%) shown in Table 3 are currently operating below the City’s adopted LOS standard. Figure 4 displays the existing LOS standard of evaluated intersections and numbered intersections currently operating below the LOS standard. The majority of intersections operating below adopted level of service standards or failing intersections have two-way stop-control; of the 13 failed intersections, three are signalized, one has all-way stop-control, and eight have two-way stop- control. The PM peak hour period is also when the network is under most strain: seven intersections are failing only during the PM peak hour, while only four intersections are failing only during the AM peak hour, and two intersections are failing during both AM and PM peak hours. In addition to current failures, five intersections are operating near the threshold of failure in the AM and three are approaching the City’s standard in the PM, indicating that future growth could cause the level of service to drop below standards. Many of the intersections with existing level of service issues are on Lea Hill or West Hill. Multiple intersections along Auburn Way South (SR 164), M Street SE, and A Street SE carry heavy volumes of both local and regional traffic and are close to or failing City and/or state LOS standards. Future Conditions (2044 Preferred) To forecast what travel patterns might be in 2044, the City’s VISUM-based travel demand model was applied. Developing these forecasts required validation of the model to confirm it could replicate existing traffic volumes (with model inputs reflecting 2022 roadway and land use conditions throughout Auburn). Then, the model was updated to reflect land use and transportation conditions expected under the 2044 preferred land use scenario from the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element. Table 4 lists the projects included in the Initial 2044 Preferred Land Use Future model. The table also indicates what the current project status is and what are the next steps planned for the project. The next steps indicate whether or not the project will be retained or removed from the Plan project list included in Appendix B. INTERSECTION 1 116th Ave SE & SE 304th St 2 46th PL S / 44th Ave S & S 321st St / 51st Ave S 3 51st Ave S & 316th Ave 4 A St SE & 44th St SE 5 AWN & 45th St NE 6 AWS & 17th St SE 7 C St SW & 3rd St NW 8 Henry Rd NE / Pike St NE & 8th St NE 9 Lakeland Hills Way SE & Oravetz Rd SE 10 M St SE & 12th St SE 11 M St SE & AWS 12 R St SE & 33rd St SE 13 Howard Rd / 21st St SE Table 3. Intersections Operating Below the LOS Standard per 2022 Traffic Counts EXISTING LOS NUMBER OF INTERSECTIONS OK 111 Approaching Standard 27 At Standard 6 Failed 13 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 19 Page 74 of 435 Figure 4. Existing Intersection Level of Service MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 20 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 75 of 435 Table 4. Improvement Projects in the Initial 2044 Preferred Land Use Future Model 2024-2029 TIP ID IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT STATUS NEXT STEPS I-6 Lea Hill Road SE & 112th Avenue SE Roundabout Design Programmed for 2027, Construction Not Yet funded. Retain in 2024 CTP Project List I-10 R Street SE & 21st Street SE Road Roundabout Design Underway, Construction Programmed for 2025 Retain in 2024 CTP Project List I-11 SR 164 & 6th Street SE Improvement Design Programmed for 2025, Construction Not Yet Funded Effectiveness of Project in Mitigating LOS questionable. Remove project from TIP and CTP. I-12 Lea Hill Road SE & 104th Avenue SE Roundabout Design Underway, Construction Not Yet Funded Seek Construction Funding. Retain in 2024 CTP List. I-15 10th Street NW & A Street NW Signal Design Underway, Construction Programmed for 2024 Project to be substantially complete by end of 2024. Remove from 2024 CTP list. I-16 SR 167 NB Ramps & 15th Street NW Improvement Removed from TIP. Design and Construction Not Funded Alternate Project Developed to Address LOS issue. Remove from 2024 CTP List. R-2 Stewart Road Widening (City of Sumner) Design Underway, Construction Programmed for 2025 Project By Others and Outside City of Auburn. Remove from 2024 CTP Project List. R-4 A Street Loop Construction underway Project to be substantially complete by end of 2024. Remove from 2024 CTP list. R-5 A Street NW & 3rd Street NW Improvement Design and Construction Not Yet Funded Retain in 2024 CTP Project List R-6 Auburn Way S Widening (Hemlock Street to Poplar St) Design Underway, Construction Programmed for 2024 Project will still be in construction by end of 2024. Retain in 2024 CTP Project List. R-7 M Street NE Widening (Main Street to 4th Street NE) Design Underway, Construction Programmed for 2025 Retain project in 2024 CTP Project List. R-13 R Street SE Widening (22nd to 33rd) Design Underway, Construction Not Yet Funded Retain project in 2024 CTP Project List. (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 21 Page 76 of 435 2024-2029 TIP ID IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT STATUS NEXT STEPS R-16 RGC Access Improvements Design Underway, Construction Programmed for 2024 Project to be substantially complete by end of 2024. Remove from 2024 CTP Project List. R-26 E Valley Highway Widening Design Underway, Construction Not Yet Funded Seek construction funding. Retain in 2024 CTP Project List. R-27 Garden Avenue Realignment Design Underway, Construction Programmed for 2024 Project to be substantially complete by end of 2024. Remove from 2024 CTP Project List. P-3 10th Street NE Improvements Design and Construction Not Yet Funded Retain in 2024 CTP Project List 2019 COMP PLAN ID IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT STATUS NEXT STEPS 2 I Street NE Extension (45th Street NE to S 277th St)Complete Remove from 2024 CTP Project List 11 116th Avenue SE & SE 320th Street Roundabout Not funded Retain in 2024 CTP Project List 16 M Street SE Widening (8th Street SE to Auburn Way S)Not funded Combine with M/12th signal project in 2024 CTP Project List 19 116th Avenue SE & SE 312th Street Roundabout Not funded Retain in 2024 CTP Project List 22 M Street SE & 12th Street SE Signal Not funded Combine with M Street SE Widening 23 M Street SE & 29th Street SE Roundabout Not funded Retain in 2024 CTP Project List 30 R Street Bypass (M Street SE to SR 18)Not funded Retain in 2024 CTP Project List WSDOT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT STATUS NEXT STEPS n/a SR 167 HOV Widening (15th Street SW to SR 410) Construction Programmed for 2025 Project by Others. Remove from 2024 CTP Project List. MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 22 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 77 of 435 The initial 2044 Preferred Land Use Future Model was used to generate future travel demand volumes and turning movement counts at 162 study intersections2 throughout the city during the busiest hour of the weekday AM (7:00 - 9:00 am) and PM (4:00 - 6:00 pm) peak periods. Figure 5 shows the forecast 32% increase in households and 44% increase in jobs in the City of Auburn between 2022 and 2044. AM peak hour trips are forecast to increase by 28% (from 22,900 trips today to 29,300 trips in 2044). PM peak hour trips are forecast to increase by 37% (from 30,700 trips today to 42,200 trips in 2044). Forecast volumes from the preferred land use alternative model were then applied to study intersections using Synchro software to test future LOS. In the preferred land use alternative, 162 intersections were analyzed. Of these, 22 intersections are forecast to operate below City or state LOS standards in 2044. These intersections are listed in Table 5. Of the intersections forecast to fail, 10 currently do not meet the adopted LOS standards. These 10 intersections are highlighted in pink in Table 5. Figure 6 shows a map of intersection LOS across the City. Figure 5. Changes in Trip Generation Between 2022 Existing Condition and the Preferred Land Use 2044 Alternative INTERSECTION 1 112th Ave SE & SE 304th St 2 116th Ave SE & SE 304th St 3 15th St NE & M St NE 4 30th St NE 5 46th PL S / 44th Ave S & S 321st St / 51st Ave S 6 51st Ave S & 316th Ave 7 56th Ave S & S 316th Ave 8 A St SE & 12th St SE 9 A St SE & 21st St SE 10 A St SE & 44th St SE 11 A St SE & Ellingson Rd / 41st St SE 12 AWN & 42nd St NE 13 AWN & 45th St NE 14 AWS & 17th St SE 15 C St SE & Ellingson Rd 16 C St SW & 3rd St NW 17 Henry Rd NE / Pike St NE & 8th St NE 18 I St NE & 37th St NE 19 I St NE & 45th St NE 20 Lakeland Hills Way SE & Oravetz Rd SE 21 M St SE & AWS 22 SE 304th St & 118th Ave SE Table 5. Intersections Operating Below the LOS Standard 2 Note that the future scenario includes five intersections that do not exist today. FUTURE LOS NUMBER OF INTERSECTIONS OK 88 Approaching Standard 33 At Standard 19 Failed 22 32% Households Jobs AM Peak Trips PM Peak Trips 2022 Existing 2044 Preferred Change 33,00043,60047,80068,60022,90029,30030,70042,200or 10,600 44% or 20,800 28% or 6,400 37% or 11,500 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 23 Page 78 of 435 Figure 6. Intersection Level of Service in the 2044 Future Preferred Land Use Alternative MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 24 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 79 of 435 Of the intersections forecast to operate below LOS standards by 2044, the vast majority have two-way stop-control; only three failing intersections are signalized, four have all-way stop-control, and 14 have two-way stop-control. More of the intersections are impacted during the PM peak hour than in the morning, similar to existing conditions. In addition to the 21 intersections that are expected to fail city or state standards by 2044, 14 intersections are forecast to operate at the City’s LOS standard, two in both the AM and PM, three in the AM and nine in the PM peak hour, signaling that increased growth could test the capacity on more of the road network in Auburn. With some exceptions, Vehicle LOS issues associated with the preferred land use alternative are concentrated along five corridors, where multiple intersections will fail to meet City or state LOS standards: • East: SE 304th Street corridor on Lea Hill • North: I St corridor and Auburn Way N • West:51st Ave S / S 321st Street Corridor on West Hill • South: A Street SE corridor 2.2.9. Addressing Vehicle LOS Deficiencies Projects to Address Existing and Forecast LOS Issues Where the future analysis indicated that an intersection would not meet adopted LOS standards in 2044, measures to address the deficiency were identified, evaluated, and costed. City transportation policies, goals, site characteristics, and and adjacent planned or underway projects were considered to identify effective and desirable improvements. The types of improvements considered included roundabouts, re-channelization of intersections, access management, turning restrictions, and signalization. Where a signalized intersection was deemed a desirable solution, MUTCD 11th Edition signal warrants were applied to determine if forecast volumes would warrant signalization of the intersection. In instances where a failing intersection would not meet MUTCD signal warrants, non-signalized mitigation measures, such as channelization and access management, were considered. All improvements were analyzed using Synchro traffic operations software to ensure the recommended measure would facilitate the intersection meeting the adopted level of service standards in the 2044 preferred land use alternative. Projects to implement these improvements are included in the project list in Appendix B. Trip Reductions The Preferred scenario includes reductions to vehicle trip generation rates to reflect shifts to other travel models due to increased density and mixed-use development projects, focused land use growth and increased access to additional active transportation facilities, transit service, increased vehicular travel costs, and demographic changes. The reduction percentages were determined based on results from PSRC's regional travel demand for travel behavior changes in the City of Auburn. Reductions were applied across the City based on the Transit LOS rating. This metric is based on walking proximity to transit. Reductions were only applied in areas with level of transit service 1 and 2, the highest quality transit options in the City: within the walkshed of Auburn Station and frequent transit routes (BRT and routes with less than 30 minute headways). The reductions in vehicle trip rates ranged from 1.5 to 8.0 percent based on trip type (commute vs. non- commute) and transit area type. Regional Capacity Projects In addition to projects that provide additional vehicle capacity to meet City vehicle LOS standards, a set of projects have been identified that would provide regional system-wide capacity benefit. These projects are included in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and are listed below: • Auburn Way South - Hemlock to Poplar (currently in construction) • Auburn Way South: 32nd St to City Limit (candidate project) • Auburn Way South - Poplar to 32nd St (candidate project) • E Valley Highway Widening (currently in design w/planned construction start in 2028) • M Street NE Widening, E Main St to 4th St NE, (currently in design w/planned construction start in 2025/2026) • M Street SE Corridor Improvements (8th St SE to Auburn Way S) See Project Comp-20 in Appendix B. For more information regarding these projects, please refer to the PSRC Regional Transportation Plan available at https://www.psrc.org/planning-2050/regional- transportation-plan. SR 167 Master Plan The SR 167 Master Plan update includes recommendations to address the significant congestion and impact on local roadways from regional traffic flowing through the SR 167 corridor. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 25 Page 80 of 435 The plan calls for an additional express toll lane in each direction and interchange improvements on SR 167 at 15th Street NW, SR 18, and 15th Street SW to reduce bottlenecking and queuing issues. These changes are complemented by a suite of transit improvements and active mode access improvements in the surrounding area. Additionally, the master plan also includes support for reconstructing the BNSF freight railway over Ellingson Road to reduce bottleneck and impacts to traffic. For further review of the SR 167 master plan, visit the WSDOT project website. 2.3. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Active transportation is an integral component of Auburn’s transportation system. Active transportation includes walking, bicycling, and rolling. The City seeks to enhance the active transportation travel environment both for recreational travel and trips that might otherwise be taken via a car to improve mobility and environmental health. The City recognizes that the past development of the transportation system has prioritized the automobile as the primary travel mode. A side effect of this has been conditions less conducive to active transportation travel. The City seeks to redress the balance by enhancing conditions in which active transportation modes are a realistic and attractive travel option. Over the last 15 years, there have been significant improvements to active transportation facilities in Auburn's Regional Growth Center (Downtown Auburn). Sidewalk, ADA, and lighting improvements have been made to Main Street, S Division Street Promenade, City Hall Plaza and Plaza Park, and behind the shops on East Main Street. Growth in the downtown core has resulted in the development of multi-story residential and office buildings and senior housing, helping renew the pedestrian infrastructure and creating a need for continued effort to maintain and improve the sidewalk system. In addition, the Sounder Auburn Station and transit hub at West Main Street and C Street SW provide pedestrians more options for connecting to regional destinations. These improvements contribute to a more hospitable environment for pedestrians. Despite the progress that has been made over the past several years, there are still many areas of need and gaps in active transportation systems in Downtown Auburn and in other areas throughout the city. Commercial development outside the downtown exists primarily along arterials and is dominated by strip development and auto-oriented businesses. Although sidewalks are provided on most arterials, pedestrians may feel exposed to the traffic. Surface parking lots border the sidewalks, and driveways interrupt the continuity of the sidewalk system. The high volumes of vehicular traffic and wide streets along arterials, such as Auburn Way, pose a barrier for pedestrians crossing the roadway. Residential areas, such as southwest Lea Hill, were built under King County’s jurisdiction and sidewalk construction was not required. Breaks in the sidewalk network require pedestrians to maneuver around parked cars, into private yards, or into the street. In newer neighborhoods such as Lakeland Hills, SR 167 PEL Study SR 167 Master Plan Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) Study Final Study JUNE 2023 Prepared by: Washington State Department of Transportation MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 26 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 81 of 435 sidewalks built to the city standards applicable at the time of their construction are provided on both sides of the street. The Lea Hill and West Hill neighborhoods have a sporadic and often disconnected sidewalk system. Most newer residential developments have sidewalks, but many of the older residential areas and arterial streets are missing large segments of sidewalk, resulting in an inconsistent pedestrian environment. The Auburn Valley is flat and conducive to cycling for a range of skill levels and has a good network of existing or planned north-south biking routes and trails. Areas along the Green and White Rivers provide opportunities for multi-use trails that accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians. The Interurban Trail is part of a major north-south regional trail system. The Green River trail is also an extension of a north- south regional trail. Conversely, there are few existing east-west connections between the West Hill and Lea Hill areas of Auburn which are more challenging due to steep topography. Many bicycle lanes existing throughout the City but often have gaps before forming a fully connected network or connection to transit and trails. Planning and developing a strong active transportation network supports several state and national acts including Washington’s GMA, CTR Act, the federal Clean Air Act, the ADA, and the Move Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) and its successors. Supporting the active transportation system helps ensure compliance with these initiatives and the healthy community principles espoused by PSRC through Vision 2050. It also increases funding opportunities for City projects. Improving the active transportation system also helps address the findings of the citywide Health Impact Assessment, which recommended that the City improve sidewalk connectivity; improve the pedestrian environment; eliminate natural and man- made mobility barriers for pedestrian and bicyclists; improve transit access; and improve traffic safety, and pedestrian safety. As a regional growth center, the City encourages transportation planning that emerges from a clear land use plan based on a community vision and the values expressed in Imagine Auburn. In this vision, Auburn supports higher density housing in the downtown; neighborhood commercial districts; and landscaped, pedestrian-oriented street and sidewalk design. This pattern of development reinforces a positive walking and biking environment. Auburn’s developing trail network provides local and regional connections for both recreational use and commuting. The regional trails that have been developed include the Interurban Trail and portions of the Green River and White River Trails. The Lakeland Hills Trail network provides connections to neighborhood parks, community center, and to the Sumner Link Trail via a tunnel under the BNSF railway. Map 2. 2024 Bike Route Network in Appendix A illustrates the existing and proposed trail network within the City. In 2024, the City’s existing bike facilities were mapped using aerial photography and field verification. All roads in the City of Auburn are considered Class III Bikeways. However, only bike facilities of Class III Bikeways with Pavement Markings level and higher were included in the inventory. The inventory is depicted in Map 3. 2024 Existing Bike Facilities in Appendix A and yielded the statistics shown in Figure 7. A citywide sidewalk inventory was completed in 2022. This initial inventory collected the following information for city sidewalks: • Location • Surface type (concrete, asphalt, brick) • Width • Length • Surface area The inventory was collected prior to the development of the Pedestrian Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) standards and for many sidewalks, doesn’t include all information needed to determine the Pedestrian LTS. An ongoing effort is underway to collect this additional information that will then be used to evaluate and document where existing sidewalks meet or don’t meet pedestrian LOS standards. The total length of City sidewalks inventoried in 2022 was 298 Miles. Figure 7. Existing Bike Facility Statistics as of January 2024 22.62 mi Class I Bikeways 1.29 mi Class II Bikeway with Buffer Both Sides of Roadway Class II Bikeway with Buffer Intermittent or 1 Side of Roadway0 mi 15.95 mi Class II Bikeway Both Sides of Roadway 4.21 mi Class II Bikeway Intermittent or 1 Side of Roadway 2.60 mi Class III Bikeway with Pavement Markings TOTAL: 46.67 mi 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 27 Page 82 of 435 2.3.1. Active Transportation Level of Service Standards The Plan policies establish active transportation LOS standards based on the LTS, shown in Figure 8. This approach is consistent with Washington State, Pierce County, and King County policies and standards. LTS describes how comfortable a pedestrian or bicycle route feels to its users based on a variety of variables including posted speed limit, traffic volumes, whether or not the roadway is a truck route, and the type of active transportation facility provided. Active transportation facilities in, or along, roadways with higher vehicle speeds and volumes generally have higher LTS scores because the vehicle traffic makes it less comfortable for bicyclists and pedestrians to use those facilities. Facilities that provide more separation between active transportation modes and adjacent roadway vehicular traffic and/or on lower speed roadways are more comfortable for bikes and pedestrians and therefore have a lower LTS. The City rates the LTS of its bicycle and pedestrian facilities on a scale of "1" to "4" with "1" being the most comfortable facilities and are the most likely to be used by people with a wide range of ages and abilities and "4" is the least comfortable and are likely to be used by only a select group of people and may present a barrier to the general walking and biking community. 2.3.2. Walking LOS Standards The City’s pedestrian network consists mostly of sidewalks and roadway shoulders. Trails and alleys also provide pedestrian connectivity in some areas. The City utilizes the Pedestrian Facility LTS Table shown in Table 6 to identify the LTS scores for pedestrian facilities. The Plan policies establish an LTS of "2" as the minimum standard for new and upgraded pedestrian facilities. The Plan policies also establish that new and upgraded pedestrian facilities will meet current ADA requirements. The Plan policies support actions to identify, prioritize, and plan improvements to existing pedestrian facilities to meet current LTS standards and ADA requirements. Figure 8. Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Less comfortable than LTS 1, but tolerable for people of a wide range of ages and abilities. Safe and comfortable for people of a wide range of ages and abilities. Tolerable for confident, experienced bicyclists and pedestrians. Uncomfortable for most people biking. Not suitable for pedestrians. LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4 Table 6. Pedestrian Facility LTS Table ROADWAY CLASS NO SEPARATE PEDESTRIAN FACILITY 5’ SHOULDER 5’ SHOULDER WITH PHYSICAL BARRIER 5’ SIDEWALK 5’ SIDEWALK WITH 5’ SEPARATION 10’ SIDEWALK Alley 2 1 1 1 1 1 Local Rustic 2 1 1 1 1 1 Rustic Collector 3 2 1 1 1 1 Local 3 3 2 2 1 1 Collector 4 3 2 2 1 1 Local Industrial 4 4 3 3 2 1 Minor Arterial 4 4 4 3 2 1 Principal Arterial 4 4 4 3 2 1 MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 28 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 83 of 435 2.3.3. Biking LOS Standards The planned and existing routes making up the City’s bicycle transportation network have been classified as either Regional, Priority, or Auxiliary Routes and are shown on Map 2. 2024 Bike Route Network in Appendix A. These classified bicycle routes, both existing and planned, support general movement of cyclists throughout the City and have been identified to provide connectivity between neighborhoods and commercial areas to transit stops, regional trail connections, and the downtown urban center. Streets and trails not identified as Regional, Priority, or Auxiliary routes provide important connections between local destinations, recreational use, and access to the bicycle transportation network. • Regional routes provide connectivity through the City to areas outside the City • Priority routes provide connectivity from Auxiliary Routes to Regional Routes, frequent transit stops, and Auburn Station • Auxiliary routes provide connectivity to Priority Routes from neighborhoods, commercial areas, schools, services, and non-frequent transit stops The Plan policies establish standards that require Regional Routes to have the lowest LTS of "1", Priority Routes to have a slightly higher LTS of "2" or less, and Auxiliary Routes to have an LTS of no more than "3". Bicycle facilities not identified as being Regional, Priority, or Auxiliary do not have assigned LTS standards d are designed in accordance with the standard roadway cross sections by street classification in the EDS. The City utilizes the Bicycle Facility LTS Table shown in Table 7 to identify the LTS scores for bicycle facilities. The table represents a simplified approach towards evaluating bicycle level of traffic stress. In some cases, factors not shown in the table may need to be considered and could necessitate the use of a more robust bike facility than is shown on the table to achieve the level of traffic stress standard. Standards for Class I, II, and III Bikeways are included in the EDS, shown in Figure 9. The EDS will be periodically updated to reflect current and emerging approaches towards achieving LTS standards with differing treatments and approaches. Although a bike network route is not identified on SR 164, this state route is subject to WSDOT complete streets requirements. Per these standards, SR 164 would require a minimum of a separated trail (Class I Bike Facility) to meet WSDOT level of traffic stress requirements. The City will look for opportunities to improve SR 164 to include these facilities where feasible with capital and development project improvements. 2.3.4. Sidewalk Facility Gap Analysis The inventory of existing sidewalks was used to identify gaps in the City’s sidewalk network. Improvements to address gaps and to address safety, accessibility, and level of traffic stress deficiencies have been, or will be, identified and included projects in this plan or addressed with future projects and programs. Figure 9. Bikeway Standards 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 29 Page 84 of 435 2.3.5. Bike Facility Gap Analysis The inventory of existing bike facilities was evaluated using the LTS Table to determine the LTS for existing facilities. The existing bike facilities LTS data was compared to the Map 2. 2024 Bike Route Network in Appendix A of regional, priority, and auxiliary routes to identify gaps in the planned bike network and existing bike facilities that do not currently meet the LTS standards. The comparison yielded the following statistics shown in Figure 10. Bike facilities not located on the City’s bike network do not have an LTS standard and were therefore not assessed for a gap between the provided LTS and the LTS standard. Completing gaps in the bike network and upgrading bike facilities to meet or exceed LTS standards in areas closer to transit services and where those transit services are more frequent and convenient (level of transit service "1" or "2", see Section 2.4.2. Transit LOS Standards) is more likely to encourage a mode shift from cars to bikes and transit. These projects would help relieve vehicle congestion and reduce needs for increased vehicle capacity and are therefore eligible to be funded with a per person trip transportation impact fee program. These projects are listed in Appendix B. Table 7. Bicycle Facility LTS Table POSTED SPEED LIMIT (MPH) ARTERIAL TRAFFIC VOLUME/ FREIGHT CLASS CLASS III BIKEWAY CLASS III BIKEWAY W/ PAVEMENT MARKINGS CLASS II BIKEWAY CLASS II BIKEWAY W/BUFFER CLASS I BIKEWAY 25/Not Posted <3k 1 1 1 1 1 3-7k 3 2 2 2 1 ≥7k 3 3 2 2 1 30 <15k 4 3 2 2 1 ≥15k 4 4 3 2 1 35 <25k 4 4 3 3 1 ≥25k 4 4 4 3 1 40+ Any Volume 4 4 4 4 1 Any T-2* or Greater 4 4 4 4 1 Figure 10. Bikeway Network Assessment Statistics as of January 2024 Of Regional Routes Meet LTS Standards 100% Of Priority Routes Meet LTS Standards 49% Of Auxiliary Routes Meet LTS Standards 76% OF 5.8 M IL E S OF 25.3 M I L ESOF 39.4 M I L ES5.8 Miles 12.5 Miles 30.1 Miles MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 30 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 85 of 435 2.4. TRANSIT 2.4.1. Existing Transit Services Figure 11 provides a brief summary of the public transportation services offered in Auburn. Existing transit service for the Auburn area is identified in Map 5. 2024 Transit Bus Routes/Stops in Appendix A . The service levels outlined in this section are for normal operations as of January 2024. Auburn Station Transit service is a key component of Auburn’s transportation system, providing mobility within the City and access to and from the City. Unlike the street and active transportation systems, Auburn does not directly administer transit service. Rather, the City works with local and regional transit agencies to coordinate service. The transit agencies are publicly funded and are responsible for providing transit service within their individual service boundaries. Today, Auburn is served by local and regional bus service and commuter rail. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 31 Page 86 of 435 Figure 11. Types of Transit Services in Auburn AUBURN STATION (MANY TRANSIT OPTIONS AVAILABLE) • Sound Transit Sounder commuter rail service • Sound Transit express bus service • KC Metro frequent route service • KC Metro and Muckleshoot Tribal Transit local route service • KC Metro DART service • Pierce Transit express route service Service/ Frequency Distance Between Stops Level of Service RAPIDRIDE Frequent Routes BRT – Bus Rapid Transit (RapidRide) Local Routes DART & Express Routes HIGHEST service frequency/ hours MEDIUM service frequency/ hours LIMITED service frequency/ hours < 15 MINS OR LESS headways during service hours Minimum 4 buses/hour during peak times (currently route 160) ≤ 30 MINS headways during peak hours ≤ 60 MINS during service hours outside of peak hours (currently routes 181, 184, Muckleshoot Tribal Transit) Service with few stops between destinations, intended to take riders quickly to the key destinations. •Express routes are currently routes 497, 566, and 578 •Dial-A-Ride Transit Service (DART) routes are currently routes 915 and 917 STOPS EVERY 1/2 MILE STOPS EVERY 1/4 MILE STOPS EVERY 1/4 MILE MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 32 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 87 of 435 King County Metro Transit (KC Metro) KC Metro offers a network of bus service in Auburn, connecting the city to the region. KC Metro adopted and implemented changes to its network in September 2020, via the Renton- Kent-Auburn Area Mobility Plan (RKAAMP), and some routes were affected. These changes were in part to accommodate the planned RapidRide I Line, which would replace a portion of Route 160, and provide frequent, reliable, and extended (early mornings to late night) service from Auburn Station, along the Auburn Way N corridor, connecting Auburn, Kent, and Renton transit stations. Route 160 provides a maximum of 15-minute service during peak hours and 30-minute service during off- peak, and operates from 4 am to 3 am on weekdays and from 5 am to 3 am on weekends. This route will become the RapidRide I Line in 2026 and will provide service every 10 to 15 minutes. Route 165 provides regional service between Kent, Auburn, and Green River College. It connects with Route 181 at Green River College. This route provides 20-minute service during peak hours and 30- to 60-minute service during off-peak, operating from 5 am to 12 am on weekdays and 6 am to 12am on weekends. Route 181 provides daily service between the Twin Lakes Park-and-Ride, Federal Way Commons Mall, Federal Way Transit Center, the Outlet Collection, Auburn Station, and Green River College. It provides 15- to 30-minute service during peak hours and 30- to 60-minute service during off-peak, operating from 5 am to 11:30 pm on weekdays and 6:45 am to 11:30 pm on weekends. Route 184 provides daily service from Auburn Station to south Auburn. It provides 20- to 30-minute service during the day, and 30- to 60-minute service during nights and weekends, and operates from 4:30 am to 1:30 am on weekdays and 5:30 am to 2 am on weekends. Route 915 provides weekday and Saturday service between Auburn Station and Enumclaw via Auburn Way South. The route also includes a small portion of DART service with limited, variable routing in response to rider requests in downtown Enumclaw and the northern part of the Auburn Downtown Urban Center around the MultiCare Auburn Medical Center. This route provides 40- to 60-minute service, operating from 4:30 am to 7:45 pm, during weekdays, and 90-minute service, operating from 10 am to 6:30pm, on weekends. KC Metro provides frequent, local, and DART bus services linking destinations within the community and providing regional connections to the Auburn Station. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 33 Page 88 of 435 Route 917 provides weekday and Saturday service between A St SE, 41st St SE, Algona, the Outlet Collection, and Auburn Station. The route offers DART service (limited variable route) in portions of Pacific. This route provides 25- to 40-minute service on weekdays, and 60-minute service on weekends. It operates from 5 am to 7 pm on weekdays and from 8:30 am to 5:45 pm on weekends. Metro Flex Metro Flex is an on-demand neighborhood ride share service, allowing transit users to ride anywhere within its service area at the same cost as a KC Metro bus trip. Metro Flex provides service in places that are not near frequent bus or rail service, helping to fill transit gaps in the areas that it serves. While Auburn is not currently within a Metro Flex service area, it is on the short list for expansion of the program. ACCESS ACCESS Transportation is a KC Metro paratransit service, providing door-to-door, shared-ride van transportation within most of King County. The ADA requires door-to-door paratransit service for persons whose disabilities prevent use of accessible fixed- route bus service. Vanpool Services KC Metro sponsors vanpool services that serve residents and employees in Auburn. Vanpool is a shared-ride service that provides group transport for commuters with proximate origins and destinations. Vanpool is a popular and flexible service that provides commuters with an alternative to driving alone and fixed-route transit service. Vanpool will continue to be an important strategy for mitigating peak period congestion throughout Auburn and the region. Metro Transit Facilities KC Metro owns and operates the Auburn 15th Street NW Park-and-Ride with approximately 150 surface parking stalls. KC Metro also operates into Auburn Station, which is managed by Sound Transit. MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 34 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 89 of 435 Pierce Transit Route 497 is operated by Pierce Transit in partnership with the City of Auburn and KC Metro. It operates peak hour weekday service between Lakeland Hills and Auburn Station. As a morning and evening service meeting Sounder commuter rail schedule, Route 497 is a commuter-oriented route, but is open to all riders. Route 497 primarily serves Sounder passengers and significantly reduces the demand for commuter parking at the Auburn Station parking garage managed by Sound Transit. Vanpool Services are provided by Pierce Transit similar to those offered by KC Metro. Sound Transit Sound Transit is the regional transit provider for the many parts of the Puget Sound region. It provides limited-stop transit services linking Auburn to major regional destinations in King and Pierce Counties. The agency offers Sounder commuter rail and regional express bus services in Auburn. Sounder Commuter Rail Sound Transit operates the Sounder commuter rail service on the Lakewood to Tacoma to Seattle route (S Line) via the BNSF Railway. The S Line provides weekday peak hour trips northbound to Seattle in the morning and southbound from Seattle to Tacoma to Lakewood in the afternoon. Limited reverse direction trips are also provided in each peak hour, as well as limited midday service. Some connections are available between S Line Sounder trains, which terminate in Seattle, and N Line Sounder trains from Everett to Seattle. Additional special event service to and from Seattle for Mariners, Seahawks, and Sounders games on some weekends. Currently, nine trains operate northbound to Seattle in the morning peak, and ten trains return southbound during the evening peak. Three trains operate southbound to Tacoma/Lakewood in the morning and northbound to Seattle in the evening. There is currently one midday train running northbound to Seattle. Due to shifts in ridership since the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in many commuters’ work schedules, particularly the increase in telework, Sound Transit is re-examining the priorities from the 2020 Sounder South Strategic Plan. Prior to the pandemic, near capacity ridership growth was expected during peak periods, resulting in the plan prioritizing longer trains (from seven cars to ten cars) during the peak periods. However, since the pandemic, peak ridership has lowered, leading Sound Transit to consider prioritizing new trips, including more trips during off-peak hours, over longer trains. Any new trips, however, will require approval from BNSF Railway, which owns most of the tracks the Sounder runs on. As part of its re-examination of its priorities, Sound Transit conducted public engagement around the question of longer trains during peak hours versus more trips. The survey results showed that approximately 90% of respondents preferred adding new trips over longer trains. Sound Transit will use the feedback from its public engagement, along with other research, to inform Sound Transit Board discussions regarding its Sounder S-Line priorities. Regional Express Bus Service Route 566/567 offers daily weekday, limited-stop service between Auburn Station, Kent Station, Renton Transit Center, Bellevue Transit Center, and Overlake Transit Center. It provides 20- to 30-minute service northbound during the morning peak from 5:30 am to 11 am, and 20- to 30-minute service southbound during the evening peak from 1:40 pm to 8 pm. Route 577/578 offers daily limited-stop service between Puyallup, Sumner, Auburn, Federal Way, and Seattle. Route 577 provides service between the Federal Way Transit Center and Seattle during the peak periods when the Sounder train is in operation. The 578 provides service between Puyallup and Seattle during the off-peak hours when train service is not currently provided. Route 578 provides 30- to 60-minute service on weekdays. On weekends, Route 578 provides hourly service. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 35 Page 90 of 435 Auburn Station Sound Transit owns and operates Auburn Station located in downtown Auburn. This full-service multimodal facility provides parking for a total of 633 vehicles in a six-story parking garage and a surface parking lot. A new parking garage is expected to be available for transit users in 2027, offering an additional 525 parking stalls. A number of parking stalls are reserved for carpool/vanpool, and a number of stalls are reserved for paying single-occupant vehicles. The facility currently handles approximately 470 daily bus trips. Approximately 3,000 passengers ride bus service to/from the station on a daily basis. Boardings at Auburn on the Sounder commuter rail are approximately 1,300 per day. Muckleshoot Tribal Transit MIT currently operates the Muckleshoot Tribal Transit (MTT) services that offers two publicly available transit routes. The Reservation Hot Lap provides local service between SE 384th Street and SE 416th Street with 30- to 60-minute service from 7 am to 8 pm on weekdays. The Reservation Route serves the SR 164 corridor generally between SE 416th Street, Downtown Auburn, and the Outlet Collection with 30-minute service from 5:30 am to 8:30 pm on weekdays, and 30-minute service from 10 am to 4:30 pm on Saturdays and holidays. MTT shares many stop locations with KC Metro and is a valuable resource to the community as the service is free to all passengers. MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 36 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 91 of 435 2.4.2. Transit LOS Standards Different agencies take different approaches towards transit LOS standards. Unlike facilities and services for other transportation modes, the City of Auburn does not own or operate transit facilities and does not directly provide transit services. It follows that the City evaluates and utilizes transit LOS standards differently than transit service providers (KC Metro, Pierce Transit, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and Sound Transit). Agencies that provide transit service typically utilize transit LOS standards to identify deficiencies in transit services and plan for expanded or improved transit services and facilities. The City of Auburn's approach utilizes transit LOS standards to identify and prioritize investments in other transportation modes that would best encourage people to use transit services instead of driving. This approach utilizes transit LOS as a gauge to evaluate the likelihood that people would choose transit over driving. The variables used to evaluate transit LOS by the City are proximity to transit services and the type of transit services available to the area. People in areas that are within closer walking and biking distances to transit services are more likely to use those services and therefore those areas have a higher transit LOS than areas further from transit services. Similarly, people are more likely to use transit services that offer more frequent and connected services and therefore areas served by more frequent and connected services have a higher transit LOS than areas with less frequent, less connected services. Using the transit LOS in Table 8, a transit LOS rating ranging from "1" to "4" can be assigned for any location in the City using a combination of the walking distance from the location to transit service and the type of transit service available. A transit LOS rating of "1" is the highest rating which indicates an area is within a comfortable walking or biking distance to the most frequent and convenient transit services (frequent transit and/or transit hubs like Auburn Station). A transit LOS rating of "4" is the lowest rating and indicates an area is not within a short walking or biking distance to even the most basic transit services. Map 6. 2024 Level of Transit Service in Appendix A shows level of transit service ratings throughout the City. Transit LOS is estimated using the walkshed distance to current and near-term planned transit stops based on the existing street network and does not account for whether or not those streets have active transportation facilities that meet current LOS pedestrian and bike standards. The City utilizes transit LOS to help prioritize investments in active transportation facilities intended to reduce the transportation system’s need for vehicular capacity. Placing a new sidewalk, bike lane, or trail in a location with a transit LOS of "1" is more likely to encourage mode shift from vehicle to transit than placing the new facility in a location with a transit LOS of "4". Additionally, mitigation of potential vehicular LOS impacts caused by development is more likely realized with active transportation improvements in areas with higher transit LOS ratings. Map 6. 2024 Level of Transit Service in Appendix A is also used by the City in its coordination efforts with transit agencies to help identify service needs and gaps. It is the City’s intention to improve overall transit LOS in the City by coordinating with transit agencies to encourage and support improved services, planning growth in the City near areas served by transit, and prioritizing investments in active transportation facilities that provide connectivity to transit services. Table 8. Transit LOS Table TYPE OF TRANSIT SERVICE >1 MILE WALKSHED 1 MILE WALKSHED ¾ MILE WALKSHED ½ MILE WALKSHED ¼ MILE WALKSHED Auburn Station 4 3 2 1 1 Frequent 4 3 2 1 1 Local 4 4 3 2 2 Express and Dart 4 4 4 3 2 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 37 Page 92 of 435 2.4.3. Transit Needs and Gaps The City serves as a community voice and advocate to transit providers to maintain and expand transit services to meet community needs. However, the City is not in full control of these services, therefore, the City’s approach towards addressing transit level of service issues in order to improve that level of service where the City has control is to focus on providing access to existing and planned transit services. Those efforts are centered on improving sidewalk and bicycle facilities to provide connections to transit services and are described in the active transportation sections of this plan. This section summarizes the gaps and needs in the existing transit services in Auburn and provides recommendations on how those gaps and needs may be filled. The City will continue to communicate and coordinate with transit agencies to advocate for these needs. West Hill The West Hill of Auburn is generally the area bound on the west by 56th Ave S, Peasley Canyon Rd, 51st Ave S and 46th Place S (City limits), on the east by West Valley Highway, on the south by the S 348th St alignment (City limits), and on the north by the S 284th St alignment (the City limits approximately ½ mile south of S 277th St). Auburn’s West Hill is not directly served by any transit services making its 7,500 residents the least transit served people in Auburn. Auburn’s West Hill is also unique in that it sits between the Auburn Station and the Federal Way Transit Center. This presents an opportunity to provide transit connections from West Hill to the Federal Way Transit Center, Auburn Station, or both. These connections could come in the form of new routes or by modifying existing routes. KC Metro Route 183 could be modified to expand into portions of the West Hill to provide connection to the Federal Way Transit Center. KC Metro Route 181 could be modified to pass through a portion of West Hill to provide access to both the Federal Way Transit Center and Auburn Station. Another recommended solution would be to provide Metro Flex services to the West Hill and other parts of Auburn that lack transit services. Connection Between Auburn Station and Federal Way Transit Center With the Link Light Rail expanding south to Federal Way with an expected opening in 2026, there is an opportunity and need to improve Auburn’s overall access to regional transit systems by providing frequent and efficient transit services between the Federal Way Link Station and Auburn Station. When the Link Light Rail is complete to the Federal Way Transit Center, the demand for this route is likely to increase significantly. The City of Auburn strongly supports and advocates for the expansion to frequent services and/or conversion of the existing Route 181 to a RapidRide line to enhance the connection between Auburn Station and the Federal Way Transit Center. Lea Hill The Lea Hill area of Auburn is bound on the west and south by the Green River, on the east by SR 18, and on the north by the City limits along S 282nd St and S 288th St. Lea Hill, a predominantly residential community, has two transit routes that predominantly serve Green River College, leaving a large portion of the residents unable to walk or bike to a transit route. In 2014, a license plate survey of the Auburn Station garage indicated that a substantial Figure 12. Auburn Neighborhoods with Transit Needs and Gaps Auburn Transit Center Federal Way Transit Center MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 38 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 93 of 435 Residential areas of east Auburn, east of M St NE and south of 8th St NE, and parts of northeast Auburn, east of I St NE, are located more than 1/4 mile from fixed-route bus service. It is difficult for these areas to access transit, both for local and regional trips. The design of KC Metro’s local bus routes in Auburn should be reviewed in relation to future changes in Sound Transit’s Sounder commuter rail and regional express bus services to identify opportunities and priorities for productive improvements to transit coverage, frequency, and hours of operation. To maximize the investment in public transit service in Auburn, it is recommended that both Sound Transit and KC Metro conduct an evaluation of their schedules with a focus on improving service to major employers in the Auburn area. Sounder Commuter Rail operates bi-directionally in the peak periods. Most of the trips are operated in the peak direction: northbound during the weekday AM peak and southbound during the weekday PM peak. No midday, evening, or weekend regular service is currently provided, except for the special events times. These services are needed, as is additional capacity on some of the currently most popular runs. The City encourages Sound Transit to institute midday Sounder service to and from Tacoma/Lakewood and Seattle, and plan for evening and weekend service in the near future. The City will continue to work with Sound Transit as it designs and builds the second parking garage for the Auburn Station. The City will utilize the CTR commuter surveys and employer program reports and continue to develop partnerships with CTR businesses to better understand the transit needs and gaps with the major employers in Auburn. The City will continue to work with transit providers to ensure that transit stops are clean, secure, and meet safety requirements. Auburn encourages Amtrak to consider implementing more intercity rail stations in the high density and traffic congested areas of Puget Sound, such as at Auburn Station. A new Auburn stop would have great ridership benefits since it is at a station with available overnight parking and is in close proximity to hundreds of thousands of potential new customers. number of Lea Hill residents utilize transit service at Auburn Station. This suggests that a commuter- oriented shuttle serving Lea Hill, similar to the Route 497 shuttle implemented in Lakeland Hills, could be successful. Another recommended solution would be to provide Metro Flex services to the Lea Hill and other parts of Auburn that lack transit services. Plateau The area along Auburn Way South (SR 164) between Riverwalk Drive, east to the City limits is referred to as the Plateau and is currently served by KC Metro Route 915 and Muckleshoot Tribal Transit. With both of these routes running, headway time ranges from 30 to 60 minutes. The City will continue to encourage partnership between KC Metro and Muckleshoot Tribal Transit to improve transit services to/from the Other Transit Needs and Suggested Improvements 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 39 Page 94 of 435 plateau to shorten headways along Auburn Way South. Another recommended solution would be to provide Metro Flex services to the Plateau and other parts of Auburn that lack transit services. Lakeland Hills Lakeland Hills, a planned residential community with approximately 3,800 homes, has peak-hour service to downtown Auburn, but lacks all-day service. The City of will continue to work with Pierce Transit, KC Metro, and Sound Transit to preserve Route 497 and add service to the route to meet all existing and future Sounder trains. In its Destination 2040 Long Range Plan, Pierce Transit lists an unfunded project that would expand Route 497 to become Route 498 that would run between Auburn and Fife. The City will continue to coordinate with Pierce Transit when, or if, this route expansion project starts to move forward. Another recommended solution would be to provide Metro Flex services and/or Pierce Transit Runner services to Lakeland Hills. Additionally, during the public outreach efforts for development of this Plan, the City heard a suggestion from multiple people to expand KC Metro Route 184 into Lakeland to replace or augment Route 497. The City will discuss and potentially advocate for this, or similar concepts, with KC Metro and Pierce Transit. 2.5. FREIGHT The efficient movement of freight, through and within the City, is critical to local and regional economic stability. Both rail and truck freight, originating largely in the Ports of Tacoma and Seattle, pass through Auburn regularly. Within Auburn, freight, or the movement of goods, occurs mostly with trucks on state routes and City streets or on railroad facilities. These facilities benefit the City as they provide regional connectivity and access. The state routes present challenges as they create barriers to other roadways and active transportation facilities. Multiple railroad corridors pass through Auburn and provide regional benefit as they provide freight movement and, in the case of the BNSF Railway north-south corridor, also local benefit as it provides commuter rail line service. However, like the state routes, in many areas throughout the valley area of the City, the railroads obstruct neighborhood access and transportation network connectivity. A strength of the railroad network is that 11 of the 21 mainline rail crossings of City trails and roadways are grade separated. All non-grade separated mainline rail crossings have gates and warning lights. An opportunity to greatly improve neighborhood access and overall transportation network connectivity exists in working to create more grade separated crossings for active transportation modes. A significant amount of freight also moves throughout the City on City streets. Based on actual truck usage data, there are currently 49 centerline miles of T-1, T-2, and T-3 truck routes in Auburn. MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 40 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 95 of 435 2.5.1. Truck The City has designated truck routes for through freight movement in an effort to maximize the efficiency of and protect the roadway infrastructure. Current City of Auburn truck routes are shown in Map 10. 2024 Freight Network in Appendix A. Truck routes, established by City ordinance, are designated for roadways that incorporate special design considerations such as street grades, continuity, turning radii, street and lane widths, pavement strength, and overhead obstruction heights. In addition, the Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) is used to classify roadways, freight railroads, and waterways according to the annual freight tonnage they carry as directed by RCW 47.05.021. Map 10. 2024 Freight Network in Appendix A shows the 2023 classifications of City streets. The FGTS is primarily used to establish funding eligibility for Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) grants, fulfill federal reporting requirements, support transportation planning process, and plan for pavement needs and upgrades. The FGTS classifies roadways using the categories shown in Figure 13. Truck freight tonnage values are derived from actual or estimated truck traffic counts and converted into average weights by truck type. The City expects that the majority of regional truck trips will take place on state highways. However, recognizing that trips through the City are sometimes necessary, Auburn has designated a network of north-south and east-west corridors as truck routes, which are built to truck standards. In addition, the City has designated future truck routes, which will be designed and constructed to accommodate truck traffic, as opportunities arise. FMSIB has expressed an interest in these first and last mile connectors which provide access between these classified freight facilities and port, rail yard, distribution centers, and truck terminals. Auburn has significant industrial and commercial development throughout the City. The City encourages local delivery trucks to use the designated truck network as much as possible, but recognizes that trips on non-truck routes are necessary. The City is committed to supporting local industry and recognizes that the ability to ship and receive freight is essential to the success of many businesses. To implement this policy, the City will collaborate with local businesses to improve freight access, while maintaining the roadway infrastructure whenever possible. This may include adopting City Code and updating the Auburn Engineering Design and Construction Standards in a manner that favors these priorities. However, in a limited number of key locations, trucks may be prohibited due to existing design elements which do not support trucks, protecting sensitive areas such as downtown and residential neighborhoods, and to extend pavement life. Figure 13. FGTS Truck Route Classification T1T2T3 T4 T5 > 10 Million Tons 4 - 10 Million Tons 300,000 - 4 Million Tons 100,000 - 300,000 Tons Annually < 100,000 Million Tons, or at least 20,000 Tons per 60 Days 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 41 Page 96 of 435 2.5.2. Rail The Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) have rail lines running through Auburn. The UP line runs north- south, to the east of the Interurban Trail. BNSF has a triple-track, federally designated, high-speed railroad line running north-south. The BNSF Stampede Pass line runs east-west through downtown Auburn, entering Auburn at the east end of town near Auburn-Black Diamond Road, and merges with the north-south line just south of Auburn Station. In addition, BNSF operates a rail yard between A Street SE and C Street SW, south of SR 18. In the future, this area may develop as a multimodal rail yard, prompting the need to mitigate increased truck traffic through capacity improvements. BNSF also has plans to increase traffic on the Stampede Pass line, the east-west rail line running through Auburn. To accommodate this increase, the City completed the grade separation of M Street SE. Both the BNSF north-south line and the Stampede Pass line are handling an increase in rail freight traffic. BNSF handles a number of unit (solid) coal trains traveling to terminals in northwest Washington state, as well as unit oil trains carrying crude oil to northwest Washington state refineries. While loaded coal and oil trains are usually handled on the north-south line, some of these empty trains return east to Wyoming or North Dakota via the Stampede Pass line. At-grade railroad crossings create conflict points between vehicles and active transportation road users and rail traffic. Auburn has several at-grade railroad crossings: the Union Pacific tracks cross 44th St NW, 37th Street NW, 29th Street NW, West Main Street, and 15th Street SW. The BNSF tracks cross 37th Street NW, 29th Street NW, 3rd Street NW, W Main Street, and Auburn-Black Diamond Road. There are also at-grade crossings of spur tracks at various locations throughout the City. With as many as 75 trains passing through the City each day, the City has many at-grade crossings, each with unique safety implications. The City coordinates with railroad operators and the State to upgrade the crossings whenever possible. For instance, the project to grade separate M Street SE at the BNSF Stampede Pass tracks by lowering M Street SE under the railroad overpass was completed during 2013. Upgrades include the construction of a pre-signal where 37th Street NW crosses the BNSF tracks, to stop westbound vehicles on 37th Street NW to the west of the grade crossing in advance of the traffic signal at B Street NE. The pre-signal will prevent vehicles from stopping on the crossing. BNSF recently constructed a third rail mainline between Seattle and Auburn to improve service and reliability for passenger rail. The new mainline is located on the west-side of the existing tracks. The third mainline reduces vehicle storage for westbound vehicles on W Main Street and 3rd Street NW MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 42 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 97 of 435 between the tracks and traffic signals with C Street NW. Vehicle delays and queuing at the remaining at-grade crossings are anticipated to worsen in the future due to increased vehicle demands at the crossings, combined with increased rail and longer trains, resulting in more frequent, and longer duration, closures. 2.5.3. Freight LOS Standards Within Auburn, freight, or the movement of goods, occurs mostly with trucks on state routes and City streets or on railroad facilities. The City of Auburn’s freight LOS standards focus on elements of the freight network that the City owns, operates, or has regulatory authority to control such as City streets and intersections. The standards are intended to provide a network of roadways to carry freight traffic to/from freight oriented land use within the City to/from state highways and other regional truck routes. The standards are also intended to facilitate local deliveries using truck routes in the City. Unlike other LOS standards, freight LOS standards do not apply to all City streets. Instead, the standards are applied to truck routes in the City as designated in the Plan policies and shown on Map 10. 2024 Freight Network in Appendix A. Generally, truck routes include T-1, T-2, or T-3 routes, except as designated otherwise by the City Code or as posted by the City Engineer. In addition, the City recognizes local industrial roads, which are other key connections between truck routes and industrial properties. The freight LOS standards are established in the Plan policies and are summarized in Table 9. LOS STANDARD 1 Freight LOS standards for intersection delay and queuing on truck routes match vehicle LOS standards. 2 Intersections of truck routes shall be designed to accommodate turning trucks such that the trucks do not interfere or obstruct with other travel modes or cause damage to adjacent property and facilities. 3 Roadway pavement on truck routes shall be designed with a minimum 20-year service life with truck loading. 4 Driveways serving trucks and lane widths on the adjacent truck routes shall be designed such that trucks accessing the driveways do not enter into opposing roadway or driveway lanes. Driveways with excessive width may be required to provide mitigation treatments for bicyclists and pedestrians crossing the driveway. 5 Truck oriented land-uses shall provide on-site parking area for truck loading and unloading and shall accommodate truck access and on-site turn-around. Development anticipating regular truck deliveries or services shall provide a delivery plan that identifies the trucks size, frequency, and delivery or service duration and demonstrates how, when, and where the trucks will make deliveries or services without causing impacts to vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians in the roadway corridor. Table 9. Freight LOS Standards 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 43 Page 98 of 435 2.6. AIRPORT The Auburn Municipal Airport was founded in 1969. It is a division within the Public Works Department, is operated by three full-time City staff and is supported by other City of Auburn departments. The Airport is guided by seven volunteers on the Airport Advisory Board who advise the City Council regarding operations, master planning, facilities improvements, leasing, rental fees, and other aviation concerns. The airport is comprised of 113 acres. This includes 1,330,436 total square feet of pavement which is maintained by staff. The Airport has 254 hangar units (145 are City-owned), and 140 tie downs. In 2021, the City undertook an update to the City’s Zoning regulations to address the need to discourage incompatible uses near the airport. The revised Auburn City Code Chapter 18.39, LF Airport Landing Field District, Overlay, and FAR Part 77 Surfaces, provides zone regulations specific to development near the airport that include restrictions, performance standards and requirements of development within the overlay areas Airport planning is specifically addressed in a separate document, Auburn Municipal Airport – Airport Master Plan. Auburn Municipal Airport – Airport Master Plan MULTIMODAL NETWORK PAGE 44 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 99 of 435 PAGE 45 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN IN THIS CHAPTER Where to Find Additional Safety Information CHAPTER 3 Safety Page 100 of 435 The City’s safety goal statement, policies and related actions are included in Chapter 5. For additional safety information, refer to the City’s Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, under separate cover, which is incorporated by reference into the Plan. PAGE 46 SAFETY CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 101 of 435 PAGE 47 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN IN THIS CHAPTER Goals, Policies and Actions CHAPTER 4 Policies Page 102 of 435 PAGE 48 POLICIES CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Transportation goals, policies, and actions establish the framework for realizing the City’s vision of its transportation system. Policies provide guidance for the City, other governmental entities, and private developers, enabling the City to achieve its goals in accordance with the Plan. The policy framework presented in this chapter is a guideline, which the City will use to evaluate individual projects, programs, actions, and other actions to address its infrastructure needs. The goals, policies, and actions make reference to the City of Auburn Engineering Design Standards (EDS) that provide specific guidelines and standards for design of the City’s transportation system. Page 103 of 435 4.1. GOALS GOAL 1 GOAL 2 Planning: Plan, expand, and improve the transportation system. Equity: Plan and implement the City’s transportation system to support system wide equity. Safety: Significantly reduce or eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries through a safe systems approach. Environmental: Comply with environmental laws and regulations. GOAL 3 GOAL 4 GOAL 5 GOAL 6 GOAL 7 GOAL 8 GOAL 9 GOAL 10 GOAL 11 Multimodal Accessible Network: Ensure Auburn’s transportation system is designed to be comprehensive, integrated, accessible for all. Multimodal Level of Service: Establish multimodal level of service (MMLOS) for all City streets, active transportation facilities, and access to transit. Multimodal Concurrency: Ensure transportation systems and facilities are adequate to serve development. Demand & System Management: Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and Transportation System Management (TSM) strategies. Right-of-Way: Retain and preserve existing Right-of-Way (ROW) and identify and acquire new ROW as needed. Asset Management: Design, construct, preserve, and maintain the City’s transportation system in the most cost- effective manner. Parking: Ensure a balance between on-street and off- street parking. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 49 Page 104 of 435 Planning Plan, expand, and improve the transportation system in cooperation and coordination with adjacent and regional jurisdictions to ensure concurrency compliance with the Growth Management Act, and to improve the safety and efficiency of the multimodal system to meet the community needs, facilitate the land use plan, and reduce vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions. SUPPORTING ACTIONS • Evaluate and amend the Comprehensive Transportation Plan regularly to ensure it is technically accurate, consistent with state, regional, and other local plans, and in keeping with the City's vision of the future transportation system. • Prepare a 5-year Comprehensive Transportation Plan intermediate progress report in 2029. • Prepare a periodic update to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan to be adopted by Council in 2034 or date required by the State, whichever is earlier. • Coordinate transportation planning and improvements with other transportation authorities and governmental entities (cities, counties, tribes, state, federal) to address transportation issues and to ensure that Auburn and its adjacent jurisdictions do not unreasonably preclude each other from implementing their planned improvements. • Prepare, amend, and update a 6-year Transportation Improvement Program that is reviewed and adopted by the City Council in accordance with RCW 35.77.010. The TIP will include the following elements: • Proposed road and bridge construction work and other transportation facilities and programs deemed appropriate. • Any new or enhanced bicycle or pedestrian facilities identified pursuant other applicable changes that promote nonmotorized transit. • Identify projects of regional significance for inclusion in the regional TIP. • Revise the TIP before July 1st of each year to encompass the ensuing six calendar years to update the included projects, programs, and associated funding to reflect transportation system priorities and available funding. • Coordinate transportation improvements with City utilities to provide efficiency and cost-effective solutions for both planned transportation improvements and planned utility improvements. • Identify and fund capital projects and programs that address existing and emerging system needs to meet MMLOS standards and to support safety goals. Planning Policies The City’s long range planning tool for its transportation systems shall be the Comprehensive Transportation Plan that will comply with State Law (RCW 36.70A.070). TR1-1. The City’s short range (6-year) planning tool for transportation system capital projects and programs, shall be the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that will comply with State Law (RCW 35.770.010). TR1-2. The TIP shall be financially constrained to align planned project and programs expenditures with anticipated available funding. TR1-3. The City shall identify transportation facilities or services that are below established multimodal level of service standards and develop projects and programs and engage in coordination activities that support improving those facilities or services to meet level of service standards. TR1-4. City transportation planning will focus system improvements to connect centers and support existing and planned development as allocated by the Regional Growth Strategy. GOAL 1 POLICIES PAGE 50 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 105 of 435 Equity Plan and implement the City’s transportation system to support system wide equity. SUPPORTING ACTIONS • Develop and implement a process during project/program planning to review demographic information and identify potential impacts to historically under- represented and under-served communities and identify potential mitigation measures. • Develop and implement equity tools to assist in transportation system planning, construction, and operations. • For the communities adjacent to the project locations, or served by the projects and programs, research how to best engage with them, and develop outreach and information tools. Equity Policies TR2-1. Transportation system improvements shall be planned such that they minimize and mitigate potential impacts, as well as past impacts, to historically under-represented and under-served communities. TR2-2. The transportation system will be planned, built, and operated to provide equitable levels of access to transportation systems based on the needs of the populations being served, particularly populations that are traditionally underserved. TR2-3. Encourage the involvement of residents, business and property owners in the planning process, including the participation of vulnerable populations and overburdened communities, and ensure coordination with other agencies to reconcile conflicts. TR2-4. In the development of projects, the city shall identify opportunities to remove barriers created by past transportation programs or improvements. GOAL 2 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 51 Page 106 of 435 Safety Significantly reduce or eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries through a safe systems approach. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (GENERAL) • Implement, maintain, and regularly update the Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) and Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP). • The LRSP/CSAP will include documentation of the progress towards actions and performance metrics identified in the plans. • Establish a transportation program in the Transportation Improvement Plan and funding that provides for safety data collection, study, planning, and implementation. • Identify, evaluate, and pursue grant funding and other outside funding sources for safety programs and improvements. Safety Policies (General) TR3-1-1. The City shall apply the Safe System Approach for pursuing its transportation safety goal through the different elements associated with the safety of the City’s transportation system which the City has the ability to influence including: roadways, roadway users, speeds, vehicles, and post crash care. TR3-1-2. The City shall study, plan, and implement safety improvements prioritized by the occurrence of fatal and serious injury crashes and/or the presence of systemic characteristics indicative of serious or fatal crash risk. TR3-1-3. The City will seek internal and external funding to both implement safety strategies and on-going maintenance of improvements. GOAL 3 What is the Safe Systems Approach? Founded on the belief that death and serious injuries on city streets are preventable, the Safe System Approach considers how the transportation system as a whole can be improved to avoid serious and fatal crashes. It is organized into five categories: Safe Roads, Safe Speeds, Safe Vehicles, Safe Road Users, and Post Crash Care. To learn more, please visit highways.dot.gov/safety/zero-deaths Source: Federal High w ay A d m in is t r a t i o n (ht t ps://highways.dot.gov/safety/zero-deaths)POLICIES PAGE 52 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 107 of 435 SUPPORTING ACTIONS (ROAD USERS) • Establish and implement approaches towards education, outreach, and other measures as appropriate to encourage safe behaviors. • Regularly communicate rules of the road and other safer travel strategies to the general public via various mediums such as signage, social media, public service announcements, flyers, articles, and mailers. Safety Policies (Roadways) TR3-2-1. The City will integrate the Safe System Approach into roadway design standards and related policies, and project development processes and be consistent with industry best practice. TR3-2-2. Roadway design shall consider safety and multi-modal level of service standards to meet both transportation level of service goals and safety goals to the greatest extent feasible. However, safety of active transportation users shall be prioritized over vehicle level of service standards. TR3-2-3. In making changes to existing roadways, including horizontal or vertical re-alignment, re-channelization, additional lanes, new or modified intersections, and new or modified driveways, design speeds for safety related design elements shall not be less than the 85th percentile speeds of existing vehicle traffic except where roadway changes include traffic calming measures that will reduce vehicle speeds. TR3-2-4. The City shall fund and implement the neighborhood traffic safety program that will take a pro-active, area wide approach towards traffic calming through studying streets in residential areas to identify safety concerns. The program will identify and implement physical measures per the EDS and as funding allows address identified concerns. TR3-2-5. Safety countermeasures will be incorporated into roadways as recommended by the Federal Highway Administration and as appropriate to City roadways as funding allows to potentially reduce roadway fatalities and serious injuries. Safety Policies (Road Users) TR3-3-1. Seek and utilize opportunities to provide the community with information to educate and encourage safe driving, biking, and walking practices. TR3-3-2. Implement and operate, as appropriate and funding allows, systems to provide information to roadway users that could help improve safety. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (ROADWAYS) • Periodically review and update City EDS to integrate current and emerging Safe System Approaches and safety countermeasures. • In identifying projects for inclusion in the Plan and TIP, develop and implement approaches to consider all travel modes and to specifically address risk factors identified in the LRSP and CSAP in the project scope. • At locations with a high number of risk factors identified in the LRSP and/or CSAP, identify potential safety countermeasures to reduce the potential for fatality and serious injury crashes. Seek funding to implement countermeasures and implement as funding is available. • Establish standards for physical improvements implemented with the neighborhood traffic calming program, including, but not limited to, speed cushions, traffic circles, raised crosswalks, and tabletop intersections. (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 53 Page 108 of 435 SUPPORTING ACTIONS (SPEEDS) • Establish criteria in the EDS for when physical traffic calming measures may be appropriate to encourage safer speeds. • Implement automated school speed zone enforcement. Modify and/or expand program as needed to address compliance issues and other concerns. Provide annual reporting as required by law. • Identify, evaluate, and implement automated speed enforcement in non- school zone areas as allowed by law and as determined to be appropriate to address speed compliance concerns. • As issues and concerns arise, as part of specific speed studies, and/or as part of public improvement project designs, the City will review roadways to identify existing and desired posted speeds based on classification, land use context, types of road users, and degree of separation or conflict management between vehicles and active transportation users. The review will identify changes needed to posted speeds, if any, and any new or modified roadway features needed to align desired speeds and posted speeds. Safety Policies (Speeds) TR3-4-1. Posted and design speeds of new roadways shall consider context, including adjacent land use, presence and proximity of active transportation, traffic volumes, and geometric design constraints. TR3-4-2. The 85th percentile speed of vehicular traffic shall be used to evaluate speed compliance and to determine appropriate traffic calming measures as established by thresholds and considerations in the EDS. Traffic calming measures will be prioritized and implemented as funding is available. TR3-4-3. The City will implement automated speed enforcement that encourages speed compliance as allowed by state law. Safety Policies (Road Users) TR3-3-3. City employees are responsible for operating City vehicles responsibly and safely, according to all state and local laws and City administrative policies. TR3-3-4. Support equitable, unbiased enforcement to enhance overall public safety. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (ROAD USERS) • Coordinate with appropriate partners such as local, county, and state law enforcement, local and regional hospitals, school districts, and large employers to create and distribute safety messages and materials. • Regularly coordinate with law enforcement regarding the road user behaviors and/ or street locations being targeted for enforcement to encourage equitable, unbiased enforcement that uses practices to enhance overall public safety, including use of automated enforcement technologies. • Explore, identify, evaluate, and as appropriate and funding allows, implement systems such as dynamic message signs that provide roadway conditions and other information to drivers. POLICIES PAGE 54 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 109 of 435 SUPPORTING ACTIONS (POST CRASH CARE) • Coordinate with entities providing emergency response services to crashes with the purpose of maintaining appropriately managed routes, access and facilitate wayfinding to hospitals and trauma care facilities. • Continue to maintain emergency vehicle pre- emption technology at traffic signals throughout the City prioritizing emergency vehicle routes and access to hospitals and trauma care centers, and emergency response to crashes. • When notified by Police, City Public Works staff perform post crash investigations where a serious injury or fatality crash occurs at a traffic signal or stop controlled intersection, in a marked and/or enhanced cross walk, involves a pedestrian during non-daylight hours where street lighting is present, or other situations that warrant verification that transportation systems are functioning as intended. Safety Policies (Post Crash Care) TR3-6-1. Maintain the transportation system to support entities providing emergency response services to crashes. TR3-6-2. Prioritize emergency vehicle routes and access to hospitals and trauma care centers. TR3-6-3. Actions will be taken, as applicable, after crashes involving serious injury or fatality, to reduce or eliminate the possibility of repeat crashes at the location due to malfunctioning or failing traffic control devices. Safety Policies (Vehicles) TR3-5-1. The City shall advocate for vehicle and device safety enhancements that make traveling in Auburn safer. TR3-5-2. Seek opportunities to provide the community with information to educate and encourage vehicle safety practices. TR3-5-3. City shall continue to implement vehicle safety practices on its fleet. TR3-5-4. New or modified vehicle types and emerging vehicle technology shall be evaluated and measures may be taken to promote, prohibit, or restrict their use in the City transportation network as appropriate to support adopted goals and policies. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (VEHICLES) • Coordinate with other local, regional and state agencies to advocate for vehicle safety enhancements for commercial motor vehicles as well as technologies used in private automobile industry, and vehicle inspections. • Review, update, and maintain local ordinances regarding the appropriate use of new or modified vehicle types and emerging vehicle technology. • Ensure City vehicles are regularly inspected and maintained, and include regulatory required appropriate safety enhancing technologies, and are equipped with appropriate emergency equipment and tools. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 55 Page 110 of 435 SUPPORTING ACTIONS • Incorporate environmental factors into transportation decision-making, including attention to human health and safety. • Review and implement guidance from the Department of Commerce pertaining to measures that cities may implement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. These guidelines will prioritize measures that benefit overburdened communities that have experienced disproportionate harm due to air pollution and be consistent with environmental justice assessment pursuant to RCW 70A.02.060. Environmental Policies TR4-1. The impacts of transportation projects shall be evaluated, and the appropriate mitigation measures identified in accordance with the applicable environmental laws and regulations. TR4-2. The multimodal transportation systems shall be designed efficiently and support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and per capita miles traveled, protect and enhance environmental, economic, and human health and safety, and advance environmental justice, and are based on regional priorities and coordinated with other comprehensive plans. TR4-3. In planning transportation facilities and programs, the City will seek to reduce stormwater pollution from transportation facilities and improve fish passage. Environmental Comply with environmental laws and regulations. GOAL 4 POLICIES PAGE 56 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 111 of 435 SUPPORTING ACTIONS (GENERAL) • Plan for and develop a balanced transportation system, which provides safer access and connectivity to transportation facilities for users of all ages and abilities, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, transit users and operators, and truck operators. • Plan for, design, and construct all transportation projects, whether City led or development driven, to provide appropriate accommodation for bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, except in situations where the establishment of such facilities would be contrary to public health and safety or the cost would be excessively disproportionate to the need • Ensure the transportation system meets the requirements outlined in the ADA and the ADA Transition Plan for Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way and its policies. • Ensure the EDS requirements support the policies and guidance for complete streets, bicycle LTS, and pedestrian facilities. Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (General) TR5-1-1. The network of sidewalks, bicycle facilities and roadways shall be interconnected to encourage active transportation between neighborhoods, activity centers, community resources, and transit. TR5-1-2. Ensure that the city’s standards and development requirements align with the complete streets policies. TR5-1-3. Context and flexibility in balancing user needs for all travel modes shall be considered in the planning and design of all projects and, if necessary, a deviation from the EDS may be considered to ensure the Complete Streets Goal and supporting policies are achieved. TR5-1-4. The development of the multimodal transportation system shall balance safety and convenience to accommodate all users of the transportation system to safely, reliably, and efficiently provide access and mobility to people and goods. Multimodal Accessible Network Ensure Auburn’s transportation system is designed to be comprehensive, integrated, accessible for users of all abilities, and facilitates different types of traffic flows, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, transit riders and operators, truck operators and aviation users. GOAL 5 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 57 Page 112 of 435 SUPPORTING ACTIONS (STREETS) • The EDS will include cross section standards for the various city roadway classifications and established more detailed sub-classifications as appropriate. • To achieve access control to meet city policy, the City: • Adopts and supports the State’s controlled access policy on all state highway facilities; • May acquire access rights along some arterials and collectors; • Adopts design standards that identify access standards for each type of functional street classification; • Encourages consolidation of access in developing commercial and high-density residential areas through shared use of driveways and local access streets; and • Will establish standards for access management, develop a planning process to work with the community, and implement access management solutions on arterial corridors. Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (Streets) TR5-2-1. City streets shall be classified as arterial, collector, local, or alley to support the goals and policies of the Plan. The EDS may establish more detailed classifications as needed to serve the needs of the transportation system. TR5-2-2. The City Functional Roadway Classifications Map shall serve as the adopted standard for identifying classified streets in the City of Auburn. TR5-2-3. The City shall pursue federal classification of all eligible streets and prioritize federal classification as funding needs and regulatory requirements are identified. TR5-2-4. Street standards in the EDS shall reflect the street classification system and function. TR5-2-5. The design and management of the street network shall seek to improve the appearance of existing street corridors. The EDS shall include provisions for streetscaping to enhance the appearance of City street corridors, where appropriate. TR5-2-6. The classification standards adopted in the EDS are considered the City’s minimum standards for new streets. The standards do not limit or prevent developers or the City from providing facilities that exceed the City’s standards. TR5-2-7. The standards for residential streets may be modified in cross section to provide better relationships between the different components of the street including, but not limited to, on- street parking, the landscape strip, and the sidewalk. Among other objectives, this may be done to balance the need to provide adequate parking and buffer pedestrians from traffic. TR5-2-8. The city shall designate new arterials and collectors to serve developing areas concurrent with approval of such development. These new roadways shall be spaced in compliance with transportation network planning principles and support the importance of overall system circulation. (Continued on next page) POLICIES PAGE 58 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 113 of 435 Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (Streets) TR5-2-9. The City will seek consolidation of access points to state highways, arterials, and collectors as appropriate to benefit the highway and city street system, reduce interference with traffic flows on arterials, and discourage through traffic on local streets. TR5-2-10. ROW access shall be provided in a manner that minimizes operational impacts to the City street system, reduces or eliminates safety impacts to the ROW, and provides for access needs of the property. Shared driveways in access tracts or easements may be allowed as specified in the EDS to reduce access points to the ROW. TR5-2-11. Intersections controlled with roundabouts are preferred over signalized intersections. Where necessary to meet level of service standards, roundabout control shall be implemented over signalization or all-way stop- control, unless determined to be infeasible. TR5-2-12. Conversion of an intersection to all-way stop-control as mitigation for existing intersection level of service deficiencies shall only be allowed as a temporary measure where permanent measures such as a traffic signal or roundabout are planned. TR5-2-13. New all-way stop-control intersections shall be discouraged. In evaluating improvements to existing intersections, roundabout or signalization are preferred over all-way stop-control. TR5-2-14. The local street network shall be developed to maximize the efficiency of the transportation network in residential areas and minimize through traffic in neighborhoods. TR5-2-15. The street network should be developed and maintained to increase resiliency and support security and emergency management. TR5-2-16. Private streets are discouraged, but may be permitted on a discretionary basis, as regulated by City code and the EDS. Private streets are not intended to connect between two public streets and shall be built to public street standards. The properties benefiting from the private street are responsible for its maintenance. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (STREETS) • To maximize the efficiency of the transportation network in residential areas and minimize through traffic in neighborhoods, the EDS will incorporate requirements such that: • The internal local residential street network for a neighborhood discourages regional through traffic and non- residential traffic from penetrating the neighborhood or adjacent neighborhoods. • Streets shall be planned, designed, and constructed to connect to future development as appropriate to support the goals and policies of the Plan. • Residential developments should be planned in a manner that minimizes the number of local street access points to arterials and collectors. • To promote efficient connectivity between areas of the community, existing stub end streets shall be linked to other streets in new development whenever the opportunity arises and the resulting traffic volumes are not likely to exceed acceptable volumes per the street classification as identified in the EDS. • Design criteria for roundabouts, including feasibility criteria, will be incorporated into the EDS. • The City will coordinate with the WSDOT, counties, and adjacent cities to facilitate the movement of traffic through the City, to construct improvements needed to the state and county arterial and freeway systems, and to develop through routes that minimize the impact of through traffic on Auburn's residential neighborhoods. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 59 Page 114 of 435 SUPPORTING ACTIONS (ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION) • The City shall schedule, plan, and co-sponsor events that support recreational walking and bicycling. These events should emphasize their recreational and health values and introduce people to the transportation capabilities of bicycling and walking. • Develop programs and publications, and work with local employers to encourage citywide bicycle commuting. • Work with the Community Development Department to establish guidelines and building code requirements to require convenient and secure bicycle storage facilities in all large public and private developments. • The City will develop, and periodically update, a Bicycle Route Map that defines the bicycle network in Auburn and classifies bicycle routes throughout the City as either Regional, Priority, or Auxiliary. The network of classified bicycle routes will focus on connectivity from non-classified routes in neighborhoods and commercial areas to auxiliary, priority, and regional routes. • Develop and maintain an official Auburn Bicycling Guide Map. • Evaluate transportation projects and identify opportunities to include sidewalk and bicycle facilities based on the identified priority locations. • Seek ways to provide pedestrian amenities such as streetlights, trees (within the downtown and on local residential streets), signage, and public art along appropriate pedestrian travel routes. • Encourage the formation of Local Improvement Districts to develop pedestrian pathways and other active transportation amenities throughout the City. Partner with the local school districts to improve Safe Walking Routes to School. • Actively seek to acquire land along corridors for planned bike routes as identified in the Bicycle Route Map and for pedestrian facilities needing more property to meet LOS standards. Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (Active Transportation) TR5-3-1. The City’s active transportation facilities include bicycle and pedestrian networks and shall be planned and built in accordance with the active transportation level of service standards. TR5-3-2. City investment in active transportation facilities will prioritize facilities that: 1) Encourage mode shifts from vehicle to active transportation and transit; 2) Provide access to key destinations, such as schools, parks, community services, transit stops, commercial areas, and the Downtown Urban Center; 3) Encourage and support bicycle and pedestrian safety; and 4) Serve disadvantaged and historically underserved communities. TR5-3-3. City bicycle routes shall be classified as Regional, Priority, or Auxiliary to support the goals and policies of the Plan. TR5-3-4. The City shall seek external funding and prioritize investments to develop the bicycle network identified in the bicycle priority map, and to build the associated projects listed in Comprehensive Transportation Plan. TR5-3-5. Active transportation facilities shall be designed to reduce modal conflicts, with greater separation from vehicle traffic along roadways with higher classification, expecting higher vehicle volume and speed. TR5-3-6. Bicycle and pedestrian crossings of vehicular travel ways shall be placed to align with desired crossing lines and in accordance with the EDS. TR5-3-7. Pedestrian facilities shall be designed consistent with ADA guidelines and the existing infrastructure shall be updated per the city’s ADA Transition Plan for facilities in the Public Right-of-way, to accommodate users of all ages and abilities. TR5-3-8. Wayfinding elements may be constructed to guide travelers along major active transportation routes. (Continued on next page) POLICIES PAGE 60 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 115 of 435 Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (Active Transportation) TR5-3-9. Active transportation routes shall be constructed to accommodate emergency vehicle access and be amenable to law enforcement. TR5-3-10. When applicable, active transportation paths shall be provided at the end of dead end streets to shorten walking distances to an adjacent arterial or public facility including, but not limited to, schools and parks. Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (Transit) TR5-4-1. Active transportation improvements shall be prioritized based on transit level of service with higher priority placed on improvements in areas with higher transit level of service. TR5-4-2. Improvements that optimize intersections and corridors to facilitate speed and reliability of transit service will be encouraged and supported as appropriate and will be balanced with the needs of the other travel modes. TR5-4-3. The City shall cultivate partnerships with transit agencies and WSDOT to help with, or support the development of a robust transit network, to serve trip generators such as colleges, commercial areas, and community resources, to expand transit service within the underserved areas of Auburn, and to achieve a transit network that is convenient and provides a viable alternative to driving. TR5-4-4. The City shall advocate for adequate off-street parking supply to accommodate demand associated with transit facilities in Auburn, where no alternative options are provided by transit agencies to access transit service that meet the needs of the transit riders. TR5-4-5. The City shall encourage development projects to provide access improvements to transit stops located within priority transit walksheds. TR5-4-6. The City shall establish parking restrictions in areas where transit parking impacts nearby residential areas to mitigate the impact of overflow transit parking. TR5-4-7. The City shall seek partnership opportunities with transit agencies for grant applications and cost sharing to improve access to transit for active transportation facilities, supporting safety, equity, and sustainability. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (TRANSIT) • Evaluate intersections and identify opportunities to improve speed and reliability of transit service. • Partner with transit agencies to support transit service in the City. • Work proactively with Sound Transit, KC Metro, and Pierce Transit to ensure the adequate supply of transit parking capacity in Auburn. • Expand the areas included in the Restricted Parking Zones and other parking restrictions as needed to mitigate impacts from transit parking. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 61 Page 116 of 435 Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (Freight) TR5-5-1. City transportation planning efforts will seek to facilitate the movement of freight and goods through Auburn with minimal adverse traffic and environmental impacts. TR5-5-2. The movement of freight and goods that serve largely national, state, or regional needs should take place in such a way so that the impacts on the local transportation system are minimized. These movements should take place primarily on state highways, interstates, or on rail corridors with grade separated roadway crossings to minimize the local impacts. TR5-5-3. All through truck trips and the majority of local trips shall take place on designated truck routes. This policy shall not apply to developments and uses operating under existing ROW use permits, traffic mitigation agreements, or equivalent agreements directly related to the regulation of permitted haul routes. TR5-5-4. Prioritize improvements that facilitate truck movements along and connecting to future and existing truck routes to accommodate truck traffic and minimize impacts to infrastructure. TR5-5-5. Development shall be required to mitigate the impacts of development project generated truck traffic on the City’s transportation system, based on the City’s vehicle LOS standard. TR5-5-6. Temporary haul routes for overweight or oversized vehicles shall be permitted under circumstances acceptable to the City and with appropriate mitigation. A temporary haul permit must be obtained prior to the hauling of oversized or overweight freight. TR5-5-7. Truck traffic in residential neighborhoods shall be prohibited, except for local deliveries within said neighborhood, unless no other possible route is available, in which case mitigation may be required. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (FREIGHT) • Evaluate intersections and identify opportunities to reduce delays along freight corridors. • Seek public and private partners to leverage funds for freight improvement projects and associated mitigation. • Work with local and regional groups to ensure regional freight needs are met and local impacts are mitigated. • The City will coordinate and communicate with railroad purveyors in Auburn (United Pacific Railroad and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway) regarding safety and operational concerns at railroad crossings, along railroad corridors, and near rail yards. (Continued on next page) POLICIES PAGE 62 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 117 of 435 Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (Freight) TR5-5-8. As roadway reconstruction projects are identified, opportunities to reconstruct roadways adapted to heavy truck traffic shall be evaluated along T-1 and T-2 freight corridors, to prevent accelerated damage to these facilities. TR5-5-9. Grade separation of roadway and active transportation facilities from railroad tracks and T-1 Truck Routes (such as SR 167 and SR 18) is preferred over at-grade crossings. The City shall plan its multimodal networks to utilize existing grade separated crossings and identify where future grade separation improvements are desired. TR5-5-10. The City shall maintain its transportation systems to be compliant with Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission requirements regarding railroad crossings and shall work diligently to address any identified deficiencies. Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (Air Transportation) TR5-6-1. Continue to develop the Auburn Municipal Airport in accordance with the Airport Master Plan as adopted or amended. TR5-6-2. The airport shall be managed as a general aviation facility. General aviation includes all civilian flying except scheduled passenger airline service. TR5-6-3. When siting new or revised facilities or operations at the airport, the impacts on neighborhoods such as increased noise generated from the use of those facilities shall be considered. TR5-6-4. Use of the airport by non-conventional aircraft, such as ultra lights, is discouraged. TR5-6-5. Minimize or eliminate the potentially adverse effects of light, glare, and obstructions on the operation of the Auburn Airport. TR5-6-6. Insure that uses surrounding the Airport are compatible with the operations of the Airport as development occurs. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (AIR TRANSPORTATION) • Review existing and planned uses near Auburn Municipal Airport through development actions and review ACC18.38 regulations periodically to continue to discourage incompatible uses neat the airport. • Coordinate planning efforts to optimize the effectiveness of the aviation system while minimizing health, air quality, and noise impacts to surrounding communities, including historically marginalized communities. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 63 Page 118 of 435 SUPPORTING ACTIONS • Regularly conduct traffic counts, observations, and modeling to evaluate current and future Vehicle LOS and identify projects to address deficiencies. MMLOS Standards Policies (Vehicles) TR6-1-1. The City adopts the following vehicle LOS standards for the AM and PM peak periods per the Highway Capacity Manual: • Signalized: The LOS standard for signalized intersections is “D”, with the following exceptions: for signalized intersections of two principal arterial roads the LOS standard is “E.” • Stop Controlled: The LOS standard stop controlled intersections is “D.” • Roundabout: The LOS standard for roundabout controlled intersections is “D” and a V/C ratio for each lane group of less than 0.90. • Queuing: The LOS standard for intersection queuing is the 95th percentile queue shall not extend across an adjacent driveway, alley, or street intersection, except if the driveway, alley, or street intersection is within the functional intersection boundary of the queue in which case the queue may extend to the limit of the functional intersection boundary. Additionally, queuing for a designated turn lane shall not exceed turn lane storage area and cause a blockage of through lane(s). Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) Standards Establish multimodal level of service standards for all City streets, active transportation facilities, and access to transit service to serve as a gauge to judge performance of the system and success in helping achieve the comprehensive plan goals consistent with environmental justice. The MMLOS policies under Goal 6 for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including access to transit, are intended to provide guidance to evaluate the multimodal facilities, identify deficiencies, and prioritize projects to eventually reach a complete multimodal network that can support and promote mode shift, reducing the vehicle capacity demand on the roadways. GOAL 6 MMLOS Standards Policies (Active Transportation) TR6-2-1. The City adopts the following bicycle LOS standards: • Bicycle LOS shall be based on Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) ranging from "1" to "4" as follows: "1" – minimal traffic stress and high comfort facilities that accommodate bicyclists of all ages and skill levels; "2" – some traffic stress and moderate comfort facilities that accommodate average bicyclists; "3" – moderate to high traffic stress and moderate to low comfort facilities that accommodate mostly experienced bicyclists; "4" – high traffic stress and low comfort facilities that accommodate mostly bicycle enthusiasts with advanced experience and skill levels. • The Bicycle LTS standard for Auxiliary bicycle routes is "3." • The Bicycle LTS standard for Priority bicycle routes is "2." SUPPORTING ACTIONS (ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION) • The EDS will be updated to include standards for various types of bicycle facilities intended to meet level of service standards as defined in the Plan. • Standards will be developed and incorporated within the EDS to establish typical cross sections by roadway classification to meet the pedestrian LTS standards. (Continued on next page) POLICIES PAGE 64 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 119 of 435 MMLOS Standards Policies (Active Transportation) • The Bicycle LTS standard for Regional bicycle routes is "1." • Minimum Bicycle LTS standards for City streets without Regional, Priority, or Auxiliary bicycle routes shall be per the standard roadway cross sections by street classification in the EDS. • Streets may be designed with Bicycle LTS higher than the minimum standard to accommodate local needs such as parks, schools, and other uses. TR6-2-2. The City adopts the following pedestrian LOS standards: • Pedestrian LOS shall be based on Pedestrian Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) ranging from "1" to "4" as follows: "1" – minimal traffic stress and high comfort facilities; "2" – some traffic stress and moderate comfort facilities; "3" – moderate to high traffic stress and moderate to low comfort facilities; "4" – high traffic stress and low comfort facilities. • The pedestrian LTS standard for City streets is "1" except streets classified as “rustic” or alleys have a Pedestrian LTS standard of "2." • Streets may be designed with pedestrian LTS higher than the minimum standard to accommodate local needs such as parks, schools, and other uses. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION) • The Street cross sections included in the EDS will be updated to include active transportation facilities that provide at least minimum level of service requirements. MMLOS Standards Policies (Transit) TR6-3-1. Transit LOS is defined as the accessibility, frequency, comfort, reliability, and connectivity of available transit services using active transportation modes. A Transit LOS score ranging from "1" to "4" can be estimated for any location in the City using a combination of the walking shed distance from the location to transit services and the type of available transit service as defined in the Plan. TR6-3-2. Active transportation improvements shall be prioritized based on transit level of service with higher priority placed on improvements in areas with higher transit level of service. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (TRANSIT) • Coordinate regularly with transit operators to understand service plans. • Maintain a map that reports transit service levels citywide based on transit service plans and walksheds. • Prioritize eliminating gaps in active transportation routes and improving sub standard active transportation facilities in areas of transit levels of service "1" and "2". • Develop tools to assess current and future planned transit level of service throughout the City and identify active transportation gaps and substandard active transportation facilities. • Advocate for, and support, transit speed and reliability improvements. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 65 Page 120 of 435 MMLOS Standards Policies (Freight) TR6-4-1. The City adopts the following Freight LOS standards: • LOS for freight movement follows the vehicle LOS standards. • Principal Arterial, Minor Arterial, Non-Residential, and other streets identified as T-1, T-2, or T-3 routes are considered truck routes except as designated otherwise by the City Code or as posted by the City Engineer. • Intersections of truck routes shall be designed to accommodate turning trucks such that the trucks do not interfere or obstruct with other travel modes or cause damage to adjacent property and facilities. • Roadway pavement on truck routes shall be designed with a minimum 20-year service life with truck loading. • Driveways serving trucks and lane widths on the adjacent truck routes shall be designed such that trucks accessing the driveways do not enter into opposing roadway or driveway lanes. Driveways with excessive width may be required to provide mitigation treatments for bicyclists and pedestrians crossing the driveway. • Truck dependent land-uses shall provide on-site parking area for truck loading and unloading and shall accommodate truck access and on-site turn-around. • Development anticipating regular truck deliveries or services shall provide a delivery plan that identifies the trucks size, frequency, and delivery or service duration and demonstrates how, when, and where the trucks will make deliveries or services without causing impacts to vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians in the right-of-way. SUPPORTING ACTIONS (FREIGHT) • Maintain a map of Auburn streets that overlap with the WSDOT Freight and Goods Movement Transportation System and ensure that transportation projects that overlap with T-1, T-2, and T-3 routes include adequate space for large vehicle turns. • Update the EDS to ensure they adequately consider the needs of freight vehicles in terms of intersection turning movements, mid-block turning movements into driveways, loading docks, and alleys, and entrance to, navigation of, and exit from traffic circles and roundabouts. • Identify truck routes that do not meet current freight level LOS standards and prioritize investments to address deficiencies based on level of impact and available funding. POLICIES PAGE 66 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 121 of 435 SUPPORTING ACTIONS • Include standards in the EDS that require development projects to conduct a traffic impact analysis (TIA) when certain thresholds are met. Thresholds will be intended to require a TIA when it is likely that a development could cause transportation facilities to operate below level of service standards or when then development is likely to have negative impact on transportation facilities already operating below level of service standards. The TIA scope will be scalable based on the development project and its potential impacts on the transportation system. The TIA will identify impacts and associated mitigation actions proposed to address the impacts. • The City will review transportation impact analyses for developments outside the City through SEPA to identify if there may be potential impacts to City systems. • The City will provide transportation impacts analyses for developments within the City that may impact other agencies so that those agencies may identify if there are potential impacts to their facilities. • The City will update the per-person trip traffic impact rate for the following calendar year based on the traffic impact fee funding need identified in the TIP and revise the fee schedule based on this per-person trip rate for adoption as part of the City’s overall fee schedule. Multimodal Concurrency Ensure that those transportation system facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy without decreasing current service levels below established minimum standards. Concurrency Policies TR7-1. The City will not approve development activity if the development causes the vehicle level of service on a transportation facility to decline below level of service standards or if the development negatively impacts a transportation facility currently operating below vehicle level of service standards (any increase in intersection delay where intersection delay standard is already exceeded or any increase to queue length of an existing queue length that does not meet standards). Strategies that may allow a development to proceed, include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following: • Concurrent with the development, Developer constructs street improvements to address the vehicular level of service impacts of the development. • Concurrent with the development, Developer provides active transportation facility improvements, increased or enhanced public transportation service, ride-sharing programs, demand management, and other transportation systems management strategies that demonstrate a mode shift from vehicle to active transportation and/ or transit modes such that the development vehicular level of service impacts are mitigated. • If the City’s Transportation Improvement Program includes a project that is not fully funded (for instance, the funding includes unsecured grants) that will mitigate the impacts of the development and is scheduled to be complete concurrent to the development, the City may allow the developer to provide funds to fully fund the project so that it may proceed concurrent to the development. • If the City’s Transportation Improvement Program or Comprehensive Transportation Plan includes a project that would mitigate the impacts of the development, the City may allow the developer to fund (all or in-part) and build the project concurrent to the development. • Development project scope is reduced. GOAL 7 (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 67 Page 122 of 435 • Development project is phased or delayed. • Establish a lower vehicle level of service standard via the City Council adoption of an amended Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The denial of a development in order to maintain concurrency may be grounds for the City declaring an emergency for the purpose of amending the Comprehensive Transportation Plan outside of the annual amendment cycle. For the purposes of this policy “concurrent with the development” means that improvements or strategies are in place at the time of development, or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years. TR7-2. The City may afford a developer that funds and/ or constructs improvements that provide mitigation beyond the impacts of the development activity a credit against the traffic impact fees due for the project. TR7-3. Development activity generating people trips shall pay a transportation impact fee that is used by the City to make system wide capital improvements and programs that provide vehicular capacity and encourage a mode shift from vehicles to active transportation and/or transit. TR7-4. Development activity shall make improvements along project right-of-way frontages to provide for vehicle, pedestrian, bicyclist, transit, and freight trips to/ from the project. Improvements shall be in accordance with multimodal level of service standards and the EDS. TR7-5. The City may enter into latecomer (payback) agreements where transportation investments are made by one party that legitimately should be reimbursed by others, agreements will be at the discretion of the City Council. Latecomer or payback agreements do not apply to situations in which a property owner is required to construct improvements per an existing city code provision, such as in the case of half-street and other required improvements. TR7-6. The City may make transportation improvements that would be required for an undeveloped or underdeveloped private property to develop or redevelop with a City funded capital project and re-coup the costs of those improvements assessed through a payback requirement on the private property. TR7-7. Conversion of an intersection to all-way stop-control as mitigation for intersection level of service deficiencies shall only be allowed as a temporary measure where permanent measures such as a traffic signal or roundabout will be constructed concurrent to the development activity triggering the mitigation requirement. SUPPORTING ACTIONS • On an annual basis, the City will develop a per person transportation impact fee based on the number of people trips anticipated over the next six-year period of the TIP and the impact fee funding needed to implement projects to accommodate those trips. Projects include those that increase vehicular capacity or provide mode shift from vehicle to active transportation and transit, thereby reducing the need for vehicle capacity. • In planning expenditure of transportation impact fees, the City will seek to support development concurrency by prioritizing projects that address vehicular level of service issues related to recent and anticipated development activity. • The EDS will define frontage improvements (half-street improvements) required to be provided by development activities. • The City will seek grant, loan, and partnership funding for system capacity and mode shift projects that would help reduce traffic impact fee rates required to maintain concurrency. POLICIES PAGE 68 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 123 of 435 Demand and System Management Use Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and Transportation System Management (TSM) strategies to reduce capacity demand on the transportation system. GOAL 8 Demand and System Management Policies TR8-1. TSM strategies shall be utilized to efficiently operate the existing transportation system, thereby maximizing resources, and reducing the need for physical system capacity expansion. TR8-2. TDM strategies, such as the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program or other strategies that reduce single occupant vehicle travel shall be utilized, when possible, to lessen the impact on transportation system capacity. TR8-3. Reduce the need for new capital improvements through investments in operations, pricing programs, demand management strategies, and system management activities that improve the efficiency of the current system. TR8-4. Emphasize transportation investments that provide alternatives to single occupancy vehicle travel, increase travel options, especially to and within centers, and support compact, pedestrian- and transit-oriented densities and development. SUPPORTING ACTIONS • Identify and map prioritized intelligent transportation system (ITS) improvements, based on available funding and existing infrastructure. • Coordinate with transit agencies to enhance CTR programs for CTR employers in Auburn. • Improve the CTR Program for City employees. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 69 Page 124 of 435 Right-of-Way (ROW) Retain and preserve existing right-of-way and identify and acquire new right-of-way as needed to provide for the existing and planned transportation system. GOAL 9 ROW Policies TR9-1. Seek opportunities to obtain right-of-way along roadways and at intersections in accordance with adopted standards and comprehensive planning. TR9-2. The City may acquire right-of-way, development rights, easements, and other property rights in accordance with the uniform act and other local, state, and federal law. TR9-3. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions. TR9-4. Right-of-way that has the potential for future transportation system needs shall be retained and right-of-way that has no potential future transportation system needs shall be considered for vacation. TR9-5. When triggered by City code, require the dedication of right-of-way to accommodate the build-out of half street improvements based on the roadway classification and active transportation facilities identified in this Plan. TR9-6. Permanent use or encroachment of right-of-way for non- City transportation system purposes shall be prohibited, restricted, or regulated to preserve the City’s existing and planned use of the right-of-way for City transportation system purposes. SUPPORTING ACTIONS • Preserve and protect existing right-of-way through the issuance of permits such as Construction Permits, right-of-way Use Permits and franchise agreements. • Monitor and address right- of-way encroachments. • Acquire additional right- of-way as necessary to implement the Comprehensive Plan. • As budgeted funds allow, purchase property when it is available on the market as a voluntary protective purchase rather than under threat of use of eminent domain. POLICIES PAGE 70 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 125 of 435 SUPPORTING ACTIONS • EDS prohibit trenching or cutting into newly constructed pavement surfaces (within five years) or require additional pavement replacement area where trenching or cutting in newly constructed pavement surfaces cannot be avoided. • Notify and coordinate with private and public utilities when planning to complete pavement overlays or reconstruction. • Identify City streets that are nearing a deterioration level that would require complete roadway re-build for inclusion in the pavement preservation program. • Require roadways to be built per the requirements in the adopted EDS. • Evaluate options to meet funding gaps that may include revenue mechanisms available through the Transportation Benefit District for consideration and potential implementation. • Maintain a Computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) to record response to customer service calls. Asset Management Design, construct, preserve, and maintain the City’s transportation system in the most cost-effective manner. GOAL 10 Asset Management Policies TR10-1. The target average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for all streets is 70. TR10-2. The minimum design service life for new and re-built roadways is 20 years. TR10-3. The City shall take and require actions by others that minimize and mitigate impacts to the roadway surfaces by utility work and other construction activities. TR10-4. Pursue and secure other funding sources, such as grants, partnerships, and revenue mechanisms to fund pavement preservation projects. TR10-5. To the extent allowed by available preservation funding, the City shall prioritize the preservation of streets prior to the existing pavement degrading to the point where reconstruction of the roadway becomes the appropriate treatment. TR10-6. Non-residential roadways requiring full pavement replacement shall be prioritized based on vehicle volumes and classifications with higher volumes of vehicles, heavy trucks, and transit routes being higher priorities than those with less. TR10-7. Local Street Preservation program shall focus on preserving and re-building roadways classified as local residential, local industrial or rustic residential. TR10-8. The Arterial Street Preservation program shall focus on preserving and re-building roadway systems classified as arterials or collectors. (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 71 Page 126 of 435 TR10-9. Prioritize the maintenance and replacement of pedestrian facilities to address deficiencies and to meet ADA requirements. TR10-10. Prioritize maintenance of bicycle facilities to keep them visible with signage and markings, and clear of encroachments and debris. TR10-11. Prioritize maintenance, repairs, and replacement of traffic control systems (signals, dynamic message signs, rapid rectangular flashing beacons) at a level consistent with optimizing system reliability, asset economic life, and system performance . TR10-12. Ensure adequate resources to maintain, per USDOT, MUTCD, and other regulatory requirements and best practices, other elements of the street system such as signage, street lighting, and roadway markings. TR10-13. Bridge inspection and maintenance shall follow State, Federal, and other applicable regulatory requirements. TR10-14. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) will be managed and maintained to be secure, reliable, and effective. TR10-15. Prepare for changes in transportation technologies and mobility patterns. SUPPORTING ACTIONS • Assign industry standard design lives for control systems. Seek to repair or replace system assets before they exceed their economic life and minimize the number of high- criticality assets beyond their economic life. • Take measures to ensure system security for traffic control systems. • Incorporate repair and replacement of sidewalks and other street assets into pavement preservation projects as appropriate and as resources allow. POLICIES PAGE 72 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 127 of 435 Parking Ensure a balance between on-street and off-street parking provided to meet the needs of existing land use, development, and other community needs and as allowed by law. GOAL 11 Parking Policies TR11-1. On-street parking should be allowed only when consistent with the classification and intended function of the street. TR11-2. New developments shall provide adequate off-street parking to meet the needs of their development unless otherwise precluded by law. TR11-3. Within high density areas, such as Regional Growth Center, evaluate and address the need for passenger and/or commercial loading zones. SUPPORTING ACTIONS • Take an active approach to managing on- and off-street parking in commercial and high-density residential areas to minimize land dedicated to parking and ensure right-of-way balancing parking with other community needs. • Explore the feasibility of parking management programs, shared parking strategies, and/ or subsidized ORCA cards programming as new low-income housing units are being developed; addressing the transportation needs as development occurs. • Encourage new development to incorporate appropriate design features such as: Preferential parking for carpools and vanpools; Special loading and unloading facilities for carpools and vanpools; Transit passenger facilities, including comfortable bus stops and waiting areas that may be integrated in the building design; and secure and covered bicycle parking, showers, lockers, and related facilities to support bicycle commuters. Where applicable, encourage convenient short-term bicycle parking for customers or other visitors. • Develop guidance for the creation of parking facilities for bicycles, scooters, and other active transportation vehicles that help promote mode shift away from motorized vehicles. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 73 Page 128 of 435 POLICIES PAGE 74 CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 129 of 435 PAGE 75 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN IN THIS CHAPTER Staffing Equipment/Fleet Facilities Asset Management CHAPTER 5 System Management, Maintenance, and Operations Page 130 of 435 PAGE 76 SYSTEM MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATIONS CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Efficient and effective management, maintenance, and operations of the City’s transportation systems relies on strategic planning and implementation. These efforts require identification of current and future assets and the financial, equipment, facilities, and personnel resources required to maintain and operate them. This chapter summarizes current and anticipated future staffing, equipment, and facilities needs and describes management of key transportation systems and elements such as pavement, street signal, sidewalks, and signage. Page 131 of 435 5.1. STAFFING The staffing for the City’s transportation system is broken down into four areas: Transportation Engineering and Planning, Traffic Signal Operation and Maintenance, Street Maintenance and Vegetation Maintenance. 5.1.1. Transportation Engineering and Planning This area is responsible for the development, management, and administration of the Plan, Transportation Improvement Plan, Traffic Impact Fee program, street payback agreements, development review and permitting related to transportation requirements on all types of developments, traffic studies, citywide traffic count program, citywide channelization and pavement marking program, franchises, right-of-way use permits, community banner program, adopt a street program, right-of- way vacations, Americans with disabilities transition plan for right-of-way, commute trip reduction program for all large employers within Auburn, pavement preservation, capital project grants, neighborhood traffic calming program, on-street parking management, photo enforcement program, and regional coordination on transportation issues. There are currently five full-time equivalent (FTE) employees to manage these responsibilities. 5.1.2. Traffic Signal Operations and Maintenance This area is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the City’s traffic signals including programing and signal timing, electronic traffic control and warning devices, dynamic message signs, traffic cameras, school zone flashing beacons, and the ITS including fiber optic cable. There are currently five FTE’s to manage these responsibilities. 5.1.3. Street Maintenance This area is responsible for the maintenance of the roadway system including signage, street lighting, guardrails, walls, pavement, sidewalks, curbing, and delineators. There are currently 10.5 FTE’s to complete this work. Litter management is contained within the Solid Waste program through contracted services. 5.1.4. Vegetation Maintenance This area is responsible for maintenance of roadside and pond vegetation, hardscape medians located along the roadways of the city, and provides street sweeping services on all roadways. The Parks Department maintains the landscaped medians within the roadway corridors of the City. There are currently 11.5 FTE’s to complete this work, however, 5.1 FTE’s are funded by the Storm Drainage Utility and provide for the vegetation maintenance of the Storm properties and facilities and therefore only 6.4 FTE’s are dedicated to the street vegetation maintenance functions. The City's transportation system elements are shown in Table 10. QTY DESCRIPTION 248.69 Miles of Streets 17 Bridges 11,000 Street Signs 13,389 Feet of Guardrail 96 Traffic Signals 31 Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons 3.684 Street Lights - City Owned 2,261 Street Lights - PSE Owned 53 School Zone Flashing Beacons XX19 Speed Radar Feedback Signs 89 Traffic Cameras 12 Speed Photo Enforcement Locations (School Zones) 4 Dynamic Message Signs 43.86 Miles of Fiber Optic Systems 2 Community Banner Locations Table 10. Transportation System Elements 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 77 Page 132 of 435 As the City’s transportation systems grow and new regulatory requirements are enacted, the resources needed to complete necessary maintenance and operations must be evaluated and adjusted to ensure adequate resources to meet the growing needs of the system and continue to maintain the system in a state of good repair. Unfortunately, because not all agencies provide the same services and functions, there are no reliable national standards to look at to determine level of staffing needed for a transportation system with the exception of signal maintenance. The Federal Highway Administration and Institute of Transportation Engineers recommends a ration of between 25-50 traffic signal/field devices per technician. The City of Auburn has three signal technicians and one supervisor which results in a ratio of 76:1 and is therefore under resourced for the current number of systems that they are responsible for. This plan has identified a need for potentially ten to 12 new traffic signals and several RRFB’s associated with projects and programs to improve pedestrian access and safety. In addition, there is the potential for future expansion of the photo enforcement program which should also be considered when determining future staff resources needed. PAGE 78 SYSTEM MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATIONS CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 133 of 435 5.2. EQUIPMENT/FLEET The City currently has the equipment resources for use in the maintenance of transportation systems shown in Table 11 and Table 12. Similar to the staff resource discussion above, there are no national statistics on the amount of equipment needed for the size of a transportation system because there are too many differences between agency responsibilities and levels of service. The current resources allow for adequate maintenance of the City’s systems and as staffing resources grow, equipment resources will be need to increase accordingly. In addition, in 2024 the City will be implementing an all electric street sweeper which was made possible through a grant from the Department of Ecology. In order to reduce the cities greenhouse gas emissions, replacement of fleet equipment and purchase of new equipment will consider the ability for electric vehicles, hybrid vehicles, or alternative fuels to be used as these technologies develop and improve. QTY EQUIPMENT DESIGNATION TYPE 1 6940C Case Skid Steer 1 A428E 30'' Cold Grinder 1 N/A 84" Angle Broom attachment-seria 1 6523C Backhoe/ Extendahoe 1 6900 Backhoe 2 6635A, 6930A Yanmar Excavator 1 6601A John Deere Excavator 3 6911B, 6910C, 6505B International Dump Truck 4 A904A, A905A, A406A, (6910D)Plow 4 A903A, A902A, A502A, (6910D)Sander 1 6910D Kenworth Dump Truck 1 6911A Mack Dump Truck 1 6420C Johne Deere Loader 1 6432D CAT Roller 1 6436A Wacker Roller 1 6934A Trverus Sidewalk Cleaner 1 N/A ACCUBRINE Brine Maker Table 11. Equipment Assigned to Street Division or Traffic Signal Division QTY EQUIPMENT DESIGNATION TYPE 4 6402E, 6403F, 6404B, 6412E 1 Ton Truck 1 6415C F 350 Light Truck 1 6418D Sign Truck 2 6113D, 6114D Signal Transit Van 1 6116D Signal Bucket Truck 1 6116D Engineering SUV 4 6413D, 6414C, 6114C, 6113D Staff Vehicles 2 6450A, 6450B Bucket Trucks 1 6426D Patching Truck 3 6411C, 6425C, 6425D International Dump Truck 6 A402A, A402B, A901A, A408A, A404A, A501D Plow Attachments 3 A403A, A405A, A401A Sander Attachments 2 A904A, A407A Deicer Attachments 1 A411A 1650 Gallon Tank 1 6423D NorAm Grader 1 6420C Johne Deere Loader 1 6432D CAT Roller 1 6436A Wacker Roller 1 6934A Trverus Sidewalk Cleaner 1 N/A ACCUBRINE Brine Maker Table 12. Additional Equipment Available for all M&O Teams 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 79 Page 134 of 435 5.3. FACILITIES Management, maintenance, and operations of the City's transportation systems are provided from two locations: • 1 East Main Street – City Hall Annex, Transportation Engineering Services • 1305 C Street SW – Maintenance and Operations Shops, Street Division, Vegetation Division, Traffic Signals Division Other facilities also used for the Transportation system include the following • Sand and salt storage – five locations citywide • Vegetation sorting facility – Jacobson Tree Farm • Storage – City's GSA Property on C Street SW In 2020, the City undertook a study, the Facility Master Plan, to determine the space needs for the Public Works, Parks and Police departments. The recommendation of that study as it relates to the transportation system was to continue to provide maintenance and operations services from the 1305 C Street SW location but to expand the facilities with the construction of approximately 13,100 SF crew building, expansion of the fleet shops, relocation of the employee parking, completion of a driveway connection to 15th Street SW, and construction of covered parking for high valued fleet. This plan and its recommendations were adopted by the City Council in 2021 with Resolution 5595. In 2024 construction is anticipated in the first phase of the Facility Master Plan for Public Works which is the expansion of the fleet shop facilities. As part of this work in the first phase, the City is improving the electrical service to the property to accommodate future charging stations for the electric street sweeper and future electric and/or hybrid fleet vehicles. In 2024/2025 it is anticipated that planning work will be done in the second phase of the identified improvements which for Public Works includes improvements at the Maintenance and Operations Shops to address the need for more crew space and warehousing space. In 2024/2025 the City will be increasing the ability for the City to handle inclement weather events in the future by adding an additional sand and salt storage location. Planning efforts are also underway to relocate the vegetation sorting facility, which allows debris from operations to be separated and dried before disposal thereby reducing the costs of disposal is completed, from the Jacobson Tree Farm Property. This is due to the future plans of the City to build a Community Park on the tree farm site. In 2024, the City is also completing a remodel at the City Hall Annex facility to provide the necessary office space for the future growth of the Public Works, Community Development and Finance departments located on the second floor and will provide necessary space for the transportation staff located there. PAGE 80 SYSTEM MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATIONS CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 135 of 435 5.4. ASSET MANAGEMENT Asset management involves the balancing of costs, opportunities and risks against the desired performance of assets to achieve objectives of the transportation system. The City currently uses an asset management system for its transportation and utility infrastructure and integrates this information with its GIS. This system allows the City to track requests for services both internally and from the community, assign specific tasks both reactionary and preventative to the maintenance of our facilities, and track information on specific assets defined within the system. The City has been implementing this system since 2007 and continues to improve the asset data sets and mapping to provide resources for our planning of system improvements as well as the day to day work of maintaining the systems. 5.4.1. Street Pavement The City’s Streets Division completes temporary and permanent pavement patching as needed in response to requests and complaints on all roadway corridors up to 6’ x 10’ in size. Areas that require more extensive patching or full pavement replacement are incorporated into the pavement preservation programs and implemented as capital projects managed by the Public Works Engineering services. As of December 2022, City streets have an overall average pavement condition index of "67" on a scale of "0" to "100" where "0" is a completely deteriorated roadway surface and "100" is a new roadway surface. The City’s goal is to achieve and maintain an average 70 pavement condition index which reflects a “good” surface condition. An annual report is published to document the pavement rating throughout the City. In November 2004, Auburn residents approved Proposition 1, Save Our Street Program, which created a dedicated local street fund. This money was set aside for repair and maintenance of local roadways which can sometimes also include sidewalk repair and rebuild. In 2013, the City Council modified the funding source for this program to be from construction sales tax revenues and no longer from property taxes. In 2018, the City Council modified the funds for this program, to be temporarily provided by real estate excise tax (REET) Revenues until a permanent and sustainable source could be established. Beginning in 2023, the City Council reallocated the existing 1% tax on utilities previously used to fund the arterial street preservation program to the fund the local street preservation program (formerly known as the Save Our Streets Program). This re-allocating established $2 million annually to the local streets preservation program, which is the funding level estimated (in 2022 dollars) needed to achieve and maintain the City’s average pavement condition index (PCI) goal of 70. In 2008, the City created a similar program to fund the repair and maintenance of arterials and collector streets. Through 2022, this program was funded with a 1% utility tax, which was supplemented by grant funds, which provided an average of approximately $3.3 million per year. Analysis shows that approximately $5 million per year (in 2022 dollars) is needed to improve our arterial and collector streets to the PCI average target of 70 within the next 10-15 years, and then maintain them at that level. Besides preserving, repairing, and replacing pavement surfaces, the street preservation programs also address non-ADA compliant curb ramps on- streets being re-paved or re-built when required per the criteria established in the City’s ADA Transition Plan. The programs also address damaged or lifted sidewalks that may present an ADA obstruction or concern on streets it is re-paving or re-building. Figure 14. Local Residential Street Before and After SOS Rebuild BEFORE AFTER 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 81 Page 136 of 435 In 2022, the City Council took actions to work towards reaching and sustaining the needed funding for both programs. Starting in 2023 the 1% utility tax revenue was moved to the local streets preservation program and a 1.5% tax on City Utilities was enacted to provide funding for the arterial streets preservation program. Additionally, as the City’s Transportation Benefit District, the City Council enacted a 0.1% sales tax to provide funding for the arterial street preservation program. These new revenue streams, combined with grants, and fund balance are projected to get the City closer to the $5 million needed per year for the arterial street preservation program. The analysis in 2022 also identified that the City may need to consider the implementation of a $20 car tab fee through the Transportation Benefit District depending on future grant revenues. Current grant programs provide funding opportunities based on eligibility and scoring that exclude many City streets and the number of streets that are eligible and score well for the grants that have not already been repaired and preserved is diminishing. Therefore, the future level of grant revenues for pavement preservation is uncertain. 5.4.2. Active Transportation Facilities Sidewalk Repair and Accessibility Program The City of Auburn has an Annual Citywide Sidewalk Repair and Accessibility Program to repair damaged sidewalks, install/replace curb ramps that do not meet ADA standards, and to complete missing links in the sidewalk network. These funds are essential for promoting active transportation travel and can be used to leverage other funding sources, such as state and federal grants or other city capital projects. Auburn has identified three principal areas in which sidewalk improvements should be prioritized: corridors that provide access to and within the downtown, school zones, and parks, with a focus on addressing areas of known concern and complaints. Additional criteria for priority access improvement could include, but are not limited to, areas with high concentrations of senior citizens or disabled citizens, areas with high volumes of pedestrian-transit interaction, areas where private improvements such as trees have damaged the public infrastructure, and areas where property owners are willing to financially participate in the construction of sidewalk improvements through payment into the City’s sidewalk repair program. This program may also include the completion of sidewalk improvements using Community Development Block Grant funding to address areas that are within a qualified census tract as defined by HUD. PAGE 82 SYSTEM MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATIONS CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 137 of 435 5.4.3. Street Lights In 2021, the City completed the conversion of all of its City-owned standard Cobrahead style street lights from sodium halide to LED lighting and implemented a control system that provides information on the use of the system and can provide notifications when lights are not working. Beginning in 2021, the City created a Street Lighting Improvement program to complete the conversion of PSE-owned lights within the City to LED and to provide funds to add street lights where lighting does not meet the City’s current design standards. More significant lighting projects are included in the transportation improvement plan as funding allows. 5.4.4. Traffic Signal Systems The City completes annual preventative maintenance on its traffic signal systems. Every eight to ten years, the City also completes the re-lamping of signal heads. Each capital project that may impact an existing traffic signal is also reviewed for improvements and/or equipment replacements that may be needed for signal operations. In addition, as a traffic signal system reaches the end of its useful service life, it is included in the transportation improvement plan for replacement as funding allows. Often, development or capital projects re-build all, or portions, of existing traffic signal systems. Generally, to keep up with the general useful service lifetime of the City’s traffic signals, a complete signal system must be replaced every three to four years. 5.4.5. Street Landscaping/Vegetation The City’s street standards require landscape strips along some roads classified as local residential or collector. City code establishes that the landscape strips are the responsibility of the adjacent property owner to maintain. Medians that include landscape treatments are maintained by the City’s Parks Department through a contract with a landscape maintenance company. Roadside vegetation is maintained by the City's Vegetation Division where formal landscape strips do not exist and where vegetation within the right-of-way may create potential hazards or sight distance concerns. 5.4.6. Transportation System Management (TSM) and ITS TSM techniques, which make more efficient use of the existing transportation facilities, can reduce the need for costly system capacity expansion projects. These techniques can also be used to improve reduce congestion and delays at intersections and along corridors to help meet City LOS standards TSM techniques used by the City include: • Re-channelization/restriping, adding turn lanes, adding • Signal interconnect and optimization • Turn movement restrictions • Access Management • ITS, including Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) • Traffic monitoring with PTZ cameras • Signal battery backups on all major intersections 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 83 Page 138 of 435 The City will continue to use these TSM techniques to maximize the efficiency of the existing street network. Of the various TSM strategies available, the City continues to invest in and expand its ITS infrastructure as a cost-effective means of increasing system capacity. The ITS system enables the City to change traffic signals in phasing and timing real-time, thereby accommodating unexpected increases in traffic or traffic obstacles such as event related traffic and crashes. For example, ITS has proven to be a useful tool in helping to manage the impact of event traffic traveling south on Auburn Way South, often during the PM peak, to the White River Amphitheatre. The City will continue to roll out ITS capabilities on corridors around the City, as referenced in Map 8. 2024 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) in Appendix A. In addition to TSM strategies, the City strives to provide viable alternatives for travelers to encourage mode shifts away from single occupancy vehicles to transit, biking, and walking, 5.4.7. Signage and Channelization The City maintains street signage per the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) as adopted by WSDOT. This includes the replacement of signage as necessary due to knock downs or when reflectivity is below standards. Reflectivity requirements are established in the MUTCD. The City re-paints roadway and curb striping on an annual basis. A database of the locations of all thermoplastic roadway markings is currently being created to facilitate a programmatic approach to the refreshing of these markings on a one to five- year basis. In addition, this data set will include the locations of raised pavement markers (RPMs) as new regulatory requirements within the MUTCD call for these RPM’s to be updated/replaced on streets without street lighting and meeting other criteria. 5.4.8. Bridges The City completes bridge inspections as required by the FHWA on an annual or bi-annual basis as determined in the prior inspection report. Inspection reports identify if there are maintenance, repairs, rehabilitation or replacement that is needed for the bridges within the City. The City Bridge program provides for minor cost repairs that are identified in the annual inspections on an annual or bi-annual basis depending on the work identified within each bridge inspection report. When larger items of work are identified, the City includes specific projects within the Transportation Improvement Plan as funding allows. The City also typically applies for grants through WSDOT’s Local Bridge Grant Program and has secured funding for bridge maintenance and repairs. PAGE 84 SYSTEM MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATIONS CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 139 of 435 PAGE 85 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN IN THIS CHAPTER Financial Summary Financial Planning & Programming Funding Sources Revenue Shortfall Contingency Funding Strategies, Project Prioritization CHAPTER 6 Funding Page 140 of 435 PAGE 86 FUNDING CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 The ability to finance the maintenance and enhancement of the transportation system is critical to the implementation of this plan and the success of the future transportation system. This chapter details the financial planning tools and funding mechanisms available to accomplish these goals. Page 141 of 435 6.1. FINANCIAL SUMMARY The summary below provides an overview of the 20-year financial outlook for the City’s transportation systems. Forecasts are based on current funding levels for City funds and based on past trends for grants and partnerships. All amounts shown are shown in current dollars (2024) without discount rate adjustments to current value. Table 13. 2024 to 2044 Expense and Revenue Forecast OPERATIONS Labor, Materials, Facilities Operations, Equipment Maintenance $(336.6 Million) Facilities Expansion, Additional Equipment $(20 Million) Motor Vehicle Excise Tax Revenue $18.9 Million General Fund $337.7 Million OPERATIONS FUNDING REMAINDER/(SHORTFALL)$0 CAPITAL Plan Projects/Programs Expense $(320 Million) Traffic Impact Fees Revenue $25.86 Million Transportation Benefit District Revenue 0.1% Sales Tax $47.5 Million $20 Car Tabs*$11.7 Million Utility Taxes Dedicated to Transportation 1.0% on Non-City Utilities $40.98 Million 2.5% on City Utilities $26.61 Million Motor Vehicle Excise Tax Revenue $10.6 Million Multimodal Transportation $2.5 Million Interest Earning and Investment Income $2.73 Million Utility Revenues for Local Street Impacts $3 Million Other (Developer and/or Other Contributions/Payments)$12.6 Million Grants, Loans, and Partnerships Revenue**$106 Million Real Estate Excise Tax Revenue $29.7 Million OVERALL FUNDING CONTINGENCY/(SHORTFALL)$ 0.22 Million * Assumes 13 years of collection at $900k collected per year. ** Based on historic average of $4.25 million awarded per year + $20 million grant for BNSF/A Street Access Project. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 87 Page 142 of 435 6.2. FINANCIAL PLANNING & PROGRAMMING The City uses the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) to develop a financial plan for capital improvements in Auburn, thus enabling the City to fulfill the GMA requirement of having a multi-year financing plan based on the identified transportation needs. 6.2.1. Transportation Improvement Program The TIP is a six-year fiscally constrained plan which lists programmed transportation improvements in the following categories: roadway improvement projects, intersection improvement projects, active transportation and transit projects, preliminary engineering and miscellaneous projects, and preservation projects. Transportation needs are identified by examining the latest information concerning safety and crash history, growth trends, the traffic model, traffic studies, and the projects identified in the Plan. The City adopts an updated TIP annually, including a revenue forecast and analysis of available funding. Projects are then prioritized according to a number of factors including safety, capacity needs, access needs, and the likelihood of securing funding. The first three years of the TIP must be financially constrained, however, the City utilizes financial constraint on the full TIP period so project programming is often limited due to anticipated funding limitations. The TIP is an important tool for identifying funding and developing a financial plan for project implementation. This planning document is incorporated into the CFP and used to influence the City’s adopted budget. 6.2.2. Capital Facilities Plan The CFP is the Comprehensive Plan element which identifies the financial plan for implementing all capital improvements in Auburn. Transportation improvements are included in the CFP, which is amended with each Biennial Budget. The CFP enables the City to fulfill the GMA requirement of having a multi-year financing plan based on identified transportation needs. It also enables the City to make informed decisions about its investment of public dollars and make timely decisions about maintaining LOS's in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan standards. The 2024-2044 Plan capital projects and program costs are summarized in Table 14 on the next page. PAGE 88 FUNDING CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 143 of 435 Table 14. Capital Project and Program Cost Summary and Revenue Forecast DESCRIPTION SUMMARY 2024 – 2044 TOTAL Comprehensive Plan Projects (Comp-X) from Appendix B See Appendix B $123 Million Asset Preservation, Repair, Replacement Projects/Programs Traffic Signals Maintenance $200,000 / Year $162 Million Traffic Signal Replacements $150,000 / Year Sidewalk Repair and Replacement Program $250,000 / Year Arterial Street Preservation $5 Million / Year Local Street Preservation $2 Million / Year Bridge Repair & Maintenance $100,000 / Year Channelization and Pavement Markings $400,000 / Year Active Transportation Projects/Programs Active Transportation Mode Shift Projects $1 Million / Year $20 Million Safety Projects/ Programs Street Lighting $50,000 / Year $11 Million Traffic Safety Programs $500,000 / Year Other Transit Partnership Routes $200,000 / Year $4 Million TOTAL $320 Million 6.3. FUNDING SOURCES The City uses a combination of public and private funding sources to implement transportation improvements in Auburn, both for maintenance activities and capital improvements. 6.3.1. General Tax Revenues The City receives tax revenues from a variety of state, regional, and local sources including the Real Estate Excise Tax, sales tax, property tax, and the motor vehicle fuel tax (MVFT). In addition, the City has implemented a utility tax on all utilities within the City and allocated a portion of these revenues specifically to the City’s transportation system for improvements. This includes a 1% tax on all non-City utilities such as gas, power, telecommunications, and cable and a 2.5% tax on City utilities including water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, and solid waste. In 2023, the City began operation of a school zone photo enforcement program that may provide revenues for future transportation related projects. 6.3.2. Transportation Benefit District Chapter 36.73 of the Revised Code of Washington provides for the establishment of Transportation Benefit District (TBD) by cities and counties to levy 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 89 Page 144 of 435 and impose various taxes and fees to generate revenues to support transportation improvements within the district. A TBD is a quasi-municipal corporation and independent taxing district created for the sole purpose of acquiring, constructing, improving, providing, and funding transportation improvements within the district. The State Legislature provided local governments with the tools of the TBD because inflation has eroded the local share of gas tax and a series of statewide ballot initiatives passed over the last 12 years have eliminated other traditional sources of funding for local transportation needs. In 2011, the City of Auburn implemented a TBD to provide adequate levels of funding for transportation improvements that are consistent with existing state, regional, and local transportation plans, and are necessitated by existing or reasonably foreseeable congestion levels. The geographic boundaries of the Auburn TBD is the municipal limits of the City of Auburn as they currently exist. The Auburn TBD geographic boundaries would expand with any future annexations. In December 13, 2016, there was an approval to implement an annual vehicle license fee of $20.00 for qualifying vehicles in the district. However, in September 19, 2017, the action was rescinded and therefore, no vehicle license fees were put into effect and no fees have been collected. In 2022, the City Council completed a review of the needs for the preservation of the City’s streets and determined that $5 Million was needed annually to preserve the City’s arterial and collector streets and $2 Million was needed annually for local streets. As a result of that the Council developed three recommendations to provide funding for preservation of the City’s roads. Two of the recommendations utilize the authorities granted to the TBD by the State Legislature. The first one was approved by the City Council on October 3, 2022, with the adoption of Ordinance No. 6881 which added a new section to the Auburn City Code (Chapter 3.23) imposing a Transportation Benefit District 0.1% Sales and Use Tax as authorized by RCW 84.55 and RCW 36.73. This tax became effective on January 1, 2023 and may be used for transportation improvements with a focus on preservation of the City’s arterial and collector roadways. The second TBD consideration is a future implementation of a $20 Car Tabs at such time as the City is unable to obtain the grant funding to supplement the revenues for arterial and collector street preservation to meet the annual budget need of $5 Million. Based on the projected need of this Plan, it is anticipated that the $20 Car Tab’s may be required to be implemented between 2031 and 2032. In addition, the 0.1% Sales and Use tax is enacted for a 10 year period and the City will need to consider continuing that tax every 10 years to continue to receive the revenues forecast in this plan. 6.3.3. Grants The City has an active grant program and continually seeks grants, both private and public, to improve Auburn’s transportation system. The following is a list of some of the grants the City has historically applied for and will likely apply for again in the future. Federal Legislation In 2021, the Federal Legislature approved the new Surface Transportation reauthorization bill called the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). This is the largest long-term investment in infrastructure and provides $550 billion over fiscal years 2022 through 2026 in new federal funding. This is also know as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). State Legislation In 2015 and 2022, the Washington State Legislature passed two separate transportation funding packages called Connecting Washington and Move Ahead Washington. These programs also increased potential funding available to existing grant programs within the State and each identified specific regional projects to be funded by the programs. Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) The mission of the FMSIB is to create a comprehensive and coordinated state program to facilitate freight movement between and among local, national, and international markets which enhances trade opportunities. FMSIB is also charged with finding solutions that lessen the impact of the movement of freight on local communities. The TBD is provided the authority to: • Establish and implement district policies, programs and procedures • Borrow money and incur indebtedness • Provide for investment of district funds • Create advisory committees (limited to seven City residents) • Other powers consistent with state law PAGE 90 FUNDING CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 145 of 435 FMSIB obtains funding directly from legislative appropriations and has contributed funds to the 3rd Street SW Grade Separation, the S 277th Street Grade Separation, M Street NE Widening 8th to 4th, and the M Street Underpass projects. Potential Grant Programs for Consideration From these state and federal actions, there are a number of grant programs available to local agencies related to transportation infrastructure improvements, as shown in Table 15. There are a multitude of other potential federal grant programs through the IIJA that are evaluated as calls for projects are issued. PSRC has published a summary of the numerous grant programs available at https://www.psrc.org/media/7292. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) TAP funds projects designed to strengthen the cultural, aesthetic, and environmental aspects of the inter-modal transportation system. The program provides for the implementation of a variety of non-traditional projects, including the restoration of historic transportation facilities, the construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, landscaping and scenic beautification, and the mitigation of water pollution from highway runoff. Surface Transportation Program (STP) STP provides flexible funding that may be used by states and localities for projects on any federally classified public road, active transportation improvements, bridge, and transit capital project. Safety Program A federal program targeted at reducing crash rates at intersections and along corridors, particularly at those locations with higher than average fatality and injury rates. Funds come from the Highway Safety Improvement (HSIP) Program . HSIP requires that states program and spend safety funds according to their Local Road Safety Plan. Washington State's plan is called Target Zero. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) A federally funded program administered through PSRC. CMAQ funds projects and programs in air quality non-attainment and maintenance areas, which reduce transportation related emissions. Safe Routes to Schools Program A state and federally funded program that aims to protect children from traffic related deaths and injuries and promotes a healthy lifestyle by encouraging bicycling and walking to school. Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Grant A state funded program that funds active transportation safety improvements. Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) TIB administers annual grant programs that fund roadway and active transportation projects that improve safety, mobility, capacity, and promote economic development. The TIB offers several programs, each of which emphasizes different funding criteria. In addition, they offer a Complete Streets program. Table 15. Potential Grant Program for Consideration (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 91 Page 146 of 435 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Community Economic Revitalization Board (CERB) A state funded program that provides low-cost financing for public facility improvements. Public entities are eligible to apply for and receive loans and grants for public facilities linked to economic development outcomes such as private business investment and job creation. CERB also finances site- specific studies and plans. Regional Mobility Grant Program A State managed program to improve connectivity between counties and regional population centers and reduce transportation delay. There are four project types: vehicle and equipment purchases, capital construction, operations, and transportation demand management. Local Bridge Grant Program A State managed program to preserve and improve the condition of bridges that are physically deteriorated or structurally deficient through replacement, rehabilitation and systematic preventative maintenance. Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) A discretionary program funding to complete critical freight and passenger transportation projects. Safe Streets and Roads For All (SS4A) A discretionary program funding regional, local, and Tribal initiatives to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries. Reconnecting Communities and Neighborhoods (RCN) RCN provides funding to prioritizing disadvantaged communities, aiming to improve access to daily needs such as jobs, education, healthcare, food, and recreation, fosters equitable development and restoration, and reconnects communities by removing, retrofitting, or mitigating highways or other transportation facilities that create barriers to community connectivity, including to mobility, access, or economic development. Table 16. 2024-2044 Forecast CURRENT LOANS & INDEBTEDNESS Harvey Road/8th Street NE Intersection Improvements Remaining Debt Payments 2024 – 2028 $407,933 M Street SE Undercrossing Improvements Remaining Debt Payments 2024-2041 $2,155,891 Auburn Way South Widening (Hemlock St SE to Poplar St SE) Anticipated Payback Period 2025-2045 $3,000,000 + Interest 6.3.4. Loans Low-interest loans are also available to municipalities. For example, the Washington State Department of Commerce Public Works Board offers low-interest loans (PWTF) for local governments to finance public infrastructure construction and rehabilitation. Eligible projects must improve public health and safety, respond to environmental issues, promote economic development, or upgrade system performance. Roads, streets, and bridges are eligible for these loans. The loans can be strategically employed to leverage grant funding by providing a local match, enabling the City to compete for funding for public infrastructure projects. In addition, the City has the option of issuing bonds for public infrastructure projects. The City may also pursue financing airport improvements through the Community Aviation Revitalization Board (CARB) loan program. PAGE 92 FUNDING CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 147 of 435 6.3.5. Transportation Impact Fees The City has an established traffic impact fee system based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) guidelines, as amended by the City Council. The fee system estimates the amount of traffic each development is anticipated to create, based on the land use type and size. Traffic impact fees compensate the City for the capacity improvements needed to accommodate the new trips generated by new development. In turn, the City uses the revenues to expand the street network through the capacity projects included in the TIP. The fees are based on the costs of the capacity project included in the TIP and forecast growth throughout the City. The fees are updated annually following the adoption of the TIP by City Council. Payment of the impact fee does not relieve developers of their codified obligation to construct half-street improvements, nor the need to mitigate project impacts identified through the SEPA process, which may include the construction of an identified TIP project (and a credit for the impact fee contribution towards that project). The City also charges a truck impact fee for certain land-use types which are associated with significant truck traffic generation, such as commercial and industrial uses. These fees are used to address impacts on the City’s truck routes and other truck- related infrastructure. With the adoption of this plan, the City will be updating its transportation impact fee schedule to be based on a per person trip approach. The impact fees generated from this revised approach will be used for both vehicle capacity projects and active transportation projects that support mode shift away from vehicles (and therefore reduce need for vehicle capacity). 6.3.6. Funding Partnerships The City has successfully formed several funding partnerships, which have enabled it to leverage its resources in implementing transportation improvements. The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) has graciously provided easements, funding, and other support to the City for several transportation projects and programs. In 2020, the City and MIT entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) where both parties agreed to work together to identify needs and provide solutions to gaps in active transportation facilities on, and along, SR 164/Auburn Way South. Subsequently, the MIT and City have entered into funding agreements for specific projects where MIT has provided funding for projects implemented by the City. The City anticipates continuing to partner with WSDOT on funding projects involving the state routes through the City. Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) enable City investment in a specified area by leveraging City funds, when available, with contributions from property owners in the district. LIDs are a means of using limited city resources to improve neighborhood quality through improvement of streets, sidewalks, and other features of the roadway. Historically, LIDs were often implemented to construct public improvements associated with new commercial and residential neighborhoods. It has been over 15 years since the City has last implemented an LID. This is presumably due to the high costs that LIDs would require the benefited property owners to pay. Additionally, most new residential and commercial developments trigger the requirement for public improvements such as streets, sidewalks, and street lighting to be built by the development at the time of the development rather than being built through LID. For these reasons, the City has not included any LID constructed improvements or funding in its future projections. In 2022, the City implemented a new Sidewalk Repair Program to address situations where adjacent property owners are financially responsible for the correction of damaged sidewalks within the City. This program allows for a property owner to pay the City a pre-determined fee to complete the work on their behalf in the next regularly scheduled sidewalk improvement project. Street Deferral agreements or Fee In Lieu payments are allowed per Auburn City Code 12.64A where property owners responsible for the construction of frontage improvements along their properties can pay the City for the completion of the work where a planned improvement project has been identified in the City’s Transportation Improvement Plan and/or adopted budget. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 93 Page 148 of 435 6.4. REVENUE SHORTFALL CONTINGENCY Revenue forecasts for City funds are considered to be relatively secured. Other revenue such as grants and partnership funding can be slightly more unpredictable. While all the revenue currently forecast is anticipated to fully fund the transportation plan, if shortfalls arise the City will have to take one or more of the following actions to maintain compliance with GMA concurrency requirements: • Supplant the projected budget shortfall with other existing City funds. • Enact new sources of revenue. • Revise the Land Use Plan to reduce development capacity and resultant need for additional transportation improvements. • Lower the LOS Standard sufficiently to reduce the need for additional transportation improvements. • Impose restriction (moratorium) on further development with impacts to areas not meeting LOS standards until the current LOS standard is met. 6.5. FUNDING STRATEGIES, PROJECT PRIORITIZATION The City uses a variety of criteria to prioritize transportation projects, including safety, mobility, and overall community benefit. In addition, the City also considers the availability of funding and the ability to leverage City dollars to raise addition funds. For example, grants are often available for specific types of capital investments, whereas they are more limited for maintenance/preservation. Hence, the City often needs to budget for maintenance/preservation through tax revenues. Capital improvements may be financially secured through a combination of public and private investment. Hence, project prioritization for capital improvements is often partially dependent on the ability to secure outside funding. Likewise, maintenance and preservation are highly dependent on the limited tax revenues available to the City. In the future, the City will need to continue lobbying for its share of federal, state, and county tax revenues, seek creative avenues for securing private investment dollars and grant funds, and potentially implement new funding strategies such as car tabs or additional tax implementation when allowed. PAGE 94 FUNDING CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 149 of 435 PAGE 95 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN IN THIS CHAPTER Annual Updates Multi-Year Updates Accomplishments Since the Last Plan Update (2019) CHAPTER 7 Monitoring & Evaluation Page 150 of 435 PAGE 96 MONITORING & EVALUATION CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 The Comprehensive Transportation Plan, a long-range plan with the horizon year 2044, predicts the needs and conditions of the future transportation system, enabling the City to anticipate its future needs. Nonetheless, the transportation network is dynamic, constantly evolving due to circumstances beyond the scope and influence of this plan. Hence, regular updates are necessary to ensure the Plan remains current and relevant. Page 151 of 435 7.1. ANNUAL UPDATES The Plan can be amended annually as part of the City’s regular Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle, which ensures proposed changes go through a public review process before the amended plan is adopted by the City Council at the end of the calendar year. In preparation for the annual amendment cycle, the City will review the plan and propose updates as needed. These proposed updates may be due to changes to City priorities, the availability of new information, or the relevance of certain plan components. 7.1.1. Re-Evaluation The annual re-evaluation process provides an opportunity for the City to identify progress made in implementing the Plan, as well as identify new needs that have arisen since the previous update. The update will consider the street, active transportation, and transit systems, and assess whether the Plan adequately addresses the implementation strategies necessary to ensure the transportation infrastructure continues to grow in line with the City’s objectives. As part of this process, the City will review its future projects list and update the TIP and the CPF as appropriate. It will also review and update the Policies and Funding chapters in order to remain consistent with the City’s vision and current with potential funding strategies. 7.1.2. Technical Information The Plan contains a range of technical data, much of which informs other elements of the Plan. As part of the annual amendment cycle, technical information, such as traffic volumes, existing LOS, roadway classifications, and transit route and ridership information, will be updated as appropriate. Updated information will inform much of the evaluation process, enabling the City to quantify system changes over time and make appropriate decisions in planning the future system. 7.1.3. Model Updates The City’s traffic model shall be updated on a regular basis, every few years, as new land use, employment, and housing data becomes available. Model updates are important as they ensure the City has an accurate understanding of how land use patterns, employment, and other factors impact future transportation conditions, enabling the City Council to make informed policy decisions. The model also provides an understanding of the impacts associated with different projects, allowing the City to devise a revised list of future projects to improve capacity and safety, as well as achieve other priorities. 7.1.4. Comprehensive Plan Consistency The annual evaluation process is an opportunity to ensure the Plan is consistent with other elements of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, including the land use and economic development elements; Auburn Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, Transportation Improvement Program; and CFP. Hence, as part of the annual amendment cycle, the City will ensure these plan components are consistent with and supportive of each other. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 97 Page 152 of 435 7.2. MULTI-YEAR UPDATES The City has the opportunity to perform annual updates to the Plan on an as-needed basis to account for significant changes which have occurred during the previous year. A more exhaustive process is periodically necessary; hence, a thorough rewrite of the Plan shall be conducted every five to eight years. This endeavor will include a broad public outreach effort with input from neighboring jurisdictions, state and regional agencies, and Auburn residents and businesses. Much like the process for the 2024 update, it will present an opportunity to holistically examine the current transportation system and lay the framework for development of the future system. 7.3. ACCOMPLISHMENTS SINCE THE LAST PLAN UPDATE (2019) Since 2019, the City has completed numerous transportation improvements, with an emphasis on providing new road capacity, improving pedestrian and bicycle safety, preservation of existing infrastructure, and providing better access to regional transit services including commuter rail. In addition to the completed planned capacity projects, additional projects were completed, such as the I Street extension to South 277th Street, the Auburn Way South sidewalk additions from Dogwood to Hemlock, Riverwalk Drive Sidewalks Expansion, and numerous pavement preservation projects. PAGE 98 MONITORING & EVALUATION CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Page 153 of 435 PAGE 99 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN IN THIS APPENDIX Map 1. 2024 Adjacent Cities and Counties Map 2. 2024 Bike Route Network Map 3. 2024 Existing Bike Facilities Map 4. 2024 Existing Sidewalks Map 5. 2024 Transit Bus Routes/Stops Map 6. 2024 Level of Transit Service Map 7. 2024 City of Roadway Classifications Map 8. 2024 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Map 9. 2024 Federal Functional Classifications Map 10. 2024 Freight Network APPENDIX A Maps & Interactive Links INTERACTIVE LINKS Roadway Information Vehicle LOS - Intersection Delays Sidewalk Inventory and Transit Level of Service Bike Network Assessment Map Existing and Planned Bike Facilities Map Conceptual Projects and Map Page 154 of 435 PAGE 100 MAPS & INTERACTIVE LINKS APPENDIX A B C D E Map 1. 2024 Adjacent Cities and Counties Page 155 of 435 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 101 Map 2. 2024 Bike Route Network Page 156 of 435 PAGE 102 MAPS & INTERACTIVE LINKS APPENDIX A B C D E Map 3. 2024 Existing Bike Facilities Page 157 of 435 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 103 Map 4. 2024 Existing Sidewalks Page 158 of 435 PAGE 104 MAPS & INTERACTIVE LINKS APPENDIX A B C D E Map 5. 2024 Transit Bus Routes/Stops Page 159 of 435 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 105 Map 6. 2024 Level of Transit Service Page 160 of 435 PAGE 106 MAPS & INTERACTIVE LINKS APPENDIX A B C D E Map 7. 2024 Roadway Classifications Page 161 of 435 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 107 Map 8. 2024 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Page 162 of 435 PAGE 108 MAPS & INTERACTIVE LINKS APPENDIX A B C D E Map 9. 2024 Federal Functional Classifications Page 163 of 435 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 109 Map 10. 2024 Freight Network Page 164 of 435 PAGE 110 MAPS & INTERACTIVE LINKS APPENDIX A B C D E This page left intentionally blank Page 165 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 111 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IN THIS APPENDIX Summary Table of Planned Projects and Programs Project Summaries: Purpose, Concept, Planning Level Cost List of Bike Improvements to Encourage Mode Shift APPENDIX B Project Summaries Page 166 of 435 PLANNED PROJECTS & PROGRAMS Interactive Map: https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/2d9fe1e0980044fbb4bf78c2056450eb Click on a linked COMP # in the summary table below to view that specific project summary. COMP #PROJECT COST ESTIMATE 1 Auburn Way N & 45th St NE Intersection Improvements $1,900,000 2 Auburn Way N & 42nd St NE Intersection Improvements $100,000 3 I St NE Improvements (37th St NE - 45th St NE)$6,700,000 4 I St NE & 37th St NE Intersection Improvements $2,300,000 5 I St NE & 30th St NE Intersection Improvements $3,250,000 6 SE 304th St & 112th Ave SE Intersection Improvements $800,000 7 SE 304th St & 118th Ave SE Intersection Improvements $950,000 8 SE 304th St & 116th Ave SE Intersection Improvements $3,725,000 9 Lea Hill Corridor Improvements $14,675,000 10 116th Ave SE & SE 312th St Intersection Improvements $5,600,000 11 116th Ave SE & SE 320th St Intersection Improvements $3,150,000 12 Pike St NE & 8th St NE Access Management $50,000 13 8th St NE Improvements (Auburn Way N - Harvey Rd/M St NE)$8,200,000 14 10th St NE Improvements (A St NW - Auburn Way N)$2,300,000 15 15th St NW & M St NW Access Management $50,000 16 S 316th St & 56th Ave S Intersection Improvements $3,225,000 17 S 316th St & 51st Ave S Intersection Improvements $2,150,000 18 S 321st St & 44th Ave S/46th Pl S Intersection Improvements $3,750,000 19 A St NW & 3rd St NW Improvements $3,025,000 20 C St NW & 3rd St NW Intersection Improvements $1,900,000 21 M St SE By-Pass Rd (M St SE - Black Diamond Rd)$17,250,000 22 Auburn Way S, M St SE, 17th St SE Intersection Improvements $2,300,000 23 M St SE & 12th St SE Intersection Improvements $4,650,000 24 M St SE & 29th St SE Intersection Improvements $2,925,000 25 A St Corridor Improvements - 37th to White River Bridge $21,965,000 26 A St SE & 12th St SE Intersection Improvements $1,425,000 27 A St SE & 21st St SE Intersection Improvements $1,925,000 28 Lakeland Hills Way SE & Oravetz Rd SE Corridor Improvements $2,610,000 TOTAL $122,850,000 PAGE 112 PROJECT SUMMARIES APPENDIX A B C D E Page 167 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-1AUBURN WAY N & 45TH STNE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 700,000 Right of Way $ 0 Construction $ 1,200,000 Total $ 1,900,000 Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the replacement of the stop control with construction of a new traffic signal. VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Fails 2044 Future Fails FailsB ST NW4 2ND PLNED ST NE44TH ST NW 49TH ST NW AUBURNWAYN49TH ST NE C ST NE4 5TH ST NE I ST NE85TH AVE SD ST NW1 © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS Auburn Way N45th St NEN.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.Auburn Way N & 45th St NESignal ConceptConcept Drawing Page 168 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-2AUBURN WAY N & 42ND STNE INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the restriction of left turns from 42nd St NE to Auburn Way N during PM peak hours with signage installed on a new raised median. PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 25,000 Right of Way $ 0 Construction $ 75,000 Total $ 100,000 VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Meets 2044 Future Meets FailsAUBURN WAY NB ST NWCSTNE37TH ST NE 42ND PL NE 44TH ST NW 45TH S T NE 37TH ST NW ISTNE85TH AVE SDSTNW2 © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS Auburn Way N42nd St NE N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Auburn Way N & 42nd St NE Intersection Concept 3PM-6PM Concept Drawing Page 169 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-3I ST NE IMPROVEMENTS (37TH ST NE - 45TH ST NE) Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Safety/Active Transportation/ Mode Shift Description: The I St NE Corridor provides access to several neighborhoods and commercial properties. To improve multi-model safety, and meet city roadway standards, bicycle and pedestrian improvements are proposed between 37th St NE and 45th St NE. 37TH ST NE 4 2NDPLNE 44TH ST NW 37TH ST NWB ST NWCSTNEAUBURN WAY N85TH AVE S45TH S T NE I ST NEDSTNW3 PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 2,000,000 Right of Way $ 1,000,000 Construction $ 3,700,000 Total $ 6,700,000 I Street NEGreen River Trail 42nd Pl NEI Street NE45th St NE N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. I St NE (37th - 45th) Concept DrawingI Street NEI Street NEI Pl NEN.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. I St NE (37th - 45th) Concept DrawingI Street NEI Street NEI Pl NEN.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. I St NE (37th - 45th) Concept Drawing I Street NEGreen River Trail 42nd Pl NEI Street NE45th St NE N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. I St NE (37th - 45th) Concept DrawingConcept DrawingMatchline A Matchline A Matchline B Matchline B Matchline C Matchline C 45TH ST NE 40TH ST NE Page 170 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-4I ST NE & 37TH ST NEINTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 800,000 Right of Way $ 100,000 Construction $ 1,400,000 Total $ 2,300,000 Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the construction of a single-lane roundabout. VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Meets 2044 Future Meets FailsI ST NEB ST NWAUBURN WAY NC ST NE37TH ST NE37TH ST NW GREENRIVERRDSE4 37th Street NEI Street NE N.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.37th St NE & I St NERoundabout ConceptConcept Drawing Page 171 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-5I ST NE & 30TH ST NEINTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the construction of a single-lane roundabout. PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 1,100,000 Right of Way $ 50,000 Construction $ 2,100,000 Total $ 3,250,000 VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Meets 2044 Future Meets FailsAUBURNWAYNB ST NWI ST NE30TH ST NE30TH ST NW C ST NEGREENRIVERRDSE5 30th Street NE I Street NE30th St NE & I St NE Roundabout Concept N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Concept Drawing Page 172 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-6SE 304TH ST & 112TH AVESE INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE* Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 300,000 Right of Way $ 0 Construction $ 500,000 Total $ 800,000 **I n c lu d e s*R R F B *sy ste m Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the construction of a new two-stage left turn lane on SE 304th St that will assist motorists turning from 112th Ave SE. A pedestrian refuge island and flashing beacons will be provided to enhance pedestrian crossing safety. VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Meets 2044 Future Meets Fails 1 0 7 T H A V E S E 112TH AVE SE116TH AVE SE22ND S T N E SE 304TH ST GREENRIVERRDSE SE304THW A Y118TH AVE SE124TH AVE SE104TH AVE SE6 SE 304th Street 112th Avenue SESE 304th St & 112th Ave SE Intersection Concept N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Concept Drawing Page 173 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-7SE 304TH ST & 118TH AVESE INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the construction of a raised median on SE 304th St that will restrict left turns from 118th Ave SE. PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 300,000 Right of Way $ 50,000 Construction $ 600,000 Total $ 950,000 VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Meets 2044 Future Fails Fails112TH AVE SE116TH AVE SESE 304TH STSE304THWAY118TH AVE SE124TH AVE SE7 © 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS SE 304th Street 118th Avenue SESE 304th St & 118th Ave SE Intersection Concept N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Concept Drawing Page 174 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-8SE 304TH ST & 116TH AVESE INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 1,200,000 Right of Way $ 325,000 Construction $ 2,200,000 Total $ 3,725,000 Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the construction of a single-lane roundabout. VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Fails Meets 2044 Future Fails Meets 1 0 7 T H A V E S E 112TH AVE SE116TH AVE SESE 304TH ST SE304THW AY118TH AVE SE124TH AVE SE104TH AVE SE8 SE 304th St & 116th Ave SE Roundabout Concept N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. SE 304TH STREET 116TH AVENUE SEConcept Drawing Page 175 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO PHASE 1 PHASE 2 8th St NE SE 320th St104th Ave SE104th Pl SE105th Pl SELea Hill R d S E 112th Ave SEProject Origin: Lea Hill Corridor Study (2020) Primary Needs: Vehicle Capacity, Mode Shift, Active Transportation, Safety Description: This project will reduce intersection delays, improve vehicle and active transportation safety, and support mode shift through the construction of the following improvements that would likely be implemented as two separate phased projects: • Phase 1 - New single lane roundabout at the intersection of Lea Hill Road and 112th Ave SE and removal of the existing traffic signal at the intersection of Lea Hill Road and 105th Ave SE. A raised media would restrict left turning movements at 105th Ave SE. • Phase 2 - New multi-use shared path along east side (uphill) and bike lane along west side (downhill) of Lea Hill Road from the new roundabout at 104th Ave SE (previously constructed as a separate project), to the new roundabout at 112th Ave SE (constructed with Phase 1 of this project). Concept Drawing COMP-9LEA HILL CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Phase 1: Lea Hill Corridor - 112th Ave SE & 105th Pl SE Intersections Improvements $ 5,175,000 Phase 2: Lea Hill Rd Corridor - Non-Motorized Improvements from 104th Ave SE to SE 312th St $ 9,500,000 Total $14,675,000 9 Page 176 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO PHASE 1 PHASE 2 8th St NE SE 320th St104th Ave SE104th Pl SE105th Pl SELea Hill R d S E 112th Ave SE105TH PL SE 112TH AVE SE PHASE 2 Concept Drawing Page 177 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-10116TH AVE SE & SE 312TH ST INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: Lea Hill Corridor Study (2020) Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: This project will reduce intersection delays, address bike and pedestrian LTS deficiencies, and provide overall safety improvements on Lea Hill Road/SE 312th Street from a new roundabout to be constructed with a separate project at the intersection of 112th Ave SE to the intersection of 124th Ave SE. Improvements include a new single lane roundabout at the intersection of 116th Ave SE, a bike lane along the north side of Lea Hill Road/SE 312th Street, a separated multi-use shared trail along the south side of Lea Hill Road/ SE 312th Street between 112th Ave SE and 116th Ave SE, and completing gaps in sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides of Lea Hill Road/SE 312th Street between 116th Ave SE and 124th Ave SE.116THAVESESE 312TH ST 112TH AVE SESE 316TH STRIVERVIEWDRNE22NDSTNE 124TH AVE SEL E A H IL L R D S E 104THAVESE10 PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 550,000 Right of Way $ 50,000 Construction $ 5,000,000 Total $ 5,600,000 Concept Drawing © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO SE 312th St 116th Ave SE112th Ave SESEE LEA HILL CORRIDOR PHASE 1 © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO 120th Ct SE121st Pl SE124th Ave SEPage 178 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES Concept Drawing © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO SE 312th St 116th Ave SE112th Ave SESEE LEA HILL CORRIDOR PHASE 1 © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus DS © 2024 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO 120th Ct SE121st Pl SE124th Ave SEMatchlineMatchlinePage 179 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-11116TH AVE SE & SE 320THST INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: 2019 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Primary Needs: Safety, Active Transportation Description: This project will improve vehicle and active transportation safety at the intersection with the construction of a single lane roundabout. This project may be expanded to complete gaps in sidewalks and bike lanes on SE 320th Street. 18124TH AVE SE112TH AVE SELEAHILLRDSE116TH AVE SESE 316TH ST SE 320TH ST 107TH PL SE1 05 T HPLSE11 PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 1,100,000 Right of Way $ 50,000 Construction $ 2,000,000 Total $ 3,150,000 SE 320th Street 116th Avenue SEBus Stop Bus Stop SE 320th Street & 116th Avenue SERoundabout Concept Design 1:30 CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Concept Drawing Page 180 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-12PIKE ST NE & 8TH ST NEACCESS MANAGEMENT Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced by restricting left turns from both northbound and southbound Pike St NE on to 8th St NE. PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 15,000 Right of Way $ 0 Construction $ 35,000 Total $ 50,000 VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Fails 2044 Future Fails Fails 8TH ST NE H A R V E Y R D N E R ST NESE 320TH ST 112TH AVE SEI ST NE4TH ST NE LEAHILLRDSEAUBURNWAYNM ST NE9T H S T N E 107TH PL SED ST NE104THAVESE1 05 THPLSE12 8th St NEPike St NECast In Place Curbing N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Pike St NE and 8th St NE IntersectionConcept Drawing Figure 1 Concept Drawing Page 181 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES Auburn Way N8th St NE 8t h S t N E F St NEH St NE N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. 8th St NE Improvements (Auburn Way N - Harvey Rd/M St NE)Concept Drawing Figure 1 8th St NE 8th St NEI St NEK St NEH a r v e y R d N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. 8th St NE Improvements (Auburn Way N - Harvey Rd/M St NE)Concept Drawing Figure 1 COMP-138TH ST NE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (AUBURN WAY N - HARVEY RD/M ST NE) Project Origin: 2024 CTP New Project Primary Needs: Mode Shift/Active Transportation/Safety Description: Residents from the neighborhoods along 8th Street NE currently must walk or ride along narrow shoulders to get to shopping, social services, recreation, and transit along Auburn Way North and M Street NE/Harvey Rd. This route is part of the City’s designated bike route network (as shown in Map 2 - Bike Network) and is a critical connection to Downtown Auburn and regional transit and bike facilities. This project will improve the roadway to provide comfortable walking and biking facilities that meet or exceed the City’s active transportation level of service standards. The project concept currently includes a center turn lane but whether or not the lane is included in the final project design will depend on detailed design considerations, including right of way needs. Concept Drawing SE 320TH ST8THSTNE H A R V E Y R D N E R ST NEAuburnAveB ST NWI ST NEA ST NE4TH ST NE 14TH ST NE LEAHILLRDSEAUBURNWAYNM ST NE3RD ST NW 9T H S T N E A ST NW10TH ST NE 107TH PL SED ST NE104TH AVE SE1 05 T HPLSE13 MatchlineMatchlinePROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 2,300,000 Right of Way $ 1,800,000* Construction $ 4,100,000 Total $ 8,200,000 * ROW costs assume no relocation is required. Page 182 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES 10th St NE 10th St NE A St NWA St NE N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. 10th St NE Improvements (B St NW - Auburn Way N)Concept Drawing (1 of 2) Figure 1 10th St NE 9th S t N ED St NEAuburn Way N8t h S t N E N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. 10 St NE Improvements (B St NW - Auburn Way N)Concept Drawing (2 of 2) Figure 1 COMP-1410TH ST NE IMPROVEMENTS (A ST NW - AUBURN WAY N) Project Origin: 2024 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Primary Needs: Safety, Active Transportation, Mode Shift Description: This project will provide bicycle facilities that meet or exceed City LTS Standards and improve vehicle and pedestrian safety measures on 10th Street NE between A Street NW and Auburn Way North. Improvements include addition of bike lanes, a road-diet to convert two lanes in each direction to one lane in each direction with a center turn lane, removal of stop-control at the intersection of A Street NE, and installation of an enhanced pedestrian crossing. The project provides active transportation facilities that connect housing and commercial areas to frequent transit on Auburn Way North. 4TH ST NE H A R V E Y R D N EAUBURN WAY NAuburnAveG ST NWA ST NEBSTNW14TH ST NE I ST NEA ST NWMSTNED ST NE8TH ST NE 9T H S T N E 10TH ST NW 15THST NW 14TH ST NW H ST NW15TH ST NE C ST NW6TH ST NW 14 PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/Design $ 800,000 Right of Way $ 0 Construction $ 1,500,000 Total $ 2,300,000 Concept Drawing MatchlineMatchlinePage 183 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-1515TH ST NW & M ST NWACCESS MANAGEMENT Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced by restricting left turns from southbound M St NW to eastbound 15th St NW during peak travel demand periods. PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 10,000 Right of Way $ 0 Construction $ 40,000 Total $ 50,000 VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Meets 2044 Future Fails Fails 167 15TH ST NE WEST VALLEY HWY NA ST NEB ST NWD ST NE1 6TH STNW 14TH ST NW 15TH ST NW RONCROCKETTDRNWM ST NWTERRACEDRNWC ST NW15 M Street NW15th Street NW 15th St NW & M St NW Intersection Concept N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. 3PM-6PM 6AM-9AM Concept Drawing Page 184 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-16S 316TH ST & 56TH AVE SINTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the construction of a single-lane roundabout. PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 1,100,000 Right of Way $ 125,000 Construction $ 2,000,000 Total $ 3,225,000 VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Meets 2044 Future Meets Fails 15TH ST NW 48TH AVE STERRACEDRNWS 316TH ST 56TH AVE S46TH PL SWESTVALLEYHWYN16 S 316th Street S 316th Street 56th Ave SS 316th St & 56th Ave S Roundabout Concept N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Concept Drawing Page 185 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-17S 316TH ST & 51ST AVE SINTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the replacement of the stop controls with construction of a new traffic signal. This intersection is outside City limits in King County. Coordination with King County will be required to fund and implement this project. PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 700,000 Right of Way $ 150,000 Construction $ 1,300,000 Total $ 2,150,000 VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Fails 2044 Future Meets Fails 15TH ST NW 48TH AVE STERRACEDRNWS 316TH ST 56TH AVE S46TH PL S 17 51st Avenue SS 316th StreetN.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.51st Ave S & S 316th StSignal ConceptConcept Drawing Page 186 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-18S 321ST ST & 44TH AVE S/46TH PL S INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the construction of a single-lane roundabout. This intersection is outside City limits in King County. Coordination with King County will be required to fund and implement this project. Temporary mitigation measures to address existing LOS deficiency may require a traffic signal until permanent project can be funded. PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 1,200,000 Right of Way $ 350,000 Construction $ 2,200,000 Total $ 3,750,000 VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Fails 2044 Future Fails Fails48TH AVE SS 316TH ST 56TH AVE SS 325TH S T46TH PL S 18 S 321st Street46th Pl S44th Ave n u e S N.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.S 321st St & 46th Pl SRoundabout ConceptConcept Drawing Page 187 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-19A ST NW & 3RD ST NWIMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: 2019 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Primary Needs: Vehicle Capacity Description: This project will reduce intersection delays and improve overall vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle operations through this intersection by re- constructing the south leg of the intersection to be re-aligned such that the split phase operations of the signal can be removed. Modeling indicates that despite this project, the southbound right turn lane queue would have a queue length that exceeds LOS standards. Therefore, additional refinement of this project would be required with, or prior to, implementation. 167 AUBURNWAYNE MAIN ST A ST SE3RD ST SWCSTSW Auburn AveM ST SE8TH ST NE G ST NWB ST NW4TH ST NE W MAIN ST 1ST ST NE 2ND ST SE2NDSTSW AUBURN WAY SG ST SWM ST NEH ST NWA ST NWCSTNW6TH ST NW 19 PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 1,000,000 Right of Way $ 225,000 Construction $ 1,800,000 Total $ 3,025,000 3rd Street NWA Street NWN.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.A St NW & 3rd St NWSignal ConceptConcept Drawing Page 188 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-20C ST NW & 3RD ST NWINTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 700,000 Right of Way $ 0 Construction $ 1,200,000 Total $ 1,900,000 Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the addition of a dedicated eastbound left turn lane on 3rd Street NW and modifying the signal operations to allow for protected/ permissive left-turns on all approaches. VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Fails 2044 Future Meets Fails 167 AUBURNWAYN8TH ST NE A ST SE3RD ST SWCSTSW Auburn AveE MAIN STG ST NWB ST NW4TH ST NE W MAIN ST 1ST ST NE 2ND ST SE2NDSTSW 3RD ST NW AUBURN WAY SG ST SWH ST NWA ST NWC ST NW6TH ST NW 20 3rd Street NW C Street NW3rd St NW & C St NW Signal Concept N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Concept Drawing Page 189 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-21M ST SE BY-PASS RD (M ST SE BY-PASS RD & SE AUBURN - BLACK DIAMOND RD) Project Origin: M Street Grade Separation Pre-Design Report (2009) Primary Needs: Active Transportation/Safety/ System Resiliency Description: This project will provide a new roadway connection between Auburn Black Diamond Road and M Street SE. The new connection will provide pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle connectivity that allows by-pass of the at-grade railroad crossing at Black Diamond Road/R Street SE to the grade separated crossing at M Street SE. There are two alternatives for this project that will be considered further with preliminary project design: 164 18 F ST SE12TH ST SE R ST SE2ND ST SE AUBURN WAY SM ST SE4TH ST SE AUBU R N - B L A C K D I A M O N D R D S E 21 PROJECT PHASE OPTION A OPTION B Planning & Engineering/Design $ 3,500,000 $ 2,400,000 Right of Way $ 6,250,000 $ 5,000,000 Construction $ 7,500,000 $ 5,200,000 Total $ 17,250,000 $ 12,600,000 M St SEM St SE 6th St SEAuburn Comprehensive PlanM Street By-PassConceptual DesignCONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.1:100M Street SE Bypass RoadSE Auburn-Black Diamond Road4th Street SEConcept Drawing Option A M St SEM St SE 6th St SEAuburn Comprehensive PlanM Street By-PassConceptual DesignCONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.1:100M Street SE Bypass RoadSE Auburn-Black Diamond RoadSE 4 StreetConcept Drawing Option B Option A: Maintain the connection between Auburn Black Diamond Road and R Street SE and re-align the at-grade railroad crossing. Option B: Disconnect R Street SE from Auburn Black Diamond Road to allow closure of the at-grade crossing. This project requires coordination and partnership with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) as the new roadway connection would be mostly on MIT land. Page 190 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-22AUBURN WAY S, M ST SE, 17TH ST SE INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 700,000 Right of Way $ 300,000 Construction $ 1,300,000 Total $ 2,300,000 Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced with several improvements including: Add a third eastbound lane on Auburn Way South through the intersection Restrict left turns from eastbound Auburn Way South to northbound M Street SE. Vehicles would utilize 12th Street SE for access to M Street SE from eastbound Auburn Way South. VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Fails Fails 2044 Future Fails Fails 164 AUB U R N W A Y S 12TH ST SE 17TH ST SE RSTSEM ST SEASTSEF ST SEH O W ARDRDSE 21ST ST SE 22 Restrict left turns from westbound Auburn Way South on the west intersection leg with curbing/median. Access to businesses on the south side of Auburn Way South would be made via a u-turn at the signalized intersection of 12th Street SE/Auburn Way South. Left turns from southbound M Street SE to eastbound Auburn Way South would be allowed from the far west lane, creating three lanes available for this movement. Eastbound 17th Street SE to eastbound Auburn Way South would be opened where it is currently blocked. Northbound movements from M Street SE to Auburn Way South would be restricted and M Street SE would not provide connectivity between 21st Street SE and Auburn Way South. Mark east crossing of Auburn Way South with a new crosswalk Improvements on Auburn Way South will be subject to WSDOT complete streets requirements and will require coordination and approval from WSDOT. Page 191 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES 17th St SE 17th St SE M St SEM St SEAu b u r n W a y S M S t S E Ho w a r d R d Au b u r n W a y S Au b u r n W a y S Auburn Way S/17th St SE/M St SE IntersectionsConcept Drawing Figure 1 N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Concept Drawing Page 192 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-23M ST SE & 12TH ST SEINTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: 2024 CTP Project (Modified from Previous Comp. Plan) Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity, Active Transportation Description: This project will reduce intersection delays with a new traffic signal. The project will also construct a separated trail along the east side of M Street SE between 12th Street SE and 8th Street SE to address active transportation level of service requirements. PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 1,200,000 Right of Way $ 1,350,000 Construction $ 2,100,000 Total $ 4,650,000 VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Fails Fails 2044 Future Fails Fails 18 164 A U B U R N W A Y S 12TH ST SE 17TH ST SE M ST SEA ST SEHOWAR D R DSE RSTSE6TH ST SE F ST SE23 M St SE9th St SE12th St SEM St SE N.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.M St SE Corridor (9th St SE - 12th St SE)Concept Drawing (2 of 2)Figure 1M St SE9th St SE12th St SEM St SE N.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.M St SE Corridor (9th St SE - 12th St SE)Concept Drawing (2 of 2)Figure 1Concept Drawing MatchlineMatchlinePage 193 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-24M ST SE & 29TH ST SEINTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS Project Origin: R St SE Corridor Study (2020) Primary Needs: Active Transportation/Safety/ Vehicle Capacity Description: This project will reduce vehicle delays, improve operations and safety, and provide improved access for bikes and pedestrians through the intersection through construction of a single lane roundabout to replace the current all-way stop control.RSTSEM ST SEF ST SE29TH ST SE RIVERWALKDRSEA ST SEH O WA R D R D S E 24 PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 900,000 Right of Way $ 125,000 Construction $ 1,900,000 Total $ 2,925,000 29th Street SE M Street SE29th Street SE & M Street SERoundabout Concept Design 1:40 CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Concept Drawing Page 194 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES Project Origin: BNSF Railway and A Street SE Crossing Study (2015), 2024 CTP Project Primary Needs: Vehicle LOS/Mode Shift/Active Transportation/Safety Description: This project will reduce intersection delays at the intersections of C St SW & Ellingson Rd/41st St SE, A St SE & Ellingson Rd/41st St SE, and at SE & 44th St SE (private road). The project will provide active transportation facilities that support mode shift and improved vehicle and active transportation safety. The improvements would likely be implemented with multiple projects implemented over time as funding is available. COMP-25A ST SE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS (37TH ST SE - WHITE RIVER BRIDGE)M ST SEA ST SE37TH ST SE 41ST ST SE ORAVETZRDSEC ST SW25 PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Phase 1Planning & Engineering/Design $ 2,940,000 Right of Way $ 1,750,000 Construction $ 15,250,000 Phase 1 Total $ 19,940,000 Phase 2Planning & Engineering/Design $ 600,000 Right of Way $ 225,000 Construction $ 1,200,000 Phase 2 Total $ 2,025,000 Project Total $ 21,965,000 Phase 1 (BNSF Railway and A Street SE Crossing) 1a New intersection with traffic signal and pedestrian and bike trail crossing on A Street SE just north of White River Bridge. White River Estates, and commercial properties along the east side of A Street SE between 41st Street SE and the new intersection will utilize this intersection for full access. 1b Construction of a pedestrian/bike tunnel under the BNSF Railway tracks that provides connectivity between the west side of A Street SE and Skinner Road. Extension of the separated trail on Skinner Road to connect to the tunnel crossing. Improvements between the White River Trail and the new intersection at the north end of the White River Bridge on the east side of A Street SE to created separated/buffered trail connection. Phase 2 (Access Management & A Street SE Intersection Improvements at 41st Street SE and 37th Street SE) 2a Space for vehicle u-turns for both directions on A Street SE will be provided at all signalized intersections and medians will be installed to restrict left turns in/out of adjacent driveways and 44th Street SE. 2b A second left turn lane from northbound A Street SE to westbound Ellingson Road/41st Street SE will be added. 2c A second dedicated right turn lane from eastbound Ellingson Road/41st Street SE will be added and there will be a separated dedicated eastbound through lane. 2d Smart signage will be installed on Ellingson Road/41st Street SE to allow two westbound movements through the intersection of C Street SW during some times and one westbound through and one right turn only (to northbound C Street SW) during other times. Re-build sidewalks on Ellingson Road/41st Street SE between C Street SW and A Street SE to provide maximum width possible as constrained by the BNSF bridge and mark the crosswalk/replace curb ramps on south leg of intersection of A Street SE and Ellingson Road/41st Street SE. Key project improvements and potential sequencing/phasing are: Page 195 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES 44th St SEA St SE A St SE A St SERiver Dr. Connection (NEW)Skinner Rd Skinner Rd2nd Ave NE1st Ave EPHASE 1 MatchlinePage 196 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES Ellingson Rd41st St SEA St SE A St SE A St SE 37th St SERemove/Relocate Existing DrivewayConcept Drawing PHASE 2 MatchlinePage 197 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-26A ST SE & 12TH ST SEINTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 500,000 Right of Way $ 25,000 Construction $ 900,000 Total $ 1,425,000 Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the replacement of the stop control with construction of a new traffic signal. VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Meets 2044 Future Fails Fails 164 A U B U R N W A Y S 12TH ST SE 17TH ST SE M ST SEMARKET ST SWA ST SE8TH ST SW 15TH ST SW 6TH ST SE INDUSTRY DR SWF ST SEC ST SWPERIMETER RD SW26 12th Street SEA Street SEN.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. A St SE & 12th St SE Intersection Concept Concept Drawing Page 198 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-27A ST SE & 21ST ST SEINTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 600,000 Right of Way $ 125,000 Construction $ 1,200,000 Total $ 1,925,000 Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the replacement of the stop control with construction of a new traffic signal. Improvements may also include widening for a northbound u-turn to support access management along the corridor. VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Meets Meets 2044 Future Fails Fails 16417TH ST SE A ST SEF ST SEM ST SE21ST ST SE PERIMETER RD SWC ST SW27 21st Street SEA Street SEN.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED.A St SE & 21st St SESignal ConceptConcept Drawing Page 199 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN | 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN | PROJECT SUMMARIES COMP-28 LAKELAND HILLS WAY SE & ORAVETZ RD SE CORRIDOR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE COST ESTIMATE Planning & Engineering/ Design $ 900,000 Right of Way $ 10,000 Construction $ 1,700,000 Total $ 2,610,000 Project Origin: New 2024 CTP Project Primary Need: Vehicle Capacity Description: Intersection delays will be reduced through the replacement of the stop control with construction of a new traffic signal. VEHICLE LOS WITHOUT PROJECT AM PM 2024 Existing Fails Meets 2044 Future Fails MeetsEVERGREEN WAY SEORAVETZRDSEMILLPONDDRSELAKEL ANDH IL L S WA Y SEASTSE28 © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS Lakeland Hills Way SEOravetz Road SELakeland Hills Way SEOravetz Road SELakeland Hills Way SE and Oravetz Road SESignal & Corridor Concept N.T.S. CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Concept Drawing Page 200 of 435 STREET FROM TO EXISTING FACILITY MINIMUM FACILITY REQUIRED TO MEET LTS STANDARD APPROACH Lakeland Hills Way Lake Tapps Parkway 69th Street SE Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Sign bike trail through Sunset Park. I St NE 45th St NE 42nd Pl. NE Class III Bikeway Class I Bikeway Build trail on East side, RRFB at trail crossing. I St NE 42nd PL. NE 37th St NE Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Change network class to auxiliary. Build out bike lanes. C St NE 42nd St NE 30th St NE Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway North of 37th, remove TWFTL add bike lanes; south of 37th re-build pavement, add bike lanes. 37th St NE I St NE AWN Class III Bikeway Class III Bikeway w/ Pavement Marking Re-stripe to include bike lanes and remove parking on north side. 37th St NE/NW AWN Between Emerald Downs Dr & I Class III Bikeway Class I Bikeway Build separated trail on north side, re-strip to narrow lanes to 11 to 12 feet wide. AWN 37th St NE 35th St NE Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Remove bike network designation, remove bike lane designation on 35th between AWN and I Street. 8th St NE Harvey Rd NE R St NE Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Re-channelize to include bike lanes. Potential widening at some locations. 8th St NE R St NE 8th St Bridge Class III Bikeway Class I Bikeway Construct separated trail along side of roadway. 8th St Bridge Class III Bikeway Class I Bikeway Widen bridge or construct adjacent active transportation bridge. Construction separated trail. SE 320th St 8th St Bridge 104th Ave SE Class III Bikeway Class I Bikeway Re-channelize and widen to provide separated trail. Lea Hill Rd SE 104th Ave SE 112th Ave SE Class III Bikeway Class I Bikeway Trail along east side of road, bike lane along west side of road - See Lea Hill Corridor Study. SE 312th St 112th Ave SE 116th Ave SE Class III Bikeway Class I Bikeway Trail along east side of road, bike lane along west side of road - See Lea Hill Corridor Study. SE 312th St 116th Ave SE 124th Ave SE Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Re-Channelize and Widen to Provide bike lanes. 124th Ave SE SE 284th St SE 288th St Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Widen to Minor Arterial Standards w/bike lanes. 124th Ave SE SE 304th St SE 307th Pl Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Widen to Minor Arterial Standards w/bike lanes. R St NE 8th St NE E Main St Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Re-Stripe to include bike lanes. LIST OF BIKE IMPROVEMENTS TO ENCOURAGE MODE SHIFT Existing and proposed bike facilities are mapped at https://auburn.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/sidebar/index. html?appid=0d4f2a3eee6d4a54bb284c3d09142b62 (Continued on next page) PAGE 146 PROJECT SUMMARIES APPENDIX A B C D E Page 201 of 435 STREET FROM TO EXISTING FACILITY MINIMUM FACILITY REQUIRED TO MEET LTS STANDARD APPROACH 4th St NE AWN H St NE Class III Bikeway Class III Bikeway w/ Pavement Marking Add bike lanes. 4th St NE H St NE J St NE Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Add bike lanes. 4th St NE J St NE M St NE Class III Bikeway Class III Bikeway w/ Pavement Marking Add bike lanes. E Main St E St NE Pike St SE Class III Bikeway w/ Pavement Class II Bikeway Bulb-outs/traffic calming/speed reduction to 25mph/sharrows signage (R to D). 4th St SE F St SE M St SE Class III Bikeway Class III Bikeway w/ Pavement Marking Install sharrows/signage. 12th St SE J St SE L St SE Class III Bikeway Class III Bikeway w/ Pavement Marking Bikes lanes on 12th from AWN to M Street SE. 15th St SW C St SE Perimeter Rd Class II Bikeway (Both Sides)Class I Bikeway Construct separated trail along south side. 15th St SE Perimeter Rd Interurban Trail Class III Bikeway Class I Bikeway Construct separated trail along south side. 17th St SE B St SE F St SE Class II Bikeway (Both Sides)Class I Bikeway Bulb-outs/traffic calming/speed reduction to 30mph/sharrows signage (R to D). 21st St SE F St SE R St SE Class II Bikeway (Both Sides)Class I Bikeway Bulb-outs/traffic calming/speed reduction to 30mph/sharrows signage (R to D). R St SE 21st St SE Between 22nd St SE & 23rd St S Class II Bikeway (Both Sides)Class I Bikeway Separated trail along east side of roadway. CP2116. 37th St SE A St SE M St SE Class III Bikeway Class III Bikeway w/ Pavement Marking Re-stripe to include bike lanes. A St SE 41st St SE 44th St SE Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Separated trail along east side of roadway. A St SE 44th St SE COA Boundary Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway w/Buffer Separated trail along east side of roadway. A St SE COA Boundary South of Lakeland Hills Way SE Class III Bikeway Class I Bikeway Separated trail along east side of roadway. CP2331. Lakeland Hills Way A St SE Oravetz Pl SE Class III Bikeway Class II Bikeway Re-stripe to include bike lanes. R St SE Between 25th St SE & 26th White River Bridge Class II Bikeway (Both Sides)Class I Bikeway Separated trail along east side of roadway. CP2116. Lakeland Hills Way Lake Tapps Parkway Between Lake Tapps & 15th St Class III Bikeway Class III Bikeway w/ Pavement Marking Install sharrows/signage. Lake Tapps Pkwy SE Lakeland Hills Way SE Just east of Lakeland Hills Class III Bikeway Class I Bikeway Construct separated trail along north side of roadway. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 147 Page 202 of 435 PAGE 148 PROJECT SUMMARIES APPENDIX A B C D E This page left intentionally blank Page 203 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 149 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN IN THIS APPENDIX GMA Requirements Checklist PSRC Requirements Checklist APPENDIX C Plan Checklists Page 204 of 435 GMA REQUIREMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S) 1. An inventory of air, water, and ground transportation facilities and services, including transit alignments, state- owned transportation facilities, and general aviation airports. • Chapter 2 • Appendix A 2. Adopted multimodal levels of service (LOS) standards for all arterials, transit routes and highways. • Chapter 2 3. Identification of specific actions to bring locally-owned transportation facilities and services to established multimodal LOS. • Chapter 2 • Appendix B 4. A forecast of traffic for at least 10 years including land use assumptions used in estimating travel. • Chapter 2 5. A projection of state and local system needs to meet current and future demand. • Chapter 2 • Appendix B 6. A pedestrian and bicycle component to include collaborative efforts to identify and designate planned improvements for pedestrian and bicycle facilities and corridors that address and encourage enhanced community access and promote healthy lifestyles. • Chapter 2, Section 2.3 7. A description of any existing and planned transportation demand management (TDM) strategies, such as HOV lanes or subsidy programs, parking policies, etc. • Chapter 4, Goal 8 8. An analysis of future funding capability to judge needs against probable funding resources. • Chapter 6, Section 6.1 9. A multi-year financing plan based on needs identified in the comprehensive plan, the appropriate parts of which serve as the basis for the 6-year street, road or transit program. • Chapter 6, Section 6.1 10. If probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs: a discussion of how additional funds will be raised, or how land use assumptions will be reassessed to ensure that LOS standards will be met. • Chapter 6, Section 6.4 (Continued on next page) PAGE 150 PLAN CHECKLISTS APPENDIX A B C D E GMA REQUIREMENTS CHECKLIST To comply with the Growth Management Act requirements, the Comprehensive Transportation Plan will include the following elements: Page 205 of 435 GMA REQUIREMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S) 11. A description of intergovernmental coordination efforts, including an assessment of the impacts of the transportation plan and land use assumptions on the transportation systems of adjacent jurisdictions and how it is consistent with the regional transportation plan. • Chapter 1, Section 1.5 12. A plan for public participation in the comprehensive planning process. • Chapter 1, Section 1.3 • Appendix D 13. A plan to monitor how well comprehensive plan policies, development regulations, and other implementation techniques are achieving the plan’s goals and the goals of the GMA. • Chapter 7 14. Considerations for preserving property rights with an evaluation of regulatory or administrative actions to ensure they do not result in unconstitutional taking of private property. • Chapter 4, Goal 9, Policy TR9-3 15. Requirement that local governments permit development only if adequate multimodal transportation facilities exist, or can be guaranteed to be available within six years, to support new development. The GMA requires each local jurisdiction to identify facility and service needs based on LOS standards. Auburn ensures that future development will not cause the system’s performance to fall below the adopted LOS standard by doing one or a combination of the following: limiting development, requiring appropriate mitigation, or changing the adopted standard. • Chapter 4, Goal 7 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 151 Page 206 of 435 PSRC REQUIREMENTS CHECKLIST PSRC requires that the plan promotes a sustainable, equitable, affordable, safe, and efficient multimodal transportation system, with specific emphasis on an integrated regional transit network that supports the Regional Growth Strategy and promotes vitality of the economy, environment, and health. PSRC REQUIREMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S) Implement the Regional Transportation Plan 1. Promote the development of an efficient, multimodal transportation system that supports the Regional Growth Strategy in collaboration with other jurisdictions and agencies (MPP-T-7) • Chapter 4, Goal 4, Policy TR4-2 2. Work to develop and operate a safe and convenient system for all users and the movement of freight and goods (MPP-T-11) • Chapter 4, Goal 5, Policy TR5-1-4 3. Reduce the need for new capital improvements through investments in operations, pricing programs, demand management strategies, and system management activities that improve the efficiency of the current system (RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(vi), MPP-T-3) • Chapter 4, Goal 8, Policy TR8-3 4. Emphasize transportation investments that provide alternatives to single occupancy vehicle travel, increase travel options, especially to and within centers, and support compact, pedestrian- and transit-oriented densities and development (MPP-T-12-13, T-15) • Chapter 4, Goal 8, Policy TR8-4 5. Increase the resilience of the transportation system and support security and emergency management (MPP-T-31) • Chapter 4, Goal 5, Policy TR5-2-15 6. Prepare for changes in transportation technologies and mobility patterns (MPP-T-33-34) • Chapter 4, Goal 10, Policy TR10-15 Support the Regional Growth Strategy 7. Focus system improvements to connect centers and support existing and planned development as allocated by the Regional Growth Strategy (MPP-RC-7-9, T-7-8, T-15) • Chapter 4, Goal 1, Policy TR1-4 8. Prioritize multimodal investments in centers and high- capacity station areas (MPP-RC-7-10, T-12-13,T-19) • Chapter 2, Section 2.4.1 • Chapter 4, Goal 1, 5, and 6, Policies TR1-3 and TR1-4; TR5- 1-1; TR6-3-1 and TR6-3-2 (Continued on next page) PAGE 152 PLAN CHECKLISTS APPENDIX A B C D E Page 207 of 435 (Continued on next page) PSRC REQUIREMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S) Support the Regional Growth StrategySupport the Regional Growth Strategy 9. Promote the design of transportation facilities that support local and regional growth centers and high-capacity transit station areas and fit the community in which they are located (MPP-T-19-21) • Chapter 2, Section 2.4 • Chapter 4, Goal 5, Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (Transit) • Chapter 4, Goal 6, MMLOS Standards Policies (Transit) 10. Support a safe and welcoming environment for walking and bicycling (MPP-DP-15) • Chapter 4, Goal 5 (page 62-66) 11. Include a pedestrian and bicycle component and collaborative efforts to identify planned improvements for pedestrian and bicycle facilities and corridors (RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(vii)) • Chapter 2, Section 2.3 12. Improve local street patterns and design to promote walking and biking (MPP-T-16-17) • Chapter 4, Goal 5 13. Support alternatives to driving alone, including walking, biking, and transit use, through design of local streets, land use development tools, and other practices (MPP-T-16-18) • Chapter 4, Goal 8, Policy TR8-4 Support People 14. Identify racial and social equity as a core objective when planning and implementing transportation improvements, programs, and services (MPP-T-9) • Chapter 4, Goal 2 15. Ensure mobility choices for people with special needs (MPP-T-10) • Chapter 4, Goal 2 Support the EconomySupport the Economy 16. Recognize the critical role of safe, reliable, and efficient movement of people and goods (MPP-Ec-6,T-1, T-23) • Chapter 4, Goal 5, Policy TR5-1-4 17. Identify and support key facilities and improvements that connect the region to major transportation hubs such as ports, airports, and designated freight routes (MPP-T-24-25) • Appendix A 18. Promote coordination with providers of major regional infrastructure, such as freight rail and commercial aviation (MPP-Ec-4-5, T-27-28) • Chapter 4, Goal 5, Multimodal Accessible Network Policies and Supporting Actions (Freight, Air Transportation) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 153 Page 208 of 435 PSRC REQUIREMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S) Protect the Environment Protect the Environment 19. Promote clean transportation programs and facilities, including actions to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from transportation (MPP-CC-3, CC-12, T-29- 30) • Chapter 4, Goal 4, Policy TR4-2 20. Reduce stormwater pollution from transportation facilities and improve fish passage (MPP-T-32) • Chapter 4, Goal 4, Policy TR4-3 21. Incorporate environmental factors into transportation decision-making, including attention to human health and safety (MPP-DP-44, T-4-5, T-29-32) • Chapter 4, Goal 4, Supporting Actions Provide Facilities inventories and identify Service Needs 22. Include mapped inventories for each element of the transportation system, including roadways, transit, cycling, walking, freight, airports, and ferries (RCW 36.70A.070, RCW 36.70A.108, MPP-T-7,T-15-17) • Appendix A 23. Include state facilities and reflect related (regional/ state) level-of-service standards (RCW 36.70A.070, RCW 36.70A.108) • Chapter 2, Section 2.2 24. Develop a comprehensive concurrency program that addresses level-of-service standards for multimodal types of transportation and include implementation strategies (RCW 36.70A.070, RCW 36.70A.108, MPP-DP-52-54) • Chapter 4, Goal 7 25. Provide travel demand forecasts and identify state and local system projects, programs, and management necessary to meet current and future demands and to improve safety and human health (RCW 36.70A.070, MPP-T-4-5) • Chapter 2, Section 2.2.8 26. Identify maintenance and system preservation projects and programs necessary to maintain the ability of the transportation system to provide safe, efficient, and reliable movement of people, goods, and services (RCW 36.70A.070, MPP-T-1-2, T-4) • Chapter 4, Goal 10 • Chapter 6 (Continued on next page) PAGE 154 PLAN CHECKLISTS APPENDIX A B C D E Page 209 of 435 PSRC REQUIREMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S) Finance Transportation Investments 27. Identify stable and predictable funding sources for maintaining and preserving existing transportation facilities and services (MPP-RC-11-12, T-6) • Chapter 6, Section 6.3 28. Pursue alternative transportation financing methods, such as user fees, tolls, and other pricing mechanisms (MPP-T-6) • Chapter 6, Section 6.5 29. Include a 20-year financing plan, as well as an analysis of funding capability for all transportation modes (RCW 36.70A.070(3), RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iv), WAC 365-196-415, WAC 365-196-430, MPP-RC-11-12, T-6, T-15) • Chapter 6, Section 6.1 30. Include a reassessment strategy to address the event of a funding shortfall (RCW 36.70A.070(3), RCW 36.70A.070(6) (a)(iv), WAC 365-196-415, WAC 365-196-430, MPP-RC-11- 12,T-6) • Chapter 6, Section 6.4 Address Land Uses Adjacent to Airports 31. Airport-adjacent communities: Identify and address any airports within or adjacent to the jurisdiction (RCW 36.70.547, 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(A), MPP-DP-48) • Chapter 2, Section 2.5 32. Describe existing and planned uses near the airport, as well as policies and regulations that discourage incompatible uses (RCW 36.70.547, 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(A), MPP-DP-48) • Existing and planned uses are not described. However, Chapter 4, Goal 5, lists an action under Actions to Support Multimodal Accessible Network Goal and Policies (Air Transportation) that calls the agency to do so 33. Promote coordinated planning and effective management to optimize the region’s aviation system in a manner that minimizes health, air quality, and noise impacts to communities, including historically marginalized communities (MPP-T-28) • Chapter 4, Goal 5, Multimodal Accessible Network Policies (Air Transportation) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 155 Page 210 of 435 PAGE 156 PLAN CHECKLISTS APPENDIX A B C D E Page 211 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 157 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IN THIS APPENDIX Public Outreach APPENDIX D Outreach Page 212 of 435 PUBLIC OUTREACH For the 2024 update to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan (Plan), City staff engaged with the public in different ways, with the intent to encourage participation and receive input from the public to ensure that the needs of the community are addressed in the planning process. Plan Webpage A webpage was created with key information regarding the plan, and with a location specific survey where people could show on a map the type of concern they have, as well as three questions to help guide our planning process. The survey questions were translated into the four most used languages in Auburn, after English, which are, as of 2023, Spanish, Ukrainian, Russian, and Tagalog. Visit the Comprehensive Transportation Plan Website Figure 15. Plan Website Homepage PAGE 158 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 213 of 435 Figure 16. Online Survey - Location Specific Feedback 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 159 Page 214 of 435 Public Comments from the Website/Online Survey Comments collected through the plan website/online survey are summarized in the table below: GENERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT TRANSPORTATION IN AUBURN QUESTION RESPONDENT #1 RESPONDENT #2 RESPONDENT #3 1. Do you have any suggestions on how we can encourage more people to walk, ride a bike, or take a bus instead of driving a car? I think the best thing to do is to expand the bicycle route network. The current network of bike lanes and trails do not take people to where they want to go. The best way to get people out of their cars is to make cycling an attractive option, and making dedicated space for them will allow for that. Ideally, bike lanes should be protected bike lanes; cyclists are not going to feel safe if there is nothing physically protecting them from being run over by cars! In terms of walking, many sidewalks are currently too narrow and/or do not provide enough protection from cars. We could also benefit from more protected pedestrian/ bicycle crossings (e.g., HAWK signals). Also consider making some streets (perhaps downtown) pedestrian-only; taking cars off of a street makes it a much more attractive place for people to gather and shop. For buses, increasing service frequencies and expanding service hours (e.g., adding off-peak service to the 497) is a good way to attract more riders. Safety. Safety. Safety. Nonexistent or disconnected infrastructure makes pedestrians and bicyclists feel unsafe. Aggressive inattentive drivers are everywhere and street widths are designed for freeway speeds. My elementary school children are threatened by drivers and nearly run over by right and left turning drivers daily. No amount of victim blaming will fix that. Intersections near schools need pedestrian first design principles like raised crosswalks and intersections and narrow streets to force drivers to slow. You need a mix of advertising options and upkeep for what you have. Moved down here going on 2 years and there are places that are not safe to walk due to crime, etc. Other places like between Les Groves and M tend to have lots of debris piled up. (For example under the overpass there's large piles of dirt and grass growing and it's clear there's very poor drainage and upkeep in the area). Businesses downtown occasionally block sidewalks with signage etc., making it difficult for strollers or mobility issues. Overall need a mix of upkeep so people can utilize/ access them and then making sure you are giving them places to go. (Continued on next page) PAGE 160 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 215 of 435 GENERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT TRANSPORTATION IN AUBURN QUESTION RESPONDENT #1 RESPONDENT #2 RESPONDENT #3 2. Do you have any suggestions on how we make sure we are providing transportation facilities in an equitable way and that we are considering the needs of the entire community, including typically underserved and disadvantaged groups? Expanding pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure to serve everyone's destinations is the best way to provide equitable transportation. Cars are expensive to purchase and maintain; living without one should be a feasible option. Expanding pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure to serve everyone's destinations is the best way to provide equitable transportation. Cars are expensive to purchase and maintain; living without one should be a feasible option. More education on existing options, maybe a more consistent booth at the farmers market and/or articles in the paper and making it clear where to flag needs or provide suggestions. Community Facebook groups in the area (and Nextdoor) seem fairly active so a social media education campaign could help spread the word more than just an add in the Auburn reporter (which by the way was misleading ad. I thought it was for city wide feedback but all these questions are transportation specific). 3. Do you have suggestions on how we should prioritize limited funding for the wide range of transportation needs throughout the City? I think non-motorized projects should be prioritized over most projects that serve private cars. It's cheaper to add new bike lanes than it is to add new car lanes. And if we can get enough people out of their cars, we won't even need to expand road capacity! All road repaving effort must add infrastructure for unrepresented road users like bicycles. Per a comprehensive plan for a connected network. Change zoning to create 15 minute neighborhoods. 4. Do you have any other comments about transportation in Auburn? All road repaving effort must add infrastructure for unrepresented road users like bicycles. Per a comprehensive plan for a connected network. Change zoning to create 15 minute neighborhoods. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 161 Page 216 of 435 PAGE 162 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E This page left intentionally blank Page 217 of 435 COMMENTS ON THE INTERACTIVE MAP COMMENT CATEGORY PIN/LOCATION Perhaps a traffic light at A St SE & 21st St SE? This seems like a fairly busy intersection and I see a lot of people making somewhat dangerous turns. A St SE & 21st St SE Southbound C Street SW can get very congested at Ellingson Road during peak hours. Maybe consider adding an additional southbound left turn lane. Though, due to capacity constraints, this may require careful coordination of the C Street and A Street signals. C St SE & Ellingson Rd Consider bike lanes on Evergreen Way SE! The road lanes are too narrow to fit a bike and car simultaneously, and the sidewalk is too narrow to comfortably fit a bike and pedestrian simultaneously. I used to bike on this road frequently as part of my commute to school, and this caused problems for me. Evergreen Way SE On Kersey Way SE between Stuck River Dr and 50th St SE, there is a mismatch between the design speed of the road and the posted speed limit. Most of the vehicles on the road travel significantly faster than the posted speed limit of 35 mph, because the geometry and environment of the road puts the comfortable driving speed much higher. This should be fixed by either raising the speed limit to reflect the actual speed of traffic, or by adding traffic calming measures to make drivers slow down. Kersey Way SE The portion of Kersey Way SE between 50th St SE and the White River currently lacks non-motorized access. There should be a path for pedestrians and cyclists running parallel to this road on its west side. As someone who lives near 50th St, this would make it much more convenient for me to bike to school or downtown. Kersey Way SE The sidewalks are poor quality and in some places overgrown. Makes it difficult for anyone handicapper, strollers etc. to get around. There are several elderly residents on this road so would be nice to see some meaningful repair work done, not some more griding that literally did nothing to improve conditions. The street was skipped over for paving as part of the larger paving project in the area, which made sense but the sidewalks are a big miss for the area and promoting walkability. L St SE between E Main St & 2nd St SE Active Transportation (Non-motorized, Walking or Biking)General Traffic Issues Safety 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 163 Page 218 of 435 COMMENTS ON THE INTERACTIVE MAP COMMENT CATEGORY PIN/LOCATION Everyday I cross this intersection; everyday drivers fail to yield to pedestrians. Particularly drivers waiting to turn left ignore children AND adults in the crosswalks. Drivers even do this with the crossing guard waiving their flag! Several changes would make this intersection safer. Time the light to treat pedestrians with respect. Give us the time to cross the street without fear of drivers by keeping all lights red and making right turn on red illegal and left turn only on green arrow. For human behavior it seems best to make this 24 hour policy instead of only before and after school hours. That would be a big improvement without much expense. What is really appropriate for a pedestrian area like this is a traffic circle with raised crosswalks to return the right-of-way to pedestrian and bicycle modes. Lakeland Hills Way SE & Evergreen Way SE Because of high volumes of vehicular and pedestrian traffic, it may be wise to consider prohibiting right turns on red at the Lake Tapps Pkwy/Lakeland Hills Way intersection to improve safety. Lakeland Hills Way SE & Lake Tapps Pkway E The all-way stop at 29th St SE and M St SE can sometimes get congested or confusing. Maybe consider installing a roundabout instead, to improve safety and traffic flow. I'm no traffic engineer, but traffic patterns seem to be well-suited for a roundabout. M St SE & 29th St SE Maybe replace the all-way stop at 37th St SE and M St SE with a roundabout. Most people are making the same turn; right onto westbound 37th, or left onto northbound M. A roundabout would allow both of these movements to occur simultaneously without everyone having to stop. M St SE & 37th St SE The intersection of Sumner-Tapps Hwy E and 16th St E seems like a good place for a roundabout. From what I can tell, the traffic patterns here are more sporadic, making it a good fit for a roundabout to improve traffic flow and safety. Though, I understand that this intersection probably isn't a high priority for the city. Sumner Tapps Hwy E & 16th St E Active Transportation (Non-motorized, Walking or Biking)General Traffic Issues Safety PAGE 164 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 219 of 435 Comprehensive Plan Open House Organized by the Community Development Department, this event was intended to inform the community about the update to the City’s Comprehensive Plan, on April 25, 2023 from 4 pm to 7 pm, at Washington Elementary School. Transportation Staff was present to share information and engage with attendees on the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, which is the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. What is a Comprehensive Plan? The City of Auburn’s Comprehensive Plan update will provide a general vision for the future of the community and a roadmap for the next twenty years. It outlines what the community wants to look like moving forward towards 2044, and how to make that collective vision a reality. The Plan also addresses regional growth requirements provided by Puget Sound Regional Council. This is a “Comprehensive” Plan, meaning it is wide ranging and inclusive, considering a multitude of topics, elements, community input, data and history. Whether you live, work or play in Auburn, now is your time to give your input. Ultimately, you will help shape the goals of the plan which will translate to policies to reach those goals. By having a plan in place, it provides a guideline to assure future land use, housing, transportation, utilities, and climate action decisions reflect the recognized vision for the community, as identified through outreach during the planning process. Why is 20-year planning important? The City of Auburn is embarking on its periodic update of the Comprehensive Plan – Imagine Auburn – required to be adopted in 2024. Under the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) Chapter 36.70A RCW, cities and counties in Washington are required to adopt and periodically update their comprehensive plans every 8 years, with all cities in King, Pierce, Snohomish, and Kitsap counties due in 2024. speakupauburn.org/comprehensive-plan Imagine Auburn Comprehensive Plan 2044 A Comprehensive Plan is: Addresses all the elements or components felt to be important in affecting the physical, economic and social concerns of the City. COMPREHENSIVE Presents a long- term vision for the community. LONG RANGE Should evolve through time through review and updating. Auburn has an annual review process to amend the Comprehensive Plan. NON-STAGNANT The Comprehensive Plan is not an ordinance, but directly informs decisions in land use codes, development patterns, and prioritization of city funds. NOT A ZONINGORDINANCEProvides general guidance and direction for City growth and development. GENERALIZED Предоставляются услуги переводчиков Servicios de traducción disponibles Available ang mga serbisyo sa pagsasalin Доступні послуги перекладачів Translation services available Figure 17. Open House Photos 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 165 Page 220 of 435 Other Events Staff hosted a celebration station on Bike Everywhere Day, on the Interurban Trail at the West Main Street entrance to encourage cyclist and active transportation in Auburn, as an alternative to driving, as part of the CTR / TDM work. At the same time, staff took advantage of this event to also engage with cyclists on the plan update and the survey. Staff displayed information at the Kids’ Day event on June 23, 2023, to let the community know about the plan, and share information about the survey. Staff reserved a booth and engaged with the community at the Auburn Farmer’s Market on July 23, 2023, from 10 am to 3 pm. Staff reserved a booth and engaged with the community at the Church of Nazarene, who was hosting a resource fair for families with free backpacks and school supplies in partnership with the Auburn Kiwanis on August 5, 2023, from 11 am to 2 pm. Figure 18. Other Outreach Event Photos Bike Everywhere Day Farmer's Market Kids' Day PAGE 166 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 221 of 435 Church of Nazarene Kiwanis Event 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 167 Page 222 of 435 Public Comments from Outreach Events Comments collected at all of our public outreach events are summarized in the table below and categorized by type: COMMENT CONTEXT/ CLARIFICATION COMMENT TYPE Open House (April 5, 2023) 1. Dedicated and protected bike lanes needed. It's hard to feel safe if the bike lanes are not protected, as there are A LOT of distracted and bad drivers. Comment was Auburn in general, not related to one specific location. 2. Need street lights, especially brighter LED lights as it's hard to see people at night. Comment referring to neighborhood downtown, to the west of the BNSF tracks, south of Main St. 3. Is getting an Amtrak service an option for the future? 4. Limited ways to cross the train tracks, which increases travel time to downtown from downtown Referring the access from the west side of the tracks to the core downtown area. 5. Need to improve safety and the perception of safety downtown. 6. Need to better enforce traffic laws and improve bike and pedestrian visibility at intersections downtown. 7. The 4-way stop by Zola's (Main St /D St) lacks compliance and there is a concern about pedestrian safety when crossing. 8. Bus shelters are not welcoming. We need shelters and seating to encourage riders, and need to address safety at bus stops, such as transient camps and unwanted activity taking place in bus shelters. 9. The interurban trail is not welcoming anymore; there is trash and homeless camps 10. There is lots of trash downtown - garbage bins were removed and people don’t have places to throw away trash, so it’s all over the sidewalks. This makes the sidewalk less appealing and less comfortable to walk downtown. 11. Bathrooms are closed in downtown parks. It is not equitable when other parks out of downtown have access to bathrooms, but not downtown residents and families. Pedestrian Bicycle Transit Safety Parks (Continued on next page) PAGE 168 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 223 of 435 COMMENT CONTEXT/ CLARIFICATION COMMENT TYPE Bike Day (May 19, 2023) 1. The Interurban trail needs to be repaved. 2. Accessing the Interurban Trail from the grocery Outlet area is difficult. 3. Suggestion to replicate event from Seattle, where 8 miles of Lake Washington Boulevard are closed to traffic on Sundays for bicycles to ride. Something like this would be great in Auburn. 4. Corner radius in ADA compliant facilities should also accommodate bike turning radius, as sharp corners are challenging for bikes 5. Streets need to be bicycle friendly in general. Bike lanes with RPMs, rumble strips, or delineators would make it much more comfortable for cyclists. Solid curb is not ideal, however, as it presents a challenge to get out of the bike lane. 6. Bike lanes need to be cleaned regularly, and also plowed when there is snow. 7. Suggestion to extend the Interurban trail to Tacoma. 8. Auburn needs more protected bike lanes along large or busy roads. 9. Suggestion to look at Denver's bike network - they are a great model with a good bike network that connects Denver to any surrounding suburbs. The network is continuous, comfortable, and safe. 10. It would be great to connect the Green River Trail to the Interurban Trail. Pedestrian Bicycle Transit Safety Parks (Continued on next page) Bike Day 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 169 Page 224 of 435 COMMENT CONTEXT/ CLARIFICATION COMMENT TYPE Bike Everywhere Day Celebration Station (May 17, 2024) 1. There needs to be a connection between the Interurban Trail and the Sumner Link Trail. 2. The trail condition on the Interurban Trail needs improvements, particularly the southern portion of the Interurban. Comment is not specific to the portion of the Interurban in Auburn, but also pertains to portions of the trail outside of Auburn 3. The pavement quality of the Interurban Trail is poor, particularly from W Main St to 15th St SW 4. There should be restroom facilities on the Interurban Trail. 5. There needs to be a better bicycle connection between Auburn and Federal Way 6. There needs to be better pedestrian facilities on W Valley Hwy 7. There is no bus connection between W Valley Hwy and Auburn Station. People who work along W Valley Hwy have to walk to Auburn Station to get the train. 8. There should be water fountains along the Interurban Trail 9. Make sure there are traffic calming features and RRFBs at trail crossings Pedestrian Bicycle Transit Safety Parks (Continued on next page) Senior Center Tabling (May 21, 2024) 1. There is a safety concern for pedestrians when walking under Hwy 18; there are many homeless people there making it feel unsafe. 2. During the winter, there is often ice near the bus stop by the downtown Safeway. Please make sure that ice is clear near bus stops. 3. There is no transit access to Mary Olsen Farm; would like a bus route that goes there. 4. Drivers often don't see pedestrians during blinking yellow left turn signals. 5. I generally have a good pedestrian experience walking around Auburn in terms of sidewalks and ramps. PAGE 170 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 225 of 435 COMMENT CONTEXT/ CLARIFICATION COMMENT TYPE Farmer's Market (July 23, 2023) 1. Need easier / more affordable way to get to airport (SeaTac). 2. Parking garage for Sounder Train gets full early, and it’s difficult to find parking to ride the train, unless arriving very early. There is no alternative parking available. Church of Nazarene One Community Kiwanis Event (August 5, 2023) 1. It is difficult for elderly residents to get around when they have mobility challenges. 2. Need to improve safety for kids to get to and from schools, parks, and around the neighborhood. 3. The Government should not tell people what to do and let people chose to drive if that is what they want. Comment related to the question "how to encourage people to walk, bike, and use transit." 4. The City needs to install more roundabouts, and replace traffic signals with roundabouts. Pedestrian Bicycle Transit Safety Parks (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 171 Page 226 of 435 COMMENT CONTEXT/ CLARIFICATION COMMENT TYPE LOCATION OMS Requests (Comments are Summarized) 1. At the intersection of M St SE & 21st St SE, there are concerns about speeding and stop sign compliance. Multiple residents have complained about crashes resulting in both injuries and property damage. They've also voiced concern about this due to it's proximity to schools. We have received 13 requests for this intersection: R41232, R41186, R39846, R39650, R39529, R39519, R39511, R39398, R39262, R38041, R37045. R36674, R34364 M St SE & 21st St SE 2. At the intersection of 112th Ave SE and SE 284th St, there have been requests about speeding and a request for a roundabout at this location to help with pedestrian safety concerns. R399390 112th Ave SE & SE 284th 3. Stop compliance concern at W St NW & Terrace Dr/S 316th St R39982 W St NW & Terrace Dr/S 316th St 4. Concern about speeding and the left turn at 124th Ave SE & SE 284th St. Requests a street light at this location. R40588 124th Ave SE & SE 284th St 5. Concern about the road condition on 37th St NW between I St NE and the Interurban Trail. Would like the condition of the road improved for bicycles. R41651 37th St NW 6. Concern about pedestrian safety at the intersection of SE 304th St and 116th Ave SE. R42770 SE 304th St & 116th Ave SE 7. Would like sidewalk along SE 304th St between 112th Ave SE and 116th Ave SE.R42772 SE 304th St between 112th Ave SE & 116th Ave SE 8. Concern about safety on Lea Hill Rd between 104th Ave SE and 112th Ave SE. Requests additional safety features, such as street lights, turtles, warning signs, etc. R42796 Lea Hill Rd between 104th Ave SE and 112th Ave SE 9. Concern about safety at the AWS & SR-18 interchange. Reports that many drivers wait too long to get into the left turn lanes, stopping abruptly in the through lanes and cutting in front of other drivers. R43047 AWS & Sr-18 Interchange Pedestrian Bicycle Transit Safety Parks (Continued on next page) PAGE 172 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 227 of 435 COMMENT CONTEXT/ CLARIFICATION COMMENT TYPE LOCATION Emails and Other Feedback (Comments are Summarized) 1. When prioritizing bike facility projects, instead of focusing only on feeding into transit and larger trails, the City should also look at destinations within the city and how cyclists get to those destinations. General 2. A St SE should have bike lanes.A St SE 3. M St SE should have its bike lane extended all the way up to Les Gove.M St SE 4. 37th St SE should have a bike lane, to complete a grid of bike lanes to make biking feasible in south Auburn. 37th St SE 5. Would like bike lanes on Auburn Way, both North and South.AWN & AWS 6. Concerned about the lack of bike lanes on Evergreen Way SE between Lakeland Hills Way & Kersey. Evergreen Way SE 7. Concern about speeding and pedestrian safety on crosswalks crossing Evergreen Way. Evergreen Way SE 8. Concern about speeding on 21st St SE near Shaughnessy Park 21st St SE east of Hemlock 9. Would like sidewalk or wider shoulder on 53rd St SE east of Kersey for better pedestrian and bicycle access. 53rd St SE east of Kersey 10. Would like speed cushions on 22nd St SE between M St SE and R St SE. Would like street to be safe enough for children to play in. 22nd St SE between M St SE & R St SE 11. Does not think the R St widening project will have any benefit General R St SE 12. Does not think the R St SE/21st St SE roundabout will have any benefit General R St SE & 21st St SE Pedestrian Bicycle Transit Safety Parks (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 173 Page 228 of 435 COMMENT CONTEXT/ CLARIFICATION COMMENT TYPE LOCATION 13. The AWS/17th St SE/M St SE intersection improvements project will create inconveniences for accessing AWS and M St NE from her neighborhood AWS/17th St SE/M St SE 14. Would like sidewalk on S 298th/65th Ave S/ S292nd, which connects 64th Ave S to W Valley Hwy. S 298th St/65th Ave S/S 292nd St 15. Would like to see a speed enforcement camera on AWS at the bottom of the hill northwest of the casino. AWS 16. Would like the White River Trail to connect to the right bank of the White River in the Pacific Right Bank Flood Protection Project, crossing A St SE and the BNSF tracks. White River Trail 17. There is a lack of bicycle crossings across AWS between D St SE and M St SE.AWS 18. There is a lack of bicycle facilities on I St NE between 40th St NE and 45th St NE I St NE between 40th St NE & 45th St NE 19. Would like a signalized (RRFB) crossing of 8th St NE at Pike St NE/Henry St NE 8th St NE & Pike St NE/ Henry St NE 20. A list of locations where signals do not detect bicycles was sent to the City.General 21. Concern about speeding on Evergreen Way SE near Lakeland Hills Elementary. Evergreen Way SE near Lakeland Hills Elementary 22. Concern about speeding and possible sight distance issues on Evergreen Way SE, particularly near 56th St SE and Bennett Ave SE. Evergreen Way SE Pedestrian Bicycle Transit Safety Parks PAGE 174 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 229 of 435 All Project Ratings PROJECT/ COMP#PROJECT NAME AVERAGE RATING NUMBER OF RATINGS NOTES N/A (General)4.00 1 20 C St NW & 3rd St NW Intersection Improvements 5.00 1 15 15th St NW & M St NW Access Management 4.00 1 3 I St NE & 37th St NE Intersection Improvements 17 S 316th S & 51st Ave S Intersection Improvements 4.00 1 6 SE 304th St & 112th Ave SE Intersection Improvements 5.00 1 7 SE 304th St & 118th Ave SE Intersection Improvements 3.00 1 26 A St SE & 12th St SE Intersection Improvements 4.50 2 2 Auburn Way N & 42nd St NE Intersection Improvements 1 Auburn Way N & 45th St NE Intersection Improvements 5 I St NE & 30th St NE Intersection Improvements 8 SE 304th St & 116th Ave SE Intersection Improvements 18 S 321st St & 44th Ave S/46th Pl S Intersection Improvements 27 A St SE & 21st St SE Intersection Improvements 4.00 1 16 S 316th St & 56th Ave S Intersection Improvements 3.00 1 28 Lakeland Hills Way SE & Oravetz Rd SE Corridor and Intersection Improvements 12 Pike St NE & 8th St NE Access Management 22 Auburn Way S, M St SE, 17th St SE Intersection Improvements 1.90 21 Ratings where either 4/5 or 1/2. No 3s 23 M St SE & 12th St SE Intersection Improvements 4.00 1 9 Lea Hill Rd Corridor Improvements (104th Ave SE - 112th Ave SE) (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 175 Page 230 of 435 PROJECT/ COMP#PROJECT NAME AVERAGE RATING NUMBER OF RATINGS NOTES 10 Auburn Way S & 6th St SE Improvements (SR 18/ SR 164 Interchange) 5.00 1 19 A St NW & 3rd St NW Improvements 5.00 1 14 10th St NE Improvements (B St NW - Auburn Way N)5.00 1 11 116th Ave SE & SE 320th St Intersection Improvements 9 Lea Hill Rd Corridor Improvements (SE 312th St from 112th Ave SE to 124th Ave SE) 5.00 1 24 M St SE & 29th St SE Intersection Improvements 21 M St SE By-Pass Rd (M St SE By-Pass & SE Auburn-Black Diamond Rd)2.77 36 14 prefer Option A; 24 prefer Option B; 5 don't like either option 21 M St SE By-Pass Rd (M St SE By-Pass & SE Auburn-Black Diamond Rd)3.54 35 14 prefer Option A; 24 prefer Option B; 5 don't like either option 3 I St Improvements (37th St NE - 45th St NE)5.00 1 13 8th St NE Improvements Project (Auburn Way N - Harvey Rd/M St NE)5.00 1 25 A St SE Projects 4.63 8 PAGE 176 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 231 of 435 RATING COMMENT 1 If you filter southbound M St SE traffic to 17th St SE, it will impact the residential area between 17th St SE and 21st St SE next to the middle school and overflow 21st St SE traffic. The right turn a car has to make from M St SE onto 17th St SE is what slows traffic going through the lights! There needs to be a light at M St SE and 21st St SE. Also, people going north from this end of town, who normally take M St SE will have to take R St SE and you also need a traffic light at R St SE and 21st St SE to handle that. During the evening rush hour, it's very difficult to get on R St going north to wind around, get on Auburn Way S for 1/2 a block and try to turn north onto M St SE. Come up with a better plan to not choke out R St SE, because this one you present will become an instant nightmare in a very wide area of southeast Auburn. A freeway exist running up to the Muckleshoot area of Auburn Way S, from the M St SE area under Hwy 18 would be a good spot for an exit! That would relieve traffic coming down M St SE to get to Auburn Way S and beyond. n/a The cul-de-sac will promote tent camping as there are no houses like a normal cul-de-sac. Let me just tent behind the Walgreens. And the antique store that already has a lot of theft will become a bigger target. n/a I have a lot of concerns. Will there be any public meetings or can I come down to see a whole plan? Do not block off and make a cul-de-sac of M St SE between 21st and 17th. All your improvements are pushing speeding traffic down neighborhood streets with no alternatives. If you close off M St SE between 21st and 17th, where is all the traffic supposed to go? Also, people in my area will now be forced into more traffic since there will be fewer options to get to the other side of town. Bad idea! 5 I am excited to reduce traffic in the residential area on and around M St SE. We have new schools in the area and a lot of kids walk to school. I live on the corner of M St SE and 21st St SE and I cannot count the number of accidents that have occurred and the number of near misses at this 4-way stop. It is a nonstop flow of traffic. 5 I live on the corner of M St SE and 21st St SE. Day and night, I hear cars spinning out and loud music. Oftentimes, people blow through the stop sign and cause accidents, one of which damaged our front fence. I believe the cul-de-sac will be the most beneficial for my family and everyone in this area! Thank you for this proposal, and I hope they all pass! 1 How am I supposed to get home when I live further south on M St SE? 1 I live on 23rd st SE. It is almost impossible to get out on R St SE to get to Auburn Way S in the morning, so I go to M St SE to get across Auburn Way S to get to work on the north end of town. This is going to force me and countless others to go through the school zones during the start of school and increase our time and fuel costs. Once in a while I will go to A St SE and the amount of inconsiderate parents dropping their kids off in the middle of the road is insane, all so they don't have to pull off the road and fight their way back in. My opinion is this will end in disaster. 4 I appreciate the multiple options provided. The lane being utilized for multiple left/right options makes the most sense to me. 4 Not a fan of the cul-de-sac on M St SE south of 17th St SE. It would cut off the direct access to Auburn Way S and M St SE from 21st St SE. AWS, 17th St SE, M St SE Project Ratings (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 177 Page 232 of 435 RATING COMMENT 1 I know it will make no difference since you will go through with these plans, but not having access to crossing Auburn Way S from M St SE is really an inconvenience to the hundred if not thousands of people that use it now. Change can really stink and this one is not helping. 1 Northbound coming from Lakeland, Lake Tapps, and Bonney Lake will only have R St SE/17th St SE to get on Auburn Way S instead of also having the option of M St SE. 17th St SE already backs up for blocks to get onto Auburn Way S. There will need to be a light at the bottom of Auburn Way S at 17th St SE for traffic from 17th St SE to get onto Auburn Way S. Also, how will fire trucks get through from the fire station onto Auburn Way S if 17th St SE is backed up? For southbound traffic, there needs to be a light at Howard Rd onto R St SE, as this already backs up onto Auburn Way S. Additionally, the pedestrian crossing at M St SE (from the church to Starbucks) is very dangerous. Needs to be "no vehicle turn on red" from Auburn Way S onto M St SE. Also, making M St SE a dead end is a horrible idea - there are only 3 north-south roads through Auburn. 1 No northbound traffic from M St SE to westbound AWS is a huge mistake. Putting in a cul-de-sac on M St SE is a nightmare waiting to happen. I suggest you put in a light at the intersection just south of the fire station on R St SE for everyone trying to make a left turn. I'd rather not ever shop in that area of Auburn since the access is so limited to go west on AWS. Also, this intersection was remade to its current flow to reduce accidents from cars attempting to cross over AWS at 17th St SE. Dead ending M St SE is a huge mistake. I'd rather see a roundabout for better traffic flow. 4 The 12th St SE signal with a u-turn? This isn't clear to me. Will there be a crosswalk at 12th? Will 12th ever go through to this land use that is being discussed at the miles sand pit? 1 Auburn Way S traffic up toward Muckleshoot and Enumclaw has gotten out of hand. The amount of incidents, traffic violations, and growing traffic is unbearable. Turning M St SE into a dead end doesn't seem like the correct answer. It seems like a cost effective, short sighted solution to a big problem. 1 By stopping northbound traffic from M St SE onto Auburn Way S, you did not provide a safe way for residents to access Auburn Way S from the streets west of Game Farm Park. This forces traffic onto R St SE, which means all those streets must make left turns and then go behind the apartments on Howard Rd to merge onto Auburn Way S without a traffic light. Or they will be forces to make a left turn at the four-way stop on 21st and then back track in order to turn onto 17th St SE. While this plan may move more volume, it totally ignores the current residents who live in this community. 1 This is not an improvement for traffic at all. M St SE is a major through road to reach the south end of town for families. (Continued on next page) PAGE 178 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 233 of 435 RATING COMMENT 1 This proposal, in my opinion, is not favorable to the citizens of Auburn whatsoever. I am a router for the Auburn School District and design the bus routes that travel these roads. This proposal would add significant costs, delays, and additional traffic to the intersection of Auburn Way S & M St SE. For our buses transporting students between all north end and south end schools, this would add significant delays where we wouldn't be able to make it to schools on time. Our bus fleet travels north and south on M St SE as the quickest way to access schools in north Auburn, mid-town, Lea Hill, and all the schools on the south end of Auburn. Eliminating access on M St SE from Auburn Way S to 21st St SE will cause major delays. Personally, I can't really believe it is being considered. We have bus stops at EJ Square (1210 M St SE) and if the eastbound left hand turn lane on Auburn Way S is eliminated, we will not be able to access this development. This is not even counting all the buses we have doing field trips that use that road to and from all the south and north schools. We have at least 30 routes that turn off Auburn Way S to 17th St SE. We have 23 routes that use R St SE and 17th St SE. We already have 22 buses that go from H St SE to 17th St SE to G St SE to 12th St SE to Auburn Way S. If you close M St SE, that will cause over 100 buses to use the neighborhood streets and we already get complaints when we use some of them. 1 This will make traveling north from our home on 25th St SE next to Pioneer Elementary very difficult. K St SE is already crowded in the morning. People park when dropping off kids and it's unsafe. This appears to make K St SE the only way out of our neighborhood. This plan will make traveling out of and in to south Auburn more congested. 1 The blocking off of M St SE from 21st St SE to 17th St SE is totally unacceptable! Having to use the neighborhood side streets to reach Olympic Middle School, Pioneer Elementary, or 17th St Plaza Retirement Center is not acceptable for emergency teams or school buses. Has anyone asked the police/fire departments about having to respond when more than one unit has to go there? The traffic on R St SE/17th St SE is already a major back up at the AM rush hour and so is the PM traffic on the road in front of the shopping center (Walgreens) connecting to R St SE. You think their deliver trucks can square the blocks through the 21st St SE neighborhoods? That short expanse of M St SE from 17th St SE to 21st St SE is a relief for the back ups at R St SE in the am/pm and so does the right hand turn of Auburn Way S to 17th St SE. Having them available decreases the response time for additional units coming into the SE Auburn area. This plan is a safety risk for the 21st St SE/R St SE/17th St SE/29th St SE residents. 1 The dead-end of M St SE does not make sense. It will cause increased traffic for nearby residential areas and a school zone. I do not understand the rationale. A better solution would involve adjusting the traffic light sequencing. No explanations for the changes have been presented. The communities south of 17th St SE will be negatively impacted. More thought needs to be given to the proposal, with better reasons given. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 179 Page 234 of 435 RATING COMMENT 5 I believe that such improvements are needed on A St SE. 4 Yes, I think they need to add a road under the railroad tracks. Ellingson Rd is impossible at 3:00pm to 6:00pm in the afternoon. We cannot get in or out of our neighborhood. All of the traffic going to Lakeland Hills blocks us from leaving or coming home. So many people use that intersection. They don't follow the traffic light rules and block the intersection. It is definitely overrun with excessive traffic. There needs to be a separate road to cross over to A St SE. 4 I like it but we need serious help with the Skinner Rd and Ellingson Rd intersection. The traffic is backed up at the light going eastbound and it blocks the intersection. We have to drive around cars to continue on Ellingson northbound through the very short green light. It's been dangerous and dreadful whenever I leave my house on 2nd Ave NE during rush hours. 4 All around, this is a pretty good plan with sensible safety improvements. A few notes: 1) the illustration does not depict any bike lanes/paths along A St SE. This project should include quality bicycle facilities along the corridor; they would fill a crucial gap in the bike network and would make the proposed tunnel more useful. 2) It's unclear from the illustration if the existing median on Ellingson Rd will remain. If ti will, it may be worth considering allowing u-turns from eastbound Ellingson so eastbound traffic can access the shopping center with the Dominos and Starbucks. 3) For pedestrian safety, I'd recommend keeping the existing no turn on red restriction. 4) The sidewalks don't look particularly safe or pleasant to walk on since they're right up against the travel lanes. Consider adding some extra space between the road and sidewalks; this would have the additional benefit of not detouring pedestrians as much around the u-turn pockets. A St SE Projects PAGE 180 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 235 of 435 OPTION A RATING OPTION B RATING PREFERRED OPTION COMMENT 3 5 B I live on 5th St NE and initially gravitated toward option A, but then as I read through the logic of Option B, I was swayed. My biggest complaint about my neighborhood is that it's not very walkable because it is cut off by several busy streets and people speed up and down R St. Not to mention I find the train horns to be a mild nuisance. I would love to live in a quieter, more walkable neighborhood and taking two extra minutes to drive a couple blocks further when I need to use that highway exit is most certainly worth that. Let's make this a more walkable, more connected city! n/a n/a B Option B looks best. It might move some traffic from residential streets to minor arterials. Also removes an at-grade railroad crossing. There are alternative routes to get access to Hwy 18, so no problem there. Please consider a roundabout instead of a new signal at the new M St SE intersection. 3 5 B I live near there and the trains not sounding their horns sounds like a great idea to me. 5 2 A Concern is losing access to Hwy 18 with Option B for us who take this everyday instead of Lea Hill or downtown Auburn. I vote for Option A because it is an additive with less negative due to opening up driving opportunities, improving train safety, and benefiting the community around it. 100% for train safety as we do not want a derailment ever. 1 5 B Currently, the traffic along R St SE to Black Diamond Rd encourages some drivers to rev their engines, speed, and make a lot of noise, all of which is detrimental to the residents and community that neighbors R St SE. Option B would eliminate this nuisance and improve the quality of life for everyone along R St SE and neighboring streets. Currently, it is risky to walk along R St SE as a pedestrian, out for a stroll. Option B would make the walk far more pleasant and also better for bicycles. Bicycle traffic currently is dangerous and hazardous for both cyclists and motorists. 1 5 B I've lived in this neighborhood for almost 30 years and experienced a decline in quality of life due to increased traffic on R St SE due to noise and pollution. The train hons continue to be a nuisance, especially at night. The closing of R St SE (Option B) would be a blessing to the neighborhood, restoring some peace and tranquility, preserving the residential character of the area. I fail to see the practical feasibility of Option A. R St south of E Main St is a narrow two-lane street, no sidewalks, minimal shoulder, lined with homes. The front yards of these homes are shallow. There is no space to widen the road. A further increase in traffic, as projected, would be disastrous for the residents of this area. Traffic delays would still occur at the redesigned railway crossing. I don't know anyone who would feel inconvenienced by driving a few extra blocks to reach Auburn Black Diamond Rd. Funneling traffic to M St SE makes more sense as M St SE is well-established as a major arterial. 1 4 B The statement says we currently enjoy easy access to Hwy 18. It is much easier to go up over Lea Hill and enter the highway there. I would rather do that than to continue to endure the extra load of trucks that Option A would bring to our neighborhood. 5 n/a A I think it's critical that NE Auburn maintains access through R St. n/a 5 B We don't need more traffic on R St NE. This would make the 8th St NE and R St NE intersection more of a mess and the 8th St NE road over the bridge to Lea Hill more of a bottle neck. M Street Bypass Project Ratings (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 181 Page 236 of 435 OPTION A RATING OPTION B RATING PREFERRED OPTION COMMENT n/a n/a B I prefer Option B because Option A would give access to more traffic at high speeds through residential areas. We already have this issue when Hwy 18 is blocked due to accidents. 5 1 A I live outside the city limits on Auburn Black Diamond Rd and use the R St connection to get into Auburn when Hwy 18 is backed up or block and have used it for years! Closing off the R St connection would have a huge negative impact for those of us who live out that way! Having the M St connection in addition to R St would absolutely help give options to easily commute to both north and south Auburn. 1 3 Neither With Option A, it is imaginable traffic flow eventually increasing along R St to make those along it and surrounding areas uncomfortable. The little connector of 4th St SE (from to R) may suffer similarly. Residential streets are not meant as highways. It's better to keep traffic flow on streets already undertaking heavier flow, such as M St. This makes Option B preferable. Yet, Option B's closing older access from 4th to Auburn Black Diamond and train crossing seems overkill. Local access will be lost. Not everyone taking back roads is a distance commuter or looking for shortcuts. It is a mistake to assume so. As for the train horn, Auburn is a railroad town. Train hors are sounding all about. Residing in the very neighborhood of the intersection discussed, it strikes me that spending money on an "inconvenience" that will little effect pervasiveness is wasteful. I prefer a compromised Option B, one with 4th to Auburn Black Diamond and the train crossing remaining open. n/a n/a A My concern is the restriction access to Auburn Black Diamond Rd for neighbors. Being a resident of 4th St SE and T St SE, Auburn Black Diamond provides a quick and necessary route for our children to get to and from school at Lakeview Elementary, especially for emergencies. In addition to accessing recreational areas such as Flaming Geyser Park and community events, family, and friends. 1 5 B I would much prefer to keep our neighborhood quiet and lose the convenient access to 18 than have trucks utilizing R St. 1 5 B I am voting for keeping large volumes of truck traffic out of our neighborhoods. M St is a large street, which is much better suited to such traffic. n/a n/a Neither Option A puts a street in our yard! Option B cuts us off from Hwy 18. Option A, how many drivers are going to run the light? Or speed through our yard? How many more accidents are going to happen in our yard? Option B takes away our road to Hwy 18 or Flaming Geyser State Park. Option B also allows the trains to be longer and idle more next to the houses here. We the home owners have to live with the extra noise, pollution, danger of car crashing our yard, loss of property, and more vibrations. We do not want this! No Option A or B! n/a n/a Neither Neither option benefits the neighborhood. Both options harm the neighborhood that this construction is being planned around. 1 5 B I do not think diverting traffic through a housing neighborhood is a best practices idea. As the old Miles Pit area is developed, this would increase. I dealt with the M St SE underpass project and the traffic that diverted through our neighborhood was obnoxious! Not only did they drive around road closed signs, many of them were speeding while driving through. I would not wish increased traffic through a neighborhood on anyone. We all know that with a new improved road, the speeding would increase and put the residents living in those areas at increased risk. (Continued on next page) PAGE 182 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 237 of 435 OPTION A RATING OPTION B RATING PREFERRED OPTION COMMENT n/a n/a Neither I'm not sure what traffic issue is being addressed. Congestion? Rush hour backup? Pollution and accidents? Train horn? Diverting traffic off of M St to push it back onto M St further south doesn't solve much; it only pushes issues further down the line. Adding a traffic signal to M St - this alone will cause more stoppage and congestion. Spending money to eliminate train horns is silly - Auburn is a train hub. Additionally, closing the railroad crossing eliminates local access, potentially increasing incidental traffic on M St. Pollution and accidents will certainly escalate along R St by using it as a diversion thoroughfare. It is easy to speculate, but it would be less so if your purpose was clearer. As it stands, the project seems to be solving a non-existent problem by using Auburn Black Diamond Rd as a catalyst to disregard an entire neighborhood. Dedicated money might be better spent directly connecting Hwy 18 to the top of SR 164 hill at Muckleshoot. n/a n/a Neither Both options hinder the local neighborhood. The planned route saves 2 minutes. Maybe at the cost of a loss of property, more accidents, more noise, and more pollution. n/a 1 Neither I've lived in this neighborhood for over 15 years. Current traffic volumes and conditions make this a dangerous area to add more vehicles. Current volumes are high enough that a train crossing during peak hours means cars back up and block driveway access all the way down to E Main St. The speed limit is only 25, but folks drive too fast and take out street signs, trees, and last summer even a telephone pole. Most driveways are back in/back out driveways all along R St, which is not great. Option B is not too great either. I can't see why we would want to limit the neighborhood's access to Hwy 18. Aren't the in/ off ramps backed up enough during peak hours? I see the intersection at AWS blocked by traffic for the on ramps pretty frequently. Wouldn't decreasing access to 18 make this worse? 1 5 B We do not want more traffic, especially truck traffic, on R St SE. 1 5 B Extending R St to the M St bypass road would negatively impact the quality of life in the neighborhood. The area between M St and the river, and south of 8th St to the railroad tracks is completely residential. R St is a residential street. South of E Main St, it is a narrow two lanes, lined with homes, without sidewalks or shoulders to speak of. There doesn't appear to be much room for widening the street. As such, it is unsuitable for the anticipated increased traffic. The proposed "improvement" to the rail crossing would not eliminate traffic delays as it will remain an at-grade crossing. Current traffic level is a nuisance, as are the frequent train whistles. Most of the traffic is from people outside the neighborhood passing through. This will increase dramatically if R St is extended. The benefits of closing R St - reduced traffic, no train horns - far outweigh the "drawback" of driving a few extra blocks to access Auburn Black Diamond Rd. 1 5 B I am at 19 N St NE in Auburn, and have non-stop traffic down my street all day. My camera records cars every 30 seconds at peak traffic time. I have asked for speed bumps to match the adjacent road for 8 years. We have had two speed studies that show many speeders. I have even offered to pay for the speed bump between myself and the concerned neighbors that have put in many speed concerns on the See-Click-Fix app. Option B seems to be the only one that may lessen people cutting down my road to avoid the light on E Main and M St. 3 4 B We like the reduced cut-through traffic and train whistle elimination of Option B, but a traffic study should be done for westbound E Main St between R St SE and M St first. As it is, we sometimes have difficulty going north and turning left/westbound off of N St SE onto E Main St because of westbound traffic, and Option B would divert more traffic off of R St onto E Main st that would have otherwise continued south on R St to get to Auburn Black Diamond Rd. 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 183 Page 238 of 435 AGE RACE (SELECT ALL THAT APPLY) OTHER - RACE (SELECT ALL THAT APPLY) DISABILITY COUNTRY OF BIRTH LANGUAGES SPOKEN AT HOME (SELECT ALL THAT APPLY) 64+Caucasian Yes USA English 43 to 63 Caucasian USA English 64+Caucasian No USA English 43 to 63 Other North Africa- middle east No USA Arabic, English 64+USA English 22 to 42 Hispanic or Latino, Caucasian No USA English 22 to 42 Caucasian No USA English 64+Caucasian No USA English 22 to 42 Black or African American, Caucasian No USA English 22 to 42 Asian No USA English 22 to 42 Prefer not to answer English 64+ 43 to 63 Caucasian No USA English Respondent Demographics PAGE 184 OUTREACH APPENDIX A B C D E Page 239 of 435 CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 185 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IN THIS APPENDIX New Street Classification Changes by Street Name APPENDIX E Roadway Classification Changes Page 240 of 435 STREET NAME BEGIN END PREVIOUS CLASSIFICATION NEW CLASSIFICATION S 324th Street 49th Avenue S 51st Avenue S Local Collector 62nd Place S S 300th Street End Residential Collector Local 63rd Place S S 301st Street End Residential Collector Local Frontage Road S 277th Street 44th Street NW Minor Arterial Local Industrial D Street NW S 277th Street 44th Street NW Minor Arterial Local Industrial D Street NW Extension 44th Street NW 37th Street NW Planned Minor Arterial Remove 44th Street NW Frontage Road NW End Minor Arterial Local Industrial I Street NW 44th Street NW 37th Street NW Local Local Industrial 49th Street NW B Street NW Auburn Way N Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial 49th Street NE Extension I Street NE L Street NE Non-Residential Collector Collector L Street NE 51st Street NE S 277th Street Non-Residential Collector Collector M Street NW 15th Street NW Gate Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial M Street NW Gate 29th Street NW Non-Residential Collector Private 29th Street NW M Street NW End Non-Residential Collector Private 29th Street NW West Valley Hwy End Local Local Industrial 26th Street NW West Valley Hwy End Local Local Industrial R Street NW 15th Street NW 14th Street NW Local Local Industrial 14th Street NW R Street NW End Local Local Industrial Pike Street NW 15th Street NW 20th Street NW Local Local Industrial R Street NW 20th Street NW End Local Local Industrial ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION CHANGES (Continued on next page) PAGE 186 ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION CHANGES APPENDIX A B C D E Page 241 of 435 STREET NAME BEGIN END PREVIOUS CLASSIFICATION NEW CLASSIFICATION 20th Street NW R Street NW West Valley Hwy Local Local Industrial 22nd Street NW R Street NW West Valley Hwy Local Local Industrial Outlet Collection Ramp 15th Street SW Outlet Collection Way Principal Arterial Local Industrial Outlet Collection Way (west) 15th Street SW End Principal Arterial Local Industrial Market Street 15th Street SW End Principal Arterial Local Industrial Outlet Collection Way (east) 15th Street SW End Principal Arterial Local Industrial Industry Drive SW Boundary Blvd 15th Street SW Minor Arterial Local Industrial Perimeter Rd 15th Street SW End Non-Residential Collector Private Sumner-Tapps Hwy E Lake Tapps Pkwy SE City Limit Principal Arterial Minor Arterial 55th Street SE Bridget Ave SE End Rustic Collector Rustic Local Bridget Ave SE 55th Street SE 53rd Street SE Rustic Collector Rustic Local M Street SE Extension 37th Street SE 41st Street SE Planned Residential Collector N/A 28th Street SE Riverwalk Drive Forest Ridge Dr. SE Local Collector M Street SE Auburn Way S 29th Street SE Minor Arterial Collector Hemlock Street SE Auburn Way S End Residential Collector Local 15th Street SW Extension C Street SW A Street SE Planned Minor Arterial Remove F Street SE 4th Street SE Auburn Way S Non-Residential Collector Collector A Street SW Main Street 4th Street SW Non-Residential Collector Minor Arterial 4th Street SW A Street SW S Division St Non-Residential Collector Minor Arterial S Division Street 3rd Street SW 4th Street SW Non-Residential Collector Minor Arterial (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 187 Page 242 of 435 STREET NAME BEGIN END PREVIOUS CLASSIFICATION NEW CLASSIFICATION C Street SW SR 18 EB ramps SR 18 WB ramps Minor Arterial Principal Arterial 2nd Street SE/SW Auburn Way North D Street SE Non-Residential Collector Collector 2nd Street SE/SW A Street SW Auburn Way North Non-Residential Collector Minor Arterial 1st Street SE/SW A Street SW A Street SE Non-Residential Collector Minor Arterial G Street SW W Main Street 3rd Street SW Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial 3nd Street SW E Street SW G Street SW Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial Lund Road W Main Street 4th Street SW Local Local Industrial Western St W Main Street End Local Local Industrial Clay Street NW W Main Street End Local Local Industrial H Street NW W Main Street 6th Street NW Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial 6th Street NW H Street NW C Street NW Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial 2nd Street NW D Street NW H Street NW Local Local Industrial D Street NW 2nd Street NW 3rd Street NW Local Local Industrial 3rd Street NW C Street NW D Street NW Local Local Industrial 1st Street NE/NW B Street NW Auburn Way N Non-Residential Collector Local B Street NW W Main Street 1st Street NW Non-Residential Collector Local 4th Street NE Auburn Way N M Street NE Non-Residential Collector Collector 8th Street NE Harvey Road/M Street NE 104th Street SE Minor Arterial Principal Arterial D Street NE 15th Street NE 16th Street NE Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial (Continued on next page) PAGE 188 ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION CHANGES APPENDIX A B C D E Page 243 of 435 STREET NAME BEGIN END PREVIOUS CLASSIFICATION NEW CLASSIFICATION 16th Street NE D Street NE E Street NE Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial E Street NE 16th Street NE 22nd Street NE Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial E Street NE 22nd Street NE 23rd Street NE Local Local Industrial 23rd Street NE E Street NE E Street NE Local Local Industrial E Street NE 23rd Street NE 26th Street NE Local Local Industrial 26th Street NE E Street NE Auburn Way N Local Local Industrial 22nd Street NE E Street NE Auburn Way N Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial 22nd Street NE Auburn Way N I Street NE Non-Residential Collector Minor Arterial Riverview Drive NE M Street NE 22nd Street NE Residential Collector Local 22nd Street NE Pike Street NE Riverview Drive Residential Collector Local 30th Street NE B Street NW Auburn Way N Non-Residential Collector Minor Arterial 30th Street NE Auburn Way N I Street NE Non-Residential Collector Minor Arterial C Street NE 30th Street NE 42nd Street NE Non-Residential Collector Local Industrial 42nd Street NW/NE B Street NW Auburn Way N Local Local Industrial B Place NW B Street NW End Local Local Industrial 85th Avenue S Auburn Way N City Limit Non-Residential Collector Local 37th Street NE Auburn Way N I Street NE Non-Residential Collector Collector Green River Road 100th Avenue SE City Limit Non-Residential Collector Rustic Collector Green River Road 100th Avenue SE 104th Avenue SE Non-Residential Collector Collector (Continued on next page) 2024 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CITY OF AUBURN PAGE 189 Page 244 of 435 STREET NAME BEGIN END PREVIOUS CLASSIFICATION NEW CLASSIFICATION 105th Place SE Lea Hill Road 107th Place SE Non-Residential Collector Collector 107th Place SE 105th Place SE SE 320th Street Non-Residential Collector Collector SE 320th Street 107th Place SE 112th Avenue SE Non-Residential Collector Collector 116th Avenue SE SE 316th Street SE 315th Street Residential Collector Local 112th Avenue SE SE 304th Street SE 281st Street Minor Arterial Collector SE 281st Street 112th Avenue SE 108th Avenue SE Minor Arterial Collector 108th Avenue SE SE 281st Street City Limit Minor Arterial Collector SE 304th Street 132nd Avenue SE City Limit Minor Arterial Principal Arterial SE 288th Street 132nd Avenue SE End Local Collector SE 286th Street 124th Avenue SE End N/A Local SE 284th Street Extension 124th Avenue SE SE 288th Street Planned Residential Collector Removed PAGE 190 ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION CHANGES APPENDIX A B C D E Page 245 of 435 DRAFT – July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Transportation Element Page 246 of 435 DRAFT – July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal Table of Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 Vision ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Planning Framework .................................................................................................................................... 1 Growth Management Act (GMA) and Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Requirements............................................................................................................................................... 1 How the City Uses the Plan ................................................................................................................. 2 Land Use Characteristics and Transportation Systems ....................................................... 4 Goals and Policies .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Page 247 of 435 DRAFT – July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Transportation Element | T E - 1 Introduction The transportation system is a vital component of Auburn's social, economic, and physical structure. The primary purposes of the transportation system is to support the movement of people and goods within the City and connect the City to the broader region. The transportation system influences patterns of growth, development, and economic activity by providing access to adjacent land uses. Planning for the development and maintenance of the transportation system is a critical activity promoting the efficient movement of people and goods, ensuring emergency access, and optimizing the role transportation plays in attaining other community objectives. This chapter provides only a brief overview of the City’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan, located in Appendix G of the 2024 Periodic Comprehensive Plan. Vision The Comprehensive Transportation Plan reflects the current and future needs of the Auburn community and, in doing so, seeks to: • Enhance the quality of life for all Auburn residents; • Encourage healthy community principles through nonmotorized travel; • Promote a transportation system that supports local businesses and enhances economic development opportunities; • Create a transportation system that is efficient, uncomplicated, and welcoming to visitors; and • Provide a balanced, multimodal transportation system that addresses both local and regional needs. Planning Framework The Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) is the framework for transportation planning in Auburn. It functions as the overarching guide for changes to the transportation system. The CTP evaluates the existing system by identifying key assets and improvement needs. These findings are then incorporated into a needs assessment, which guides the future of the transportation system. This CTP is multimodal, addressing multiple forms of transportation in Auburn including the street network, nonmotorized travel, and transit. Evaluating all modes enables the City to address its future transportation needs in a comprehensive and balanced manner. Growth Management Act (GMA) and Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Requirements Page 248 of 435 DRAFT – July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Transportation Element | TE- 2 Washington State’s 1990 Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that transportation planning be directly tied to the City’s land use decisions and fiscal planning. This is traditionally accomplished through the adoption of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The City of Auburn is a member of the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), the regions Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). As the MPO, PSRC is responsible for developing a long-range regional transportation plan and near-term regional transportation improvement program. PSRC establishes policies, procedures, and programs for award of Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) funding. PSRC has established requirements for agency comprehensive transportation plans that must be met to maintain eligibility for PSRC managed grant funding. Transportation modelling and planning is consistent with the Land Use Element, including 2044 household and employment targets for both King and Pierce Counties. How the City Uses the Plan The Comprehensive Transportation Plan provides policy and technical direction for development of the City’s transportation system through the year 2044. It updates and expands the 2015 Comprehensive Transportation Plan by recognizing network changes since the last plan, evaluating current needs, and identifying standards for future development and various infrastructure improvement scenarios. Needs Assessment A system-wide, multimodal needs assessment was conducted throughout plan development to ascertain which aspects of Auburn’s existing transportation system work well and which ones need improvement. An evaluation of potential solutions and investment priorities was also conducted as part of this process. The end result is that Auburn has a more thorough understanding of system deficiencies, how best to address these deficiencies, and direction for expanding the system in a sustainable manner. Multimodal Level of Service Standards Prior to the 2024 Plan, as with comprehensive transportation plans for most other agencies in Washington, the City of Auburn’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan only included LOS standards for motorized vehicles (vehicle LOS). Without adopted multimodal LOS standards (MMLOS), there were no metrics by which the effectiveness of the active transportation and transit systems could be measured and evaluated. With MMLOS, the City of Auburn can ensure that transportation system improvements are planned, funded, and implemented to develop a comprehensive, connected, and versatile transportation system. One of the main goals of MMLOS is to realize a transportation system that doesn’t rely on adding more vehicular capacity alone to address growing needs to move people and goods. The MMLOS approach supports providing other transportation modes including walking, bicycling, and transit to address these needs. The City of Page 249 of 435 DRAFT – July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Transportation Element | TE- 3 Auburn's MMLOS have been developed with the strategic and focused intent of maximizing potential mode shifts from driving cars to walking, biking, and riding transit. The standards work towards this by setting higher level of service standards for walking and biking in areas where doing so will best support existing and planned transit service. These principles, many of which can be promoted by thoughtful transportation systems planning, encourage healthier communities by increasing physical activity and decreasing air pollution caused by vehicle emissions. Auburn has historically planned for a transportation system that incorporates many healthy community principles, such as transit facility planning and regional trail planning. In addition, the Downtown Plan calls for a mixed-use, high density, pedestrian-oriented downtown. In the future, Auburn shall continue to promote these principles through long-range planning efforts, capital facility improvements, development review, and community activities involving active lifestyle elements. Capital Faciltites Plan and Transportation Improvement Program The City uses the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) to develop a financial plan for capital improvements in Auburn, thus enabling the City to fulfill the GMA requirement of having a multiyear financing plan based on the identified transportation needs. The TIP, is a financial planning tool used to implement the list of transportation improvement projects identified in the Transportation Plan. It is a six-year plan which is reviewed and updated annually by the City Council to reflect changes to project priorities and funding circumstances. The first three years of the plan are fiscally constrained. Traffic impact fees on new development are determined by the cost of the capacity projects included in the TIP. The Capital Facilities Plan is also an annually adopted six-year financing plan. However, it is fiscally constrained for all six years. Unlike the TIP, the CFP is an adopted element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Agency Coordination In addition to being influenced by factors within the City's jurisdiction, Auburn’s transportation system is influenced by what happens outside its jurisdiction and/or boundaries: growth in neighboring communities, infrastructure maintenance by regional agencies, the lack of funding for road maintenance, new capacity projects, and competing demands for transit service. The Plan calls for effective inter- jurisdictional actions to address cross-border issues and to mitigate the impact of new development. The Plan also recognizes that other jurisdictions, particularly state agencies and transit providers, are responsible for a major share of the transportation facilities serving Auburn. These jurisdictions include: • Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) • WSDOT • Sound Transit • King County Metro Page 250 of 435 DRAFT – July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Transportation Element | TE- 4 • Pierce Transit • King County • Pierce County • Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) • Cities of Kent, Federal Way, Sumner, Pacific, Algona, and Bonney Lake Land Use Characteristics and Transportation Systems Based on the available land capacity as zoned in 2023, Auburn showed a deficit of capacity for both the 2044 housing unit and jobs targets. The future land use map developed with the 2024 Comprehensive Plan was developed to accommodate the 2044 housing and jobs targets through new zoning and land uses in various corridors and nodes throughout Auburn, and in the Downtown area in particular. Development of the future land use map involved evaluating alternative land use scenarios and testing them against various factors. Further information regarding this process is included in the Comprehensive Plan. This Comprehensive Transportation Plan is based on the Draft Preferred Land Use Alternative documented in the Comprehensive Plan. This land use alternative was a combination of two alternatives that each focused on centralizing housing and employment growth with either corridors or centers approach. Both alternatives included intense housing and employment growth focused in the Downtown area by expanding and increasing development density and intensity. The combined alternative targets employment and housing along the Auburn Way North and I Street NE corridors where frequent transit is planned to start operating in 2026. Focused growth in employment and housing was also identified at locations of known future development plans. These areas include the Outlet Collection Mall area along 15th Street SW, the Icon Materials mining operations and adjacent lands along the east side of Kersey Way (known as the Segale development area), and at vacant or underdeveloped land areas on Lea Hill and West Hill. To comply with recent HB 1110 state legislation, middle housing is permitted in all residential zones in Auburn, which is incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan zoning map. Density increases in high-capacity transit station areas have also been assumed in the zoning map, which is implemented primarily by designated Growth Centers. Density has also been increased near future planned RapidRide high- capacity transit locations in Lea Hill and near the Outlet Collection. In addition, up to 6 middle housing units per lot will be permitted within ¼ mile of a high-capacity transit stop, which in Auburn includes future RapidRide I-Line stop locations as well as Auburn Station. The map below shows the area where the density bonus will be applied. Parking for middle housing is not required within ½ mile of these same stop locations. Middle housing considerations for density and parking is being addressed through updates to city code. Page 251 of 435 DRAFT – July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Transportation Element | TE- 5 Page 252 of 435 DRAFT – July 16, 2024 Planning Commission Transmittal City of Auburn Transportation Element | TE- 6 Goals and Policies The City creates policies to state preferences for preservation of the existing system and development of the future transportation system. Policies can be qualitative in nature, but often they are quantitative and prescribe a specific standard. Policies are also important for communicating the City’s values and needs to neighboring jurisdictions and regional and state agencies. Having established policies in place enables the City to more effectively influence change in keeping with its needs and objectives. Goals and Policies are housed in the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, located in Appendix G of the 2024 Periodic Comprehensive Plan. Page 253 of 435 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Community Development Elements Planning Commission Action Date: July 3, 2024 Department: Community Development Attachments: F - Comprehensive Plan Staff Report Ph 1 G - Comprehensive Plan_V5 Land Us e Element_Draft H - Comprehensive Plan_V5 Hous ing Element_Draft I - Comprehens ive Plan_V5 Economic Development Element_Draft J - Comprehensive Plan_V5 Historic Preservation Element_Draft K - Comprehensive Plan_V5 Climate Element_Draft L - Comprehens ive Plan_V5 Housing Needs As s es s ment_Draft M - Draft Comprehensive Plan Zoning Map Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff:Steiner Meeting Date:July 16, 2024 Item Number: Page 254 of 435 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Subject/Title: PRJ24-0008, SEP24-0004 2024 Periodic Comprehensive Plan Update Date: July 16, 2024 Department: Community Development Staff Recommendation: Planning Commission to deliberate and take action to recommend to City Council approval of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Land Use, Housing, Economic Development, Historic Preservation, and Climate Elements. Background Summary: Between April and July 2024 staff transmitted to Planning Commission Draft 2024 Comprehensive Plan Elements for presentation, public hearing, and deliberation a package of 5 Elements developed by the Community Development Department. The dates of those presentations and actions are as follows: Document Planning Commission Presentation Planning Commission Hearing Planning Commission Acceptance Land Use Element April 2, 2024 April 16, 2024 April 16, 2024 Housing Element April 2, 2024 April 16, 2024 April 16, 2024 Economic Development Element April 16, 2024 April 30, 2024 April 30, 2024 Historic Preservation Element April 16, 2024 April 30, 2024 April 30, 2024 Climate Element April 30, 2024 May 7, 2024 May 7, 2024 On July 16, 2024, the Planning Commission will deliberate on the draft documents, staff’s suggested modifications, and public comments that had been received; and vote on a recommendation to be transmitted to City Council for consideration for adoption of: • Volume 1 – Land Use Element; • Volume 2 – Housing Element; • Volume 6 – Economic Development Element; • Volume 8 – Historic Preservation Element; and, • Volume 9 – Climate Element. • Appendix A – Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment Page 255 of 435 Staff Member: Steiner Date: July 16, 2024 Page 2 of 4 A second action is scheduled for October 23, 2024 for a recommendation to City Council on the adoption of the remaining four Elements and four related plans consisting of: • Volume 3 – Capital Facilities Element; • Volume 4 – Utilities Element; • Volume 5 – the Transportation Element; • Volume 7 – Parks Element; • Appendix F – Parks, Arts, Recreation and Open Space Plan (PROS); • Appendix G – Comprehensive Transportation Plan; • Appendix I – Water System Plan; • Appendix J – Comprehensive Sewer Plan; and, • Appendix K – Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan Update. These elements and plans will be described under a separate staff report since these documents are authored by the Public Works and Parks Departments. Findings of Fact: 1. RCW 36.70A.70 (Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)) describes required and option Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan shall be an internally consistent document and all elements shall be consistent with a future land use map. 2. RCW 36.70A.140 (Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)) indicates that a comprehensive plan shall be adopted and amended with public participation. Auburn City Code (ACC) 14.22.030 required early and continuous public participation in the comprehensive plan process. 3. Auburn City Code (ACC) 14.22.010 provides a description of the purpose of the comprehensive plan. The city of Auburn comprehensive plan establishes the principles, goals, objectives and policies guiding future development of the city in compliance with Chapter 36.70A RCW, the Washington State Growth Management Act. The purpose of this chapter is to establish procedures and review criteria for amending the comprehensive plan and to provide provisions for public participation in the planning process. 4. Environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the comprehensive plan resulted in a Determination of Significance (DS) and Request for Comments on Scope of Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) issued on October 23, 2023 (City File No. SEP24-0004). This notice was published in the Seattle Times on October 23, 2023. The comment period ended November 13, 2023 with no comments received. 5. ACC 14.22.100 outlines the public hearing requirements by planning commission. Amendments to the Periodic Comprehensive Plan generally comply with “area-wide” requirements. Page 256 of 435 Staff Member: Steiner Date: July 16, 2024 Page 3 of 4 A. The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on all proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be given pursuant to Chapter 1.27 ACC and, at a minimum, include the following: 1. For site-specific plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within a radius of 300 feet of the proposed map amendment request, not less than 10 calendar days prior to the public hearing; 2. For area-wide plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within the area subject to the proposed amendment; c. Notice shall be posted in at least two conspicuous locations in the area subject to the proposed amendment not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of the public hearing. B. Notwithstanding the above, the director may expand the minimum noticing provisions noted above as deemed necessary. C. Planning Commission Recommendation. The planning commission shall conduct a public hearing on all potential comprehensive plan amendments and shall make and forward a recommendation on each to the city council. The planning commission shall adopt written findings and make a recommendation consistent with those findings to the city council. D. The city council, if it elects to amend the comprehensive plan, shall adopt written findings and adopt said amendments by ordinance. E. State Review. All comprehensive plan amendments considered by the planning commission shall be forwarded for state agency review consistent with RCW 36.70A.106. F. Any appeal of an amendment to the comprehensive plan shall be made in accordance with Chapter 36.70A RCW.” 6. As provided in the City code, the Comprehensive Plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action, which is expected in December 2024 to meet requirements to adopt the comprehensive plan by December 31, 2024. 7. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed comprehensive plan amendments outlined in this agenda bill were sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce and other state agencies for the required state review. The Washington State Department of Commerce acknowledged receipt on April 9, 2024, by Submittal ID: #2024-S-6992. Comments related to the Elements indicated above were received from Puget Sound Regional Council, Washington State Department of Commerce, Department of Wildlife, Department of Ecology, and King County. 8. Text and/or map updates to address agency comments will be included in the final draft of the Comprehensive Plan for City Council adoption. Where possible, updates to Elements Page 257 of 435 Staff Member: Steiner Date: July 16, 2024 Page 4 of 4 referenced above have been incorporated into the Element versions attached to this staff report. 9. A Notice of Public Hearing announcing the schedule for Public Meetings and Public Hearings for all comprehensive plan elements and related plans was published on March 12, 2024 in the Seattle Times Newspaper and on the city website which is at least 10 days prior to Planning Commission public hearings. A Re-Issuance/Correction of Notice of Public Hearing that includes updates to public meeting and/or public hearing dates and/or times was issued on May 3, 2024, June 8, 2024, and July 6, 2024. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment G – Draft Land Use Element Attachment H – Draft Housing Element Attachment I – Draft Economic Development Element Attachment J – Draft Historic Preservation Element Attachment K – Draft Climate Element Attachment L – Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment Page 258 of 435 Land Use Element City of Auburn DRAFT - PLANNING COMMISSION ACCEPTED VERSION Page 259 of 435 Page 260 of 435 Table of Contents Land Use Element .....................................................................................1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 Vision ...............................................................................................................................................1 Planning Framework ....................................................................................................3 Land Use Patterns.........................................................................................................3 Future Land Use ..............................................................................................................................4 Future Land Use Housing and Employment Capacity ..................................................4 Residential and Employment Zoned Capacity ................................................................................4 Housing Affordability by Average Median Income (AMI) .................................................................6 Goals, Policies, and Land Use Characteristics .............................................................9 Residential Land Use Designations .................................................................................................9 Residential Conservancy Designation .............................................................................................11 Neighborhood Residential One Designation...................................................................................11 Neighborhood Residential Two Designation ...................................................................................12 Neighborhood Residential Three Designation ................................................................................13 Mixed-Use Designation ...................................................................................................................14 Commercial Land Use Designation .................................................................................................15 Downtown Urban Center Designation ............................................................................................17 Industrial Land Use Designation .....................................................................................................20 Public/Quasi-Public Designation .....................................................................................................23 Open Space Designation .................................................................................................................24 Overlays, Urban Growth Area, and Special Planning Land Use Designations ................................25 Maps and Figures Map 1.1 – 2044 Population Estimates by Area ..............................................................7 Map 1.2 – 2044 Net New Housing Units by Area ........................................................8 Map 1.3 - City of Auburn Comprehensive Land Use Map .............................................38 Map 1.4 - City of Auburn Comprehensive Growth Centers ...........................................39 Map 1.5 - City of Auburn Districts Map .........................................................................40 Map 1.6 - City of Auburn Designated Areas ..................................................................41 Map 1.7 - City of Auburn Adopted Areas .......................................................................42 Map 1.8 - City of Auburn Impression Corridors .............................................................43 Map 1.9 - City of Auburn Gateways...............................................................................44 Tables Table 1. Residential Capacity by Zone ..........................................................................5 Table 2. Adjusted Employment Development Capacity by Zone .................................5 Page 261 of 435 Page 262 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-1 Introduction All land within the City of Auburn is assigned a land use designation and implementing zoning district, which builds from previously adopted Comprehensive Plan Maps, the existing land use pattern, adopted subarea plans, topography, natural features, and targeted goals for shifting the character of specified areas. This chapter provides a description for each designation, general criteria for how to assign the designation, and a series of goals and policies that govern land use within each designation. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map shows the location and boundaries for each designation. This map should be consulted together with the written policies of this Plan when decisions about zoning designations, land use activities, and development of public infrastructure are considered. The Land Use Element explains the reasoning and intention behind the land use designations. This should be useful in: • Developing and implementing tools (such as zoning provisions) • Interpreting the Land Use Map as it applies to specific regulatory decisions or development proposals • Adjusting or amending the Land Use Map when changing conditions or land use markets warrant • Planning for public services and infrastructure Finally, this Element sets forth special policies intended to address the unique challenges and opportunities of specific locations within Auburn. These specific policies supplement the general goals, objectives and policies found in other Elements of the comprehensive plan. Land Use Element Vision The Auburn community is both physically and socially connected. We take pride in the quality of our built environment as well as the beauty and function of our natural environment. Land use patterns are supported by a complete and efficient transportation and utility infrastructure system. Neighborhoods, commercial centers, and parks are attractive, interesting, accessible, and well maintained. Natural riverine and forested corridors are interspersed throughout the city, offering sanctuaries where fish and wildlife reside, and providing opportunities for people to observe and learn about the environment. Residents have a strong association with their neighborhoods, are engaged and involved in the decisions that steer Auburn into the future. Page 263 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-2Page 264 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-3 Planning Framework The Growth Management Act (GMA), codified as RCW 36.70A, is the enabling legislation that renders this Comprehensive Plan a legally recognized document by the State of Washington. This plan is a policy document only; the policies are required by GMA to be implemented through the use of such regulatory tools as zoning and subdivision ordinances, as well as other innovative techniques. The implementing regulations must be developed and maintained in accordance with the goals and policies of this Comprehensive Plan, and as set forth in the Growth Management Act, as amended, and consistent with King and Pierce County, Countywide Planning Policies (CPP). In 1991, the State Legislature amended the GMA to require that counties adopt CPP’s in cooperation with their municipalities. The purpose of these policies is to establish a coordinated, countywide framework within which to develop comprehensive plans. The CPP must guide the subsequent adoption of comprehensive plans without overly constraining with excessive detail. The Countywide Planning Policies shall, at a minimum, address the following: 1. Policies to implement RCW 36.70A.110; 2. Policies for promotion of contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban services to such development; 3. Policies for siting public capital facilities of a countywide or statewide nature, including transportation facilities of statewide significance as defined in RCW 47.06.140; 4. Policies for countywide transportation facilities and strategies; 5. Policies that consider the need for affordable housing, such as housing for all economic segments of the population and parameters for its distribution; 6. Policies for joint county and municipality planning within urban growth areas; 7. Policies for countywide economic development and employment, which must include consideration of the future development of commercial and industrial facilities; and 8. An analysis of the fiscal impact. 9. Policies that address the protection of tribal cultural resources in collaboration with federally recognized Indian tribes that are invited pursuant to subsection (4) of this section, provided that a tribe, or more than one tribe, chooses to participate in the process. Land Use Patterns For the first 100 years of Auburn’s existence, the land use pattern developed in a relatively logical manner. Auburn was fully contained to the valley floor with a traditional downtown urban center, several north/ south heavy commercial and industrial corridors paralleling Highway 167, and a surrounding housing stock that was built primarily between 1910 and 1960. In the last 30 years, the land use pattern of Auburn has changed, primarily from incorporation of areas to the south, east, and west. Each newly incorporated area has its own identity and land use pattern. Because a significant portion of today’s Auburn was settled prior to incorporation, the basic land use patterns and infrastructure have already been established. Furthermore, much of today’s Auburn land use pattern was established in either Auburn, the Muckleshoot Reservation, or prior to incorporation in King County or Pierce County. Given the mix of jurisdictional oversight, myriad land use policies, regulations, infrastructure standards, and investments have been applied in these areas. This has resulted in a relatively uncoordinated and random land use pattern. It also means that the various communities lack connectivity to each other, have a mix of identities, and are experiencing a change in their character from rural to more urban. Auburn has a strong mix of housing and industry. Auburn’s residential land use pattern includes a variety of densities, ages, and housing type. Auburn’s nonresidential land use pattern includes a mix of local and regional retail, entertainment, services, manufacturing, warehousing, and distribution centers. This mix of land use is a strength because it exemplifies social, economic, and cultural diversity. Auburn’s natural resources include the Green River and its tributaries, the White River and its tributaries, a robust inventory of wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes, and mature open spaces. With a strong base to work from, the city and its partners can be strategic Page 265 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-4 about how to better connect and preserve natural areas so that the overall system is enhanced for future generations to enjoy. Future Land Use The City of Auburn conducted a process to determine the preferred alternative for Auburn’s future land use. Alternatives are different options to achieve the project’s purpose and needs, and they serve as the basis for analyses related to environmental elements. The alternatives considered provide a range of capacities to accommodate growth for housing and employment, housing types, and citywide infrastructure investments. The Preferred Alternative, which is adopted as the future Zoning and Land Use maps, incorporate feedback from the community regarding where household and growth should occur as well as modelling to determine how growth may affect local infrastructure such as transportation and utilities. The Land Use and Zoning maps and assumptions described in the Land Use Element are assumed in each of the Comprehensive Plan Element and related systems plans. Future land use and zoning decisions were based on modelling results and calculations to demonstrate that there is adequate zoned capacity to accommodate the city’s required future housing and employment targets. Future Land Use Housing and Employment Capacity A residential land capacity analysis evaluates whether jurisdictions have sufficient land capacity available to allow for the types and amount of new housing needed to meet identified housing needs is required as part of HB 1220 requirements. The 2021 Housing Element updates amended RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) of the Growth Management Act to require the Housing Element to include explicit consideration of capacity for the following household needs and building types: • Moderate, low, very low, and extremely low- income households; • Permanent supportive housing; • Emergency housing and emergency shelters; and • Duplexes, triplexes and townhomes (within an urban growth area boundary The intent of this analysis is to assess the City of Auburn’s current capacity to accommodate different housing income brackets and whether that capacity is sufficient to meet Auburn’s housing targets established by King and Pierce counties. In addition, this analysis considers implementing a preferred land use alternative through zoning changes and provides updated capacity calculations to ensure sufficient capacity of suitable land to meet growth targets. Full analysis of housing and employment capacities and future need is described in Appendix A - Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment. Preferred Alternative Implementation To address an anticipated deficit of zoned capacity to accommodate future growth targets of 12,112 new housing units and 19,520 new jobs based on current zoning, Auburn is consolidated zoning districts, developing dedicated Growth Centers, increasing densities, and permitting additional housing types. The changes in zoning are based on a preferred alternative completed as part of the land use scenario process where select centers and nodes were identified for increased density. This preferred alternative is reflected in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Comprehensive Plan Zoning maps. Results of the zoning changes pertaining to housing unit and employment growth are summarized below. The full analysis is described in Appendix A - Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment. Residential and Employment Zoned Capacity Residential and employment capacity by zone is based primarily on the assumptions outlined Buildable Lands Report process in 2021, updates to reflect changes to zoning and density assumptions since that time. Downtown Urban Center mixed-use development assumes a distribution of 75% residential and 25% commercial, whereas the R-NM Neighborhood Mixed Use assumes a 50-50% split for mixed uses both vertically and horizontally. The residential capacity estimates accommodating 46,070 housing units at Page 266 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-5 max buildable capacity and 33,655 net new housing units, exceeding the 12,112 net new housing unit target. This increase is due largely to Middle Housing policies consistent with HB 1110 which allow for Middle Housing in all residentially zoned areas. The R2 – Residential Low zone is found widely throughout the city. Table 1. Residential Capacity by Zone Residential & Mixed-Use Zoning Districts Zone category Developable Acres Net zoning changes (acres) Assumed Density - DU/Acres Residential Capacity (units)Net New (Units) King County Residential Conservancy (RC)Low Density 745 0 1 745 - R-1 Residential Low Density 275 0 4 1,101 - R2 – Residential Low Moderate Density 294 1158 25 35,799 28,441 R3 – Residential Moderate Moderate Density 0 22 30 660 660 R4 – Residential High High Density 79 -1 50 3,890 -50 Neighborhood Mixed-Use (R-NM) High Density Mixed-Use 0 89 30 2,670 2,670 Manufacture Home/ Community (R-MHC)Low Density 27 0 10 273 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 125 High Density Mixed-Use 0 5 100 125 500 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 75 High Density Mixed-Use 0 5 95 119 475 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 55 High Density Mixed-Use 0 4 90 90 360 Total 1,420 1,285 -45,561 33,146 DUC Neighborhood Residential High Density Mixed-Use 0 3 30 90 90 Pierce County R2 – Residential Low Moderate Density 20 20 25 509 509 Total 20 20 -509 509 Total New (2044) Housing Capacity 46,070 33,655 Table 2. Adjusted Employment Development Capacity by Zone Non-Residential Districts Developable Acres Net zoning changes (acres) Assumed Density – DU/Acres Employment Capacity (units) Light Commercial (C-1)32 -13 845,391 2,254 Heavy Commercial District (C-2)8 -8 -- Auburn Gateway District (C-AG)0 15 653,400 653 Light Industrial (M-1)132 -41 3,945,338 3,945 Heavy Industrial (M-2)81 -9 3,122,925 3,123 Airport Landing Field (AF)5 0 233,038 233 Mixed-Use Districts Developable Acres Net zoning changes (acres) Assumed Density – DU/Acres Employment Capacity (units) DUC Downtown Urban Center – 125 0 5 163,350 408 DUC Downtown Urban Center – 75 0 5 163,350 408 Page 267 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-6 DUC Downtown Urban Center – 55 0 4 130,680 327 DUC Neighborhood Residential 0 3 98,010 245 DUC Health and Wellness – 125 0 2 87,120 218 DUC C-1 0 13 566,280 1,510 DUC C-2 0 12 522,720 1,394 DUC M-1 0 39 1,698,840 1,699 Neighborhood Mixed-Use (R-NM)0 89 1,938,420 5,169 Total New (2044) Jobs Capacity 21,587 The employment capacity estimates accommodating 20,701 new jobs at max buildable capacity by 2044, exceeding the city’s target of 19,520. Growth is located in the Downtown Urban Center (DUC) and in Growth Centers, whose core is primarily R-NM Neighborhood Mixed-Use. Additional growth in commercial space is anticipated, following a recent trend in industry job growth in Auburn. Housing Affordability by Average Median Income (AMI) Income Level (% AMI)Zone Categories Servicing these Needs Aggregated Housing Needs Capacity prior to Zoning Adjustment Post-Rezone Capacity Capacity surplus or deficit King County 0-30% PSH ADUs, High Density- Mixed Use 2,389 1,852 4,827 2,4380-30% Other >30-50%High-Density 962 1,913 3,890 2,928>50-80% >80-100%Moderate Density 2,458 1,514 36,968 34,600>100-120% >120%Low-Density 6,303 2,225 1,846 (4,457) Pierce County >80-100%Moderate Density, ADU 112 100 509 397 Aggregated Total -12,112 7,504 46,070 33,958 In addition to meeting the residential and employment capacity targets through zoning and policy decisions, the city meets the aggregate King and Pierce County housing needs for income level groups. The only exception is the >120% Average Median Income (AMI) category, which includes primarily low-density housing in the R-1 and RC zones. However, this AMI category is not required to be met under HB 1220 requirements as high-income earners are represented in this group and can also purchase moderate density housing options as well. In Pierce County, the City’s primary residential zone is R-2 Residential Moderate which for purposes of this capacity analysis aligns with the 80-120% AMI range. This zone can adequately accommodate the total housing need of 112, however AMI below 80% is not accounted for in this analysis. As indicated earlier, the housing target for the Pierce County portion of Auburn is only 112 housing units and as a result the city does not intend to rezone small areas of land in order to satisfy AMI requirements since actual development is unpredictable. The R-2 Residential Moderate zone can accommodate middle housing, single unit detached housing, and ADUs that can realistically serve a range of incomes, and the city will continue to provide flexibility in the development types allowed in this part of the city to best accommodate the full range of AMI levels. An estimated 1,852 new Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are accounted for prior to rezoning, as these developments are currently allowed in various zones are expected to occur naturally over the next 20-years. In total, 10% of new ADUs are planned for in the 50-80% AMI range, 80% in the 80-120% AMI range, and 10% in the greater than 120% AMI range. The high- density and moderate-density land uses where ADUs are primarily expected are found in throughout the city. Page 268 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-7 Map 1.1 below shows where future new population is anticipated based on new households. It is anticipated that Auburn will have a population of 100,000 by 2029 and approaching 130,000 by 2044. Map 1.1 – 2044 Population Estimates by Area Page 269 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-8 Map 1.2 shows the allocation of net new housing units by 2044 throughout the city. The net new housing units are consistent with King County and Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies required household units for 2044. Many of the new housing units are allocated in the Downtown Urban Center and in designated Growth Corridors. Map 1.2 – 2044 Net New Housing Units by Area Page 270 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-9 Goals, Policies, and Land Use Characteristics Residential Land Use Designations Character Residential uses will comprise a diverse arrangement of multiple densities and housing types. The pattern of one single density in a zone or neighborhood will evolve into increased and mixed densities in exchange for amenities that enhance quality of life. There will be greater connectivity and stronger spatial relationships between neighborhoods through strategic locations of roadway, trail, park, and neighborhood-serving businesses. These amenities will help create localized identity while also linking one area to another. The design and build quality of the new construction and infill will be held to a high standard. The city will encourage projects to be unique, innovative, and provide the residents of Auburn with true choice. Values Character: Residential neighborhoods will include amenities, features, and layouts that promote interaction amongst residents. Wellness: The design of residential neighborhoods will emphasize safety and nonmotorized connectivity. Service: Through outreach and engagement, individual residents and homeowners’ associations are connected to and aware of municipal services, events, and activities. Economy: Neighborhoods have a physical and personal connection to Auburn’s commercial centers and attractions. People want to move to Auburn because of the commercial and recreational opportunities it has to offer. Celebration: Districts and neighborhoods are identified, promoted, and celebrated. Environment: The built environment will fit into the natural landscape in a way that protects and respects ecosystem function and that preserves native vegetation and soils. Sustainability: Natural resources, economic prosperity, and cultural vibrancy are balanced in a way that builds and maintains a thriving and long-lasting community. Policies LU-1. Regulations for new developments and infill should address the following elements: A. Connectivity by multiple means to adjacent subdivisions, nearby commercial hubs, and parks and recreation facilities. B. Relationship to nearby existing or future transit service. C. Usable community amenities and spaces. D. Environmental protection and preservation of natural features. E. Preservation of areas that can support low- impact development techniques. F. Promote the use of energy and water conservation measures G. Efficient and effective delivery of utility service. H. Innovative design. I. Crime prevention through environmental design. J. Long-term maintenance considerations. LU-2 As denser development continues to occur; standards should be developed to maximize density while preserving open space and critical areas. LU-3 Programs should continue to be implemented to improve the quality of low-income neighborhoods and encourage rehabilitation of deteriorating structures and facilities. LU-4 Public/Quasi-Public uses may be permitted as a conditional use if de signed in a manner that enhances the residential character of the area. Special care shall be given to ensuring appropriate levels of parking, landscaping, and traffic circulation to avoid conflict with residential uses. LU-5 New residential development shall contribute to the creation, enhancement, and improvement of the transportation system, health and human services, emergency services, school system, and park system. This may be accomplished through the development of level-of-service standards, mitigation fees, impact fees, and/or construction contributions. Page 271 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-10 LU-6 Cluster development is the preferred form of residential development in all residential designations with the goal of preserving natural areas, critical areas, and areas that support low- impact development. Where clustering accomplishes these objectives, it should not come at the expense of lost development potential. Variances to lot size, lot dimensions, building height, and other bulk or dimensional standards should be utilized in order to create incentives that promote preservation. LU-7 Ensure that new development in Growth Centers meets minimum development intensity thresholds to ensure that employment and housing growth will help achieve the desired levels of jobs and housing units. LU-8 Designated Growth Centers and Downtown Urban Center shall promote physical activity and reduce per capita vehicle miles traveled within the jurisdiction, but without increasing greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere in the state. LU-9 Consider land use patterns and development regulations to promote development that addresses potential environmental health disparities in coordination with the Climate Element. LU-10 Identify and implement strategies to mitigate the risk to lives and property posed by wildfires. Risk identification and strategies should be aligned with Climate Element workplan through 2029. LU-11 Coordinate land use choices with neighboring jurisdictions, agencies, and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe to encourage consistency and predictability for regional planning and environmental considerations. LU-12 Encourage inclusive engagement on land use decisions to ensure decisions do not negatively impact historically marginalized communities. Page 272 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-11 Residential Conservancy Designation Description This designation should consist primarily of low- density residential uses (one dwelling unit per four acres is allowed) and accessory agricultural uses in areas featuring environmental constraints or requiring special protection such as the Coal Creek Springs watershed area, low-lying areas along the Green River, and areas that are isolated from the full complement of urban services. This designation will serve to both protect environmental features and hold areas for higher density development until such a time public facilities become available. Per HB 1110 requirements adopted in 2023, Middle Housing is permitted in this zone however adopted city development regulations still apply. Designation Criteria 1. Areas with significant environmental constraints, intrinsic value, or that may pose environmental hazards if developed, such as areas tributary to public water sources; 2. Affords greater protections to environmental features than existing designation; 3. Level of service for property consistent with adjacent residential conservancy properties; or 4. Location, size of properties, and character is consistent with a residential conservancy use. Implementation Zoning Designation A. RC Residential Conservancy Policies LU-13 Densities and activities shall be of a very low intensity and shall not compromise environmental and watershed resources. LU-14 In addition to single-family homes, these larger properties can also be developed with garages, accessory dwelling units, barns, and other accessory outbuildings. Home occupations, agricultural uses, 1 This designation was previously called “Single Family” prior to the 2024 Periodic Comprehensive Plan Update. However, the implementing zones may have changed. and other allowed nonresidential activities may operate out of any type of permitted building, subject to intensity and use limitations. LU-15 Until these areas are served by public utilities (water, sewer, storm services), existing and new development is not expected to be served by public infrastructure, such as urban streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lighting, and landscaping. LU-16 As the market and utility availability enable denser development to occur, standards should be developed to maximize density while preserving open space and critical areas. LU-17 Small-scale agricultural uses are allowed and encouraged. Commercial activities that are directly related to and support agricultural uses may also be allowed. The procedural standards may vary depending upon the type and scale of agricultural uses and supporting commercial activities. Small-scale agricultural uses are allowed and encouraged. LU-18 Land use standards should adequately limit and control excessive accumulation of debris. Where a permitted activity does allow outdoor storage, it should be adequately screened from adjacent properties and roads, as well as ensuring adequate soil and environmental protection. LU-19 Public/Quasi-Public and resource extractive uses that are low-intensity and preserve the environment may be considered conditional uses. Neighborhood Residential One Designation1 Description Low density land use for detached single-unit detached housing with a density of one unit per acre. Neighborhood Residential One includes all properties zoned R1 -Residential 1 du/acre including areas within the Urban Separator Overlay, as designated in King County Countywide Planning Policies. Per HB 1110 requirements adopted in 2023, Middle Housing is permitted in this zone however adopted city development regulations still apply. Page 273 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-12 Designation Criteria 1. Low density residential areas located within the Urban Separator Overlay that are also constrained by the presence of critical areas Implementing Zoning Designations A. R1 - Residential Zone (One Dwelling Unit Per Acre): All properties located within the Urban Separator Overlay are zoned R-1, as consistent with King County Countywide Planning Policies. Policies LU-20 Accessory dwelling units should play an integral part of promoting infill development and affordable housing and are therefore encouraged within this land use category. LU-21 Home occupations, bed-and-breakfasts, day cares, and other appropriate uses should be encouraged as viable accessory uses. LU-22 Manufactured homes shall be permitted on single-family lots provided they are sited and constructed in a manner that would blend with adjacent homes. LU-23 Encourage the development of a variety of housing typologies to suit the needs of various potential residents. LU-24 Density bonuses outside of the Urban Separator Overlay should be approved based on innovations in transportation, stormwater management, and public amenities proposed for the development or adjacent neighborhoods associated with the request. The onus is on the developer to justify density above baseline. Examples of amenities and concepts that justify density bonuses include park space, art, enhanced landscaping, trails that connect to adjacent properties, neighborhood commercial property set asides, use of low-impact development techniques beyond the minimum code requirements, incorporation of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) (Public Comment, LU 2) concepts, and variation of architecture and housing typology. 2 This designation was previously called “Moderate Density Residential” prior to the 2024 Periodic Comprehensive Plan Update. However, the implementing zones may have changed. Neighborhood Residential Two Designation2 Description Neighborhood Residential Two designated areas are planned to accommodate a variety of residential dwelling types. Varying intensities may be permitted to provide a transition between Neighborhood Residential One and other more intensive uses or activities (such as arterial streets) based on adjacent density, intensity, and/or character. Appropriate densities in these areas range from 25-30 dwelling units per acre, with between 4 and 6 Middle Housing units per lot permitted. Dwelling types generally range from single-unit detached dwellings to Middle Housing, and moderately sized mixed-use and apartment buildings that fit the size and character of traditional single-family neighborhoods. Low-impact, neighborhood scale business such as small-scale food stores, coffee shops, and cultural or recreational services in pre-existing structures, either separate from or as part of a mixed-use building, are allowed in Neighborhood Residential Two. Designation Criteria 1. Previously developed Neighborhood Residential Two areas; or 2. Areas that provide a transition between Neighborhood Residential One and Neighborhood Residential Three, Neighborhood Residential One and nonresidential, Neighborhood Residential Three and nonresidential zones or development that are adjacent and meet the development parameters of the Neighborhood Residential Two designation. Implementing Zoning Designations A. R2 – Residential Low B. R3 – Residential Moderate Policies LU-25 Density bonuses and flexible development Page 274 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-13 standards should be considered an incentive for innovative neighborhood design. LU-26 Carefully developed low-intensity commercial uses (such as day care centers, food and beverage establishments) can be compatible. LU-27 Middle Housing and accessory dwelling units should play an integral part of promoting infill development and affordable housing and are therefore encouraged within this land use category. Neighborhood Residential Three Designation3 Description Neighborhood Residential Three encourages a mix of Middle Housing residential, apartment buildings and mixed-use development at a greater density compared to Neighborhood Residential Two. These communities are served by nearby high-capacity transit, have nonmotorized connections to surrounding amenities (parks, libraries, community centers, etc.) and services, or have access to on-site amenities. Small, local commercial development is allowed consistent with Neighborhood Resident Two. Land use density standards are based on dwelling units per lot for all Middle Housing types, while base density of units per acre continues to apply for detached single-unit housing. This use includes Residential Manufactured Home communities, for which the City will be coordinating with the Department of Commerce for exception to compliance with middle housing requirements. Designation Criteria 1. Previously developed high-density residential or manufactured/mobile home parks; or 2. Properties that are connected to Neighborhood Residential One and nonresidential designations by the Neighborhood Residential Two designation or are connected to a Mixed- Use District. 3 This designation was previously called “Multiple-Family” prior to the 2024 Periodic Comprehensive Plan Update. However, the implementing zones may have changed. Implementing Zoning Designations A. R4 - Residential High B. R-MHC Residential Manufactured/Mobile Home Community Policies (cont.) LU-28 Development regulations should include density bonuses and flexible development standards that create incentives for innovative site and building design, incorporation of open space and public art, nonmotorized connectivity to parks and commercial areas, proximity to transit services, supplemental natural resource protection, supplemental use of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) (Public Comment, LU 2), and supplemental use of low-impact development techniques. LU-29 Home occupations and shared housing should be allowed in this designation; however, given their high densities, it is appropriate to establish additional restrictions, procedures, and requirements in order to ensure that they are compatible with their surroundings and do not adversely affect the community. LU-30 Live–work units are encouraged in Neighborhood Residential Two and Neighborhood Residential Three designations. LU-31 Improve the quality of low-income neighborhoods and implement programs that encourage rehabilitation of deteriorating structures and facilities the downtown area, areas between lower-density residential uses and more intense nonresidential activities, and areas with high levels of transit service and available high-quality services. LU-32 Parking requirements for Middle Housing types of development shall be reduced within ½ mile walk of a major transit stop, consistent with state requirements. LU-33 Middle Housing types are eligible for bonus of two dwelling units depending on proximity to a major transit stop or when two dwelling units are developed as affordable housing. Affordable housing bonus dwelling units shall remain affordable for a 50- year period and recorded on the covenant, per RCW 36.70A.030. Page 275 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-14 Mixed-Use Designation Description The Mixed-Use Designation permits a complementary mix of residential and commercial uses in a single land use designation. This designation encourages vertical mixed-use, horizontal-mixed use, conversion of existing residential to commercial, middle housing, and pedestrian and non-motorized travel, while allowing flexibility for how uses are combined within this area. Mixed-Use Districts align with areas where moderate and high-density development is served by transit, bicycle facilities and sidewalks, and amenities that create healthy and livable neighborhoods. Designation Criteria 1. Mixed-Use Districts are primarily located within designated Growth Centers or other areas where it can be demonstrated that the Mixed-Use District provides local neighborhood benefits consistent with the description and intent of the Mixed-Use District and where orientation to walkable communities is desired. 2. Residential and commercial uses are encouraged to be integrated as a component in all development projects. 3. A variety of housing options and development types is encouraged within this designation. 4. Mixed-Use District is not intended for automobile oriented or businesses that rely on outdoor storage, or any other type of storage facility. Such uses will be not permitted. 5. Development within a Growth Center designation along major roadways between Mixed-Use zones should provide additional building setback from the street right of way Page 276 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-15 and include areas for landscaping, open space, and pedestrian activity. Implementing Zoning Designations A. R-NM Neighborhood Mixed-Use B. RO Residential Office District C. Auburn Gateway District LU-34. Apartment development should be subject to building and site design standards. These standards should address the appearance of buildings, compatibility with nearby uses, exterior lighting, connectivity with surrounding properties and uses, the relationship of ground floor spaces and entryways with the streetscape, and connectivity to nearby nonresidential hubs (shopping centers and schools). Protected bicycle parking should be provided. LU-35. Provide a variety of housing typologies to suit the needs of various potential residents. LU-36. Establish intensity limitations such as floor area ratios, density, building height, coverage ratios, setbacks, and other standards. LU-37. Access to nearby amenities and health and human services should be considered when reviewing senior housing developments. LU-38. Encourage development of permanent supportive housing to address the homeless population and those with special needs. LU-39. Encourage adaptive reuse, particularly of historic properties. LU-40 Mixed-Use Districts should support cohesive, diverse, neighborhood mixed-use centers that allow vertical and horizontal mixed-use flexibility, as well as flexibility in uses, that provide for local housing, shopping, and employment options that also allows each center to foster it’s own identity. (Public Comment, LU 2), LU-41. Encourage sustainable transportation options by creating viable options for people to get to destinations by alternatives to personal vehicles in Mixed-Use Districts, Neighborhood Residential Three, and Neighborhood Residential Two designations. LU-42. Support development of small-scale, local neighborhood serving commercial such as food and drink establishments and local services in Residential Two and Three designations. LU-43. The residential uses permitted must be carefully regulated in regard to performance criteria to ensure alignment with the City’s responsibility to accommodate required share of regional growth. Commercial Land Use Designation Character Commercial uses will be wide ranging in terms of scale and type. A mix of businesses – local, regional, and national – will be among the businesses in the various designations and will be carefully located to create balance and maintain appropriateness based on adjacent uses. These commercial areas will be economically vibrant, unique, and active outside of traditional work hours. They will be accessible by foot, bike, car, and public transport. Values Character: Active gathering spaces, such as parks, plazas, cafes, concert venues, festivals and markets, will be distributed throughout the City; these spaces will be engaging and filled with people interacting, irrespective of culture, age, or income level. Wellness: A variety of healthy food options will be physically and economically accessible to all members of the Auburn community. Service: The City’s resources and services are available and utilized by the business community. The business community finds the City approachable, empathetic, and responsive. An open and collaborative dialogue exists to help identify problems and find solutions. Economy: A wide complement of retail, service, and dining options will cater to local needs, attract visitors, and encourage consistent patronage of local businesses. Celebration: Auburn will have a thriving and expanding arts and culture community. There will be events, amenities, and attractions that draw people to congregate and socialize. Environment: Local businesses benefit from Auburn’s collection of natural resources and amenities because residents and visitors are choosing Auburn as their home or destination. Page 277 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-16 Sustainability: Local businesses benefit from, and contribute to, a sustainable economy because Auburn is an easy location to start up, maintains opportunity for growth, and has a business-friendly economic climate. Policies LU-44. The commercial uses permitted must be carefully regulated in regard to performance criteria and design to ensure alignment with the City’s responsibility to accommodate required share of regional growth. LU-45. Permitted uses in Residential designations would consist of local-serving and community-serving retail trade, offices, personal services, and eating establishments. LU-46. Encourage uses that provide health and human services to the adjacent community. LU-47. Encourage adaptive reuse, particularly of historic properties. LU-48. Promote the use of energy and water conservation measures LU-49. Ensure that legally established existing uses that may not conform with the underlying zone, but that are compatible with their surrounding uses, and are allowed to continue to evolve and operate without being classified as “nonconforming” uses. LU-50. Consider commercial displacement when evaluating new development proposals and determine strategies to mitigate impacts when possible. Description Commercial land use designations are predominantly a mix of retail, office, service, hospitality, entertainment, and eating/drinking establishments. Some districts have a greater non-motorized emphasis Page 278 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-17 where buildings and site features are scaled to a pedestrian level while other districts are more auto-centric. Extra design emphasis is placed on architecture, lighting, landscaping, accessory uses, landscaping, hours of operation, site layout, and transitions to adjacent uses. Designation Criteria 1. Previously developed light commercial areas buffered from more intense commercial or industrial designations by landscaping or environmental features; or 2. Previously developed heavy commercial areas; or 3. Located along arterial or collector streets; 4. Properties that are buffered from the single- family designation by landscaping, or environmental features,; and 5. Meets the development parameters of the Light and Heavy Commercial designations. Implementing Zoning Designations A. C-1 Light Commercial B. C-2 Heavy Commercial Downtown Urban Center Designation Description The Downtown Urban Center (DUC) land use designation should be applied exclusively in the Downtown Auburn Subarea and Regional Growth center as identified in the Comprehensive Plan and 2024 Auburn Downtown Plan. As a Regional Growth Center, the DUC must maintain a planned target density of 45 activity units per acre minimum, per Puget Sound Regional Center Requirements. The Land Use Element assumes this target when considering future land use and zoning changes in the DUC. DUC zoning and land use in the Land Use Element and map are consistent with those in the draft 2024 Auburn Downtown Plan, which is under development with an anticipated 2025 adoption date. The DUC is implemented by zoning districts specific to Downtown Urban Center and the Downtown Design Guidelines. The ambiance of the downtown should encourage leisure shopping, provide amenities that attract regional visitors and shoppers, and provide housing and services to local residents and area employees. Designation Criteria 1. Located within the Urban Center boundaries established by the King County Countywide planning policies or within the PSRC Regional Growth Center boundaries. Implementing Zoning Designations DUC Subarea-Specific Zoning classifications consisting of: A. DUC Downtown Urban Center - 125’ District B. DUC Downtown Urban Center - 75’ District C. DUC Downtown Urban Center – 55’ District D. DUC Downtown Urban Center – Health and Wellness District E. DUC Downtown Urban Center - C1 Light Commercial District F. DUC Downtown Urban Center - C2 Heavy Commercial District G. DUC Downtown Urban Center - M1 Light Industrial District H. DUC Downtown Urban Center - Flex-Residential District I. DUC Downtown Urban Center - Neighborhood Residential District Policies LU-51. Vertical mixed-use should be encouraged; the location of retail sales and services should predominately be on the ground floor with residential or more retail or services above. However, small freestanding commercial spaces may be established as an accessory use to a larger vertical mixed-use development. LU-52. Deviations of height, density or intensity limitations should be allowed when supplemental amenities are incorporated into site and building design. Examples of amenities include use of low- impact development, use of sustainable site and building techniques, public space and art, transit- oriented development (TOD), landscaping and lighting, Page 279 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-18 and bike shelters as well as the inclusion of affordable housing. LU-53. Encourage a broad mix of uses within the downtown area. A wide range of consumer-oriented goods and services are compatible within this designation since creating an attractive shopping environment is a primary emphasis. Permitted uses include retail trade, offices, personal services, eating and drinking establishments, financial institutions, governmental offices, and similar uses. Legally established existing uses that do not fit within the range of desired new uses continue to be a valuable part of the downtown economy and character and should be allowed to evolve and operate in a manner that resembles listed permitted uses. LU-54. Encourage residential dwellings within the upper stories of buildings and provide flexibility with how those spaces are organized and utilized. LU-55. Drive-in windows shall not be permitted to maintain the area’s pedestrian environment. LU-56. Parking standards within the downtown should reflect the pedestrian orientation of the area, but also consider parking’s impact for economic development. LU-57. Discourage uses that rely on direct access by vehicles or involve heavy truck traffic (other than for merchandise delivery). LU-58. Unsightly outdoor storage and similar activities should be prohibited. LU-59. The downtown should capitalize on opportunities for multimodal transportation. LU-60. Encourage adaptive reuse of existing buildings, particularly of historic properties. LU-61. As a designated VISION 20 50 Regional Growth Center that contains a transit station, land use policies and regulations should encourage population Page 280 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-19 and employment growth. LU-62. The commercial uses permitted must be carefully regulated in regards to performance criteria and design. Architectural style, building height and size, lighting, and signage should be consistent with the surrounding residential properties. LU-63. Permitted uses would consist of community and regional-serving retail trade, offices, personal services, and non-drive through eating establishments. LU-64. Special emphasis will be directed at those accessory activities that can alter the character of these areas into heavier commercial areas. Examples include outdoor storage, location, and screening of trash receptacles, loading and unloading zones, and parking lots. Regulations and permit conditions will employ techniques that mitigate light and noise impacts associated with surrounding residential properties. LU-65. Commercial uses will have an orientation that is directed toward adjacent public streets while also providing pedestrian and bike-oriented access. LU-66. Upzone requests to the next zone will be considered for approval based on the innovations in transportation and stormwater management and public amenities proposed for the development associated with the request. LU-67. Encourage occupancy of storefront and other ground floor public-facing spaces to create a active environment downtown. LU-68. Explore opportunities to increase the amount of public green space in downtown that provide spaces for recreation and activation. LU-69. A wide range of consumer-oriented goods and services are compatible within this designation since creating an attractive shopping environment is a primary emphasis. Permitted uses would consist of local-serving and community-serving retail trade, offices, personal services, eating establishments, financial institutions, governmental offices, and similar uses. LU-70. Parking lots must be located and designed in a manner that softens their appearance from adjacent public roads. This is accomplished through landscaping, pedestrian spaces, and the location of buildings on the property. Where practicable, low- impact development techniques and landscaping should be used to promote on site stormwater infiltration and shading of hard surfaces. Minimum and maximum parking ratios must be established for each type of permitted use. LU-71. Development incentives should be established that encourage the creation of electric car charging stations, use of sustainable building and/or operational practices, development of nonmotorized infrastructure, and proximity and connection to public transit. LU-72. Multiple family dwellings are only allowed as part of mixed-use developments where they do not interfere with the shopping character of the area, such as within the upper stories of buildings. LU-73. Drive in windows should only be allowed accessory to a permitted use, and only when carefully sited under the administrative use process, in order to ensure that an area’s pedestrian environment is not compromised LU-74. Large-scale regional retail uses and uses that rely on direct access by vehicles or involve heavy truck traffic (other than for merchandise delivery) are not appropriate in this category. LU-75. Unsightly outdoor storage and similar activities should be prohibited. LU-76. Encourage adaptive reuse, particularly of historic properties. LU-77. Upzone requests to the next zone should be approved based on the innovations in transportation and stormwater management and public amenities proposed for the development associated with the request. LU-78. A wide variety of commercial-oriented services are appropriate within this category. This includes but is not limited to regional-scale retail and entertainment uses, commercial uses with outdoor sales areas, drive-in restaurant or other drive-in commercial businesses, and commercial services with outdoor storage as an accessory use. LU-79. Parking lots must be located and designed in a manner that softens their appearance from adjacent public roads. This is accomplished through landscaping, pedestrian spaces, and the location of buildings on the property. Where practicable, low- impact development techniques and landscaping should be used to promote on site stormwater infiltration and shading of hard surfaces. Minimum and Page 281 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-20 maximum parking ratios must be established for each type of permitted use. LU-80. Development incentives should be established that encourage the creation of electric car charging stations, use of sustainable building and/or operational practices, development of nonmotorized infrastructure, and proximity and connection to public transit. Industrial Land Use Designation Character Industrial uses will become a more integrated part of the physical and social life of the city. Since so many people work in these areas and these companies contribute so much to the financial life of the city, it is important that they are connected through paths, roads and by public transportation. Locations that have access to rail and highways that also encourage intelligent growth patterns will be prioritized. Innovation will be a key requirement of new and infill projects as the city looks to mitigate impacts of production and limit damage to the environment. Values Character: Buildings, landscaping, and outdoor spaces will be attractive, interesting, well designed, and well maintained. Wellness: Risk to life and property from all hazards will be minimized. Properties and businesses are connected to nonmotorized corridors that offers alternative means to commute. Service: The city works closely with individuals and organizations to fully understand the demands, needs, Page 282 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-21 and concerns of the industrial community so that the city can sponsor initiatives that help aid in their success. Economy: Cornerstone institutions will strategically expand in regional prominence. As industry grows, land use policy will support efforts to grow within Auburn. Celebration: The Community will be made aware of and celebrate the accomplishments of our local, regional and international leaders in manufacturing, warehousing, and distribution. Environment: The built environment will fit into the natural landscape in a way that protects and respects ecosystem function. Natural resource protection will be supported and celebrated by City leadership and the community. Sustainability: Industrial uses are contributing to, and supportive of, efforts to build and maintain a transportation system that ensures the people and goods move safely throughout the city and beyond. Description Industrial lands allow for a mix of manufacturing, logistics, and warehousing along with the space needed to store materials and vehicles. These areas have a heavy reliance upon the transportation of goods by rail or truck which necessitates loading docks/bays, ample area for truck movement, and convenient access to robust rail and road infrastructure. These areas can also accommodate uses such as breweries and distilleries and their associated tasting rooms, restaurants and banquet halls, warehouse style retail outlets, and a modest level of integrated housing. Designation Criteria 1. Previously developed light or heavy industrial areas; or 2. Light Industrial provides buffering for heavy industrial areas or is buffered from the single-family designation by landscaping, environmental features, and buffered from all other Residential designations; 3. Meets the development parameters of the Light and Heavy Industrial zoning districts. 4. Heavy Industrial districts should not located along high-visibility corridors serving non- industrial uses; 5. Properties identified as LF Airport Landing Field on the zoning map in the Airport Master Plan, and properties identified for future acquisition. Implementing Zoning Designations A. M-1 Light Industrial B. M-2 Heavy Industrial C. Airport Landing Field District LU-81. A wide range of industrial uses may be permitted, subject to performance standards. LU-82. Outside storage shall be permitted subject to performance criteria addressing its quantity and location. LU-83. Development incentives should be established that encourage the creation of electric car charging stations, use of sustainable building and/or operational practices, development of nonmotorized infrastructure, and proximity and connection to public transit. LU-84. Promote the use of energy and water conservation measures. LU-85. A wide range of industrial uses may be permitted, subject to performance standards. Heavy commercial uses that serve the needs of workers in light industries are also appropriate. These uses include indoor manufacturing, processing, and assembling of materials from previously prepared or raw materials and ancillary and necessary warehousing and distribution of finished goods associated with manufacturing and industrial uses. LU-86. Parking lots must be located and designed in a manner that softens their appearance from adjacent public roads. This is accomplished through landscaping, pedestrian spaces, and the location of buildings on the property. Where practicable, low-im pact development techniques and landscaping should be used to promote on site stormwater infiltration and shading of hard surfaces. Minimum and maximum parking ratios must be established for each type of permitted use. LU-87. Landscaping, sidewalks, and bike paths will be integral parts of site design if a development is located on an impression corridor or located within or adjacent to an identified nonmotorized corridor. Page 283 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-22 LU-88. Outside storage shall be permitted subject to performance criteria addressing its quantity and location. This is to ensure compatibility with adjacent uses, so that such storage would not detract from the potential use of the area for light industry. In all cases, such storage shall be extensively screened. LU-89. Where an Industrial use is located adjacent to a property with a less intense zoning designation, the light industrial use bears the burden of incorporating techniques that mitigate the visual, noise, dust, and odor impacts. LU-90. Uses involving substantial storage or processing of hazardous materials, as well as substantial emissions, should not be permitted in these areas. LU-91. A wide range of commercial activities may be allowed to provide increased opportunities for sales tax revenue. LU-92. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Auburn Yard located within the Railroad Special Plan Area is considered a compatible use at its current level of usage. It is not bound by the policies concerning outside storage under the existing light industrial designation as it was an existing use prior to the development of this policy. Should BNSF decide to reactivate its applications to upgrade the yard to an intermodal facility, the proposal will be subject to the essential public facility siting process as defined in the Capital Facilities Element. LU-93. Upzone requests to the next zone should be approved based on the innovations in transportation and stormwater management and public amenities proposed for the development associated with the request. LU-94. While this zone should be reserved primarily for the heavier forms of industrial activities, a wide range of industrial activities may be permitted. These heavier forms of industrial activities may include outdoor or semi-enclosed manufacturing, processing, or assembling activities, significant outdoor storage, and uses involving substantial storage or processing of hazardous materials. Heavy commercial uses that serve the needs of workers in heavy industries are also appropriate. LU-95. Landscaping, sidewalks, and bike paths will be integral parts of site design if a development is located on an impression corridor or located within or adjacent to an identified nonmotorized corridor. LU-96. For the LF Airport Landing Field District, the Airport Master Plan (AMP) establishes the vision, policies, and implementation strategies that govern uses, management principles, and future planning efforts. The AMP is incorporated by reference in the Auburn Comprehensive Plan as an appendix. LU-97. Auburn Municipal Airport is included in the federal airport system the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS). Participation in the NPIAS is limited to public use airports that meet specific FAA criteria. NPIAS airports are eligible for federal funding of improvements through FAA programs. To maintain eligibility for funding through FAA programs, the Airport Master Plan should be periodically updated as conditions change. LU-98. Uses, activities, and operations within the LF Airport Landing Field District must be coordinated and consistent with the Airport Master Plan. LU-99. Future expansions of the LF Airport Landing Field District, for the purpose of airport uses, activities, and operations, should be coordinated and consistent with the Airport Master Plan. LU-100. While the industrially designated area east of the Airport is highly suited for airport related activities, other industrial type uses are now located here. Therefore, the City will encourage use in this area to take advantage of its proximity to the Airport. LU-101. New commercial land uses in proximity to the airport should be air related and/ or complementary to the airport. LU-102. To protect the viability of the Auburn Municipal Airport the City shall create an airport overlay that is consistent with FAA regulations and WSDOT guidance. LU-103. The City’s zoning ordinance and other appropriate regulatory measures shall enforce the airport overlay and the FAR Part 77 surfaces. LU-104. The airport overlay shall protect the operations of the Auburn Municipal Airport by establishing controls on incompatible land uses and development. LU-105. The airport overlay should be implemented to manage land uses and development around the airport to ensure compatibility into the future and prevent incompatible future uses. The regulations applied to properties surrounding the airport should Page 284 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-23 encourage land uses that are related to, and benefit from, proximity to the airport but not restricted exclusively to only these. LU-106. The impact of development on air safety shall be assessed through the City zoning ordinance, FAA regulations, SEPA review, input from the Auburn Municipal Airport, and relevant technical guidance. Appropriate mitigation measures shall be required by the City. LU-107. Uses in proximity to the airport that may create potential operational (e.g. height or noise) conflicts shall be reviewed for their consistency to airport operations and conformance with the FAA regulations. LU-108. The airport should be protected from nonconforming uses and structures that pose a safety concern to airport operations. LU-109. The City shall determine whether nonconforming uses and structures affect airport operations and require their minimization or elimination, at cost to owner, based on individualized study of proposals, City regulations, input from the Auburn Municipal Airport, and relevant technical guidance. Public/Quasi-Public Designation Character This category includes those areas that are reserved for public or quasi-public uses. It is intended to include those of a significant extent, and not those smaller public uses that are consistent with and may be included in another designation. These public uses include public schools, developed parks, and uses of quasi-public character such as large churches and private schools. Public uses of an industrial character are included in the industrial designation, and small- scale religious institutions of a residential character are included in the residential designation. Streets, utilities, and other separate uses are not intended to be mapped separately as Public/Quasi-Public. Values Character: Community facilities and programs bring people together and connect residents and visitors to our natural resources. Wellness: Multiple recreation options, and nearby trails, parks, activities, and events will be readily accessible to the entire community. Service: Land use policy supports the provision of community, health and human services to all residents. Economy: Residents and visitors seek Auburn as a residence or destination because of its natural resources, community events, and community pride. Celebration: We utilize our open spaces and public facilities to promote who we are, our diversity, and our community pride. Environment: Residents and visitors will enjoy open spaces and environmentally sensitive areas, while encouraging the appreciation of their importance and beauty. Impacts of new development on natural resources are considerate of their sensitivity and importance. Sustainability: Public and private funds are used to make investments in land preservation, restoration and protection. Public investments in land and facilities are considered for their perpetual or generational value versus short-term motivations. Policies LU-110. The primary purpose of this designation is to address public needs while taking advantage of synergies with the adjacent areas where they are sited. LU-111. Appropriate uses for this designation include facilities that serve the needs of the larger community such as public schools, active parks, city operated municipal facilities, police stations, and fire stations. LU-112. Innovative strategies to integrate the uses and sites into the areas where they are sited is encouraged. These strategies should maximize use of the site while minimizing fiscal impacts and impacts to adjacent areas. LU-113. Increase visibility of resources through public information campaigns. LU-114. Appropriate uses include low-intensity recreational uses, passive use open areas, protected environmental habitat, stormwater detention facilities, and similar low-intensity uses. LU-115. Promote the use of energy and water Page 285 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-24 conservation measures. LU-116. A responsible management entity and the purpose for Institutional districts should be identified for each property interest within this designation. Management policies and plans are appropriate for all lands in this designation. LU-117. This designation permits a wide array of uses that tend to be located in the midst of other dissimilar uses. For this reason, special emphasis should be directed at the following: A. The appropriateness of new requests for this designation and the impacts that it may have on the surrounding community. B. Site-specific conditions that should be attached to the granting of new requests for this designation that are designed to mitigate impacts on the surrounding community. C. Site-specific conditions that should be attached to development proposals that are designed to mitigate impacts on the surrounding community. LU-118. Coordination with other Institutional entities is essential in the implementation of the Public/Quasi- Public land use designation. LU-119. Industrial and commercial uses that are affiliated with and managed by educational institutions for vocational educational purposes may be classified as a Publican Public/Quasi-Public use and permitted on a conditional basis. Designation Criteria 1. Previously developed institutional uses; or 2. Meets the development parameters of the Public/Quasi-Public designation. Implementing Zoning Designations A. I Institutional B. P-1 Public Use District Open Space Designation Description Open space lands are in public ownership or an otherwise permanently protected state that provide enhanced protection of floodplains, aquatic and/or wildlife corridors, wetlands, hazardous slopes, or that protect groundwater supplies. Open Space lands may be made available for public access and education which includes ancillary supportive uses such as Page 286 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-25 bathrooms, trails, boardwalks, interpretive signs, parking, and picnic areas. Designation Criteria 1. Passive parks or undeveloped Parks Department property; 2. Any site containing a significant developmental hazard; or 3. Any site containing open space value suitable for public protection without unduly encroaching on private property rights. 4. Sites that are permanently protected as a result of the terms of acquisition or a recorded instrument. Implementing Zoning Designations A. OS Open Space Policies LU-120. Active parks that provide sports field, activity and community centers, cemeteries, and public buildings should not be designated as open space. LU-121. Open space lands are primarily designated to provide wildlife and aquatic habitat, flood detention, vegetation and soil preservation, and view shed protection. Land designated as open space may be used for public access to trails, interpretive centers, education opportunities, and other uses and facilities that support the purpose of their designation. LU-122. Increase distribution of open space and increase access to open space amenities throughout Auburn. LU-123. Enhance restoration, preservation and protection of natural resources and critical areas. LU-124. Seek out opportunities to develop recreation and education opportunities on public lands or through public–private partnerships. LU-125. Increase visibility of resources through public information campaigns. Continue to work with regional partners to develop and maintain trail systems that connect Auburn with regional destinations. LU-126. Build on partnerships with school districts to expand public use of school facilities for recreation and exercise, and to improve public access to facilities for this purpose, as appropriate. Overlays, Urban Growth Area, and Special Planning Land Use Designations Character These areas help control growth, protect the environment, and prevent urban sprawl conditions in our City. For a variety of reasons, specific areas exist within the City that require further specificity or focus of land use planning, policy, regulation, or investment. Overlays, urban growth areas, and special planning areas may be designated that help further enumerate a purpose. These areas are to be designated through the Comprehensive Plan and treated as a component of the Land Use Element of the Plan. Values Each area designated as an overlay, urban growth area, or special planning area shall reflect the values identified in the Core Comprehensive Plan. General Policies LU-127. These land use designations must be consistent with the Growth Management Act, Puget Sound Regional Council, and countywide planning policies. LU-128. Any proposed changes to these designations must be pursued in coordination with applicable State, Regional and County agencies. Urban Separator Designation Description Urban separators are areas designated for low- density uses in the King County Countywide planning policies. They are intended to “protect Resource Lands, the Rural Area, and environmentally sensitive areas, and create open space and wildlife corridors within and between communities while also providing public health, environmental, visual, and recreational benefits.” There are two primary areas of urban separators, one on Lea Hill and one on West Hill. Designation Criteria Page 287 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-26 Areas designated through the process of annexation. Implementing Zoning Designations A. Lea Hill Overlay B. West Hill Overlay C. Bridges Overlay D. Urban Separator Overlay Policies LU-129. The City is obligated to maintain (and not redesignate) the Urban Separator designation until at least the year 2022, pursuant to countywide planning policies and an annexation agreement with King County. The City will coordinate with King County on redesignation of Urban Separators in 2025. LU-130. Urban separators are deemed to be both a regional as well as local concern and no modifications to development regulations governing their use may be made without King County review and concurrence. Therefore, the areas designated as “urban separator” on the Comprehensive Land Use map, will be zoned for densities not to exceed one dwelling unit per acre, with lot clustering being required if a subdivision of land is proposed. Urban Growth Area and Potential Annexation Area Designation Description Urban growth areas and potential annexation areas are areas located outside of the municipal city limits of Auburn. They are areas that are anticipated to be incorporated into the City within 10 years of their designation. Designation Criteria Potential annexation areas are jointly developed by cities and the County in which they are located. They are based upon countywide growth projections that are divided among all urban growth areas within each respective County. Urban growth areas and potential annexation areas are distinguished from each other by whether they have been assigned to a city or not. Urban growth areas have been identified but have not been assigned to a city. Potential annexation areas are urban growth areas that have been assigned to a specific city. Implementing Zoning Designations A. Urban Growth Area Potential Annexation Area Page 288 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-27 Policies LU-131. Work with King and Pierce County, as well as nearby cities, to redesignate urban growth areas into potential annexation areas. LU-132. Auburn’s Potential Annexation Area is shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map (Map 1.1). Map 1.1 also depicts Growth Impact Areas. These Growth Impact Areas are generally adjacent to cities or unincorporated County lands in which development that occurs potentially impacts the city of Auburn. LU-133. The Auburn City Council may revise the boundaries of the Potential Annexation Area in the future, in response to: A. Amendments to King and Pierce County Urban Growth Areas as specified in the King and Pierce County countywide policies B. Discussions between Auburn and adjacent jurisdictions regarding potential annexation area boundaries C. Discussions with Pierce County concerning the designation of potential annexation area boundaries D. Changed circumstances relating to population and employment growth and projections, urban service feasibility, or similar factors. LU-134. Develop strategies and agreements for the review of development and provision of utilities within potential annexation areas that have yet to be annexed. LU-135. Prior to annexation, develop strategies and agreements that address the orderly transition of areas into the city such as transfer of permit authority, infrastructure financing, financing of fire and police services, and interim development regulations. Critical Area Overlay Land Use Description Under the Growth Management Act cities and counties are required to identify, designate and protect critical areas. Critical areas include (a) wetlands, (b) aquifer recharge areas (including areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water), (c) fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, (d) frequently flooded areas, and (e) geologically hazardous areas. Designation Criteria Designation of critical areas includes both criteria that should be applied to the specific type of critical area as well as buffers and/or setbacks that are necessary for the protection of the critical area and/or life and property. Designation of critical areas is based on best available science as it applies to local conditions. Implementing Zoning Designations A. Wetlands B. Aquifer Recharge Areas C. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas D. Frequently Flooded Areas E. Geologically Hazardous Area Policies LU-136. Best available science will be utilized for the specific designation criteria and the associated adopted protection standards and development regulations. LU-137. Reasonable use provisions will be included within the critical area regulations that ensure a property owner is not denied use of a preexisting parcel, lot or tract. LU-138. Exemptions to the critical areas ordinance should be provided for very limited and justified circumstances such as maintenance of existing land uses, work within some types of human-made features, limited types of site investigation work, emergency activities, and certain types of invasive vegetation control. LU-139. Critical area regulations will identify the process and standards for alteration of a critical area and criteria related to mitigation, performance, and monitoring. Special Planning Area Designation Description “Special Planning Areas” consist of Districts, subareas, Impression Corridors, and Gateways within Auburn that warrant additional emphasis in planning, investments, and policy development. Each may be recognized separately within the Comprehensive Plan, as an Element of the Comprehensive Plan, or as an Page 289 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-28 subarea plan (discussed below). There are a variety of reasons for designating and distinguishing a special planning area, and once designated, a variety of potential outcomes. Reasons for designating a special planning area include: • Growth Centers are areas of the city identified though the Comprehensive Planning process where a large share of growth is allocated. These areas provide a combination of Mixed- use, higher density residential, and higher density commercial uses which serve the local area. There will be a special focus on the performance of these Centers, including housing units and jobs created, to ensure the City accommodates the required share of regional growth by 2044. Growth Centers are shown in Map 1.4 and reflected in development regulations found in city code. • Areas of high visibility and traffic. These areas create an impression or image of Auburn. It is therefore particularly important to ensure that they are attractive and well maintained. Examples include Auburn Way South and associated major highway on- and off-ramps. • Land use activities that warrant joint planning between the city and owner/operator. In addition to developing approaches and strategies for the land use activity, there may be additional emphasis on ensuring compatibility with surrounding land uses. Examples include Green River College, the Auburn Municipal Airport, and Emerald Downs Thoroughbred Horse Racetrack. • Neighborhoods in which a resident and merchant live and conduct daily business and leisure. Neighborhoods may also be distinguished by physical setting, physical separations, and similarity over an area. Examples include downtown, Lea Hill, and Lakeland. • Areas with a focused desire to create greater physical and economic cohesiveness. These may be large, planned developments or clusters. Examples include the Auburn North Business Area and Mt. Rainier Vista. • Areas with an existing built environment or an existing regulatory framework that does not, in itself, meet the expectations of the seven values that underscore the Comprehensive Plan. Examples include the need for multimodal connections between West Hill and Lea Hill to north and downtown Auburn. Designation Criteria 1. Districts: The geographic limit of districts and areas that make up this category of Special Planning Areas extends beyond an alignment with any particular street, trail, river, stream, or other linear corridor. Districts may contain other smaller Special Planning Areas, such as subareas. Additionally, districts are generally consistent with the geography of one of the eight “neighborhoods” identified in the 2014 City of Auburn Community Vision Report. Generally speaking, districts are identified for the purpose of creating identity. This means that the land use designations and overarching policies and implementing regulations are not going to change from one district to the next. Instead, Districts are important for event planning, establishing park and open space level-of-service standards, and promoting community identity Districts (see Map 1.4) • West Hill • North Auburn • Lea Hill • Downtown • South Auburn • Plateau • Lakeland • Southeast Auburn 2. Subareas: Subareas are smaller in geography than a district. Though relatively large, multiple subareas may be located within a single district. Subareas allow for the refinement and recognition of existing unique characteristics within a district. Subareas are intended to anticipate, support, and guide long-term growth and redevelopment through planned development and a unique vision for how that area should look and function in the future. It can also be used to provide flexibility Page 290 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-29 when there is uncertainty regarding how an area may be most appropriately developed in the future. 3. Twenty-eight (28) subareas currently exist. These subareas are categorized into five different types of subareas: • Identified Areas; • Designated Areas; • Economic Development Strategy Areas (a Designated Areas sub-category); • Areas of Concern (another Designated Areas sub-category); and • Adopted Areas. Uses, intensities, and infrastructure development determined for each subarea or planned area through individual planning processes. Connectivity throughout the planned area, and connections to multimodal transportation opportunities outside of the planned area are also emphasized through the individual planning process. The result of each individual planning process is the adoption of Comprehensive Plan element or subarea plan for the particular subarea by the City Council. Each Plan element must be consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and once adopted, subarea plans are intended to guide the future development of each respectively adopted subarea. 2a. Identified Areas: Identified areas are identified as a subarea within the Comprehensive Plan, but have not been established on the Comprehensive Plan Map. Therefore, the specific and detailed boundaries of an identified subarea have not been defined. Identification of a subarea within the Comprehensive Plan occurs by official action of the City Council. Identified Areas • Auburn Golf Course • GSA/Boeing • Green River College • Mary Olsen Farm • Les Gove Campus • Emerald Downs • Auburn High School 2b. Designated Areas: Designated Areas have been designated on the Comprehensive Plan Map, which defines the specific and detailed boundaries of the area. Designation of an area on the Comprehensive Plan Map occurs by official action of the Auburn City Council. It is intended that future development of these areas will be guided by individual Plan element or subarea plan of the Comprehensive Plan. The future subarea plan will either supplement existing goals, policies, and implement strategies, or replace existing Comprehensive Plan designations and policies for the area within the specific and detailed boundary. Designated Areas (see Map 1.6): • Auburn Municipal Airport • BNSF Rail Yard • Stuck River Road • Mount Rainier Vista • Lakeview 2b(1). Designated Areas: Areas of Concern: Areas of Concern are a specific type (or subcategory) of the designated area. Areas of Concern are established because they represent an area that features a lack in the infrastructure and services (e.g. municipal water and sewer service, urban roads, traffic demand, and storm water management) necessary to support increase in density or other development. These areas require a close assessment of and an emphasis on infrastructure development and planning to support further development. While this Plan may not fully represent the intensity of uses that could ultimately be supported in these areas (in part due to the current weakness of the City’s infrastructure to support future growth). Development intensification within the Area of Concern needs to be coordinated with the necessary infrastructure and services to support growth. Designated Areas - Areas of Concern (see Map 1.6): • AWS/Auburn Black Diamond Rd. • Pike Street NE • 8th Street NE 2b (2). Designated Areas: Economic Development Strategy Areas: The Economic Development Strategy Areas are a specific type (or subcategory) of designated area. In 2005, City Council adopted six Economic Development Strategy Areas under Page 291 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-30 Resolution No. 3944. These areas, initially identified by a focus group of diverse business and community interests, are targeted for population and employment growth within the planning horizon of the City’s 20-year growth target (204431). By 2012, the City Council added three additional economic development strategy areas, bringing the total to nine (9) strategy areas. During the City’s 2015 update of the Comprehensive Plan the list of economic development strategy areas reflects current conditions and status of these areas. As such, two of the original six economic development strategy areas were removed from the list. The Urban Center, one of the original six development strategy areas, was removed as it is no longer a designated area. The Urban Center, also known as “Downtown Auburn” or the “Downtown Urban Center” is an adopted area (since 2001) and features its own subarea plan. The Auburn Environmental Park (AEP)/ Green Zone has also been removed as an economic development strategy area. The AEP/Green Zone economic development strategy area was previously zoned EP, Environmental Park Zone. The intent of this zone was to encourage economic development in the form of medical, biotech and “green” technologies including energy conservation, engineering, water quality and similar uses. Through Ordinance No. 6660 City Council rezoned the AEP/Green Zone from EP, Environmental Park Zone to M-1, Light Industrial, hereby effectively removing the need to designate the AEP/Green Zone as a specific economic development strategy area. The current economic development strategy areas are included below. The boundaries of the economic development strategy areas are incorporated as designated sub-areas “Designated Areas – Special Planning Areas” map of the Land Use Element. Designated Areas -Economic Development Strategy Areas (see Map 1.6) • A St SE (corridor) • Auburn Way South (AWS) Corridor • Auburn Way North (AWN) Corridor • M St SE (between AWN and AWS) • SE 312th/124th Ave • NW Manufacturing Village • 15th St SW/West Valley Hwy N 2c. Adopted Areas: Adopted Areas include an Adopted Subarea Plan incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan that establishes the purpose Page 292 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-31 of its designation, goals and policies, and implementation strategies. Adoption of a subarea plan occurs by official action of the City Council. As an adopted document of the Comprehensive Plan, the subarea Plans are subject to a review, and if necessary, revision to address changes in conditions, issues, or even characteristics of the planned areas. The review and revision of the Subarea Plan will also include the review and, if necessary, a revision of zoning regulations and architectural design standards. Adopted Areas (see Map 1.7) • Downtown (Ordinance No. 5549) • Auburn Adventist Academy (Resolution No. 2254) • Auburn North Business Area (Resolution No. 2283) • Lakeland Hills (Resolution No. 1851) • Lake Hills South (County H.E. Case Z15/UP70) • Northeast Auburn (Ordinance N. 6183) 3. Impression Corridors: Impression corridors are aligned with a particular street, trail, river, stream, or specific linear corridor. Some corridors may be part of a subarea, in which case the Impression Corridor policies are additive to a subarea plan. Impression corridors enhance the areas in which residents, businesses, and visitors move throughout the city. The benefit of an impression corridor is two-fold: residents know that the city is invested in the aesthetic of main thoroughfares and businesses can build off of the design and aesthetic provided by the impression corridor. Improvements or modification to impression corridors consist of aesthetic signage, landscaping, and monument features, and the rehabilitation or removal of existing buildings and property. Impression Corridor boundaries and policies are formally designated by adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. Priority is given to the impression corridors that are a part of a subarea. Priority impression corridors are the thoroughfares in which residents, businesses, visitors move throughout a specific subarea. The priority impression corridors are italicized below. Impression Corridors (see Map 1.8) • Auburn Way North • Auburn Way South • Auburn Black Diamond Road • A Street SE/Auburn Avenue • C Street SW • Division Street • M Street/Harvey Road • Main Street • 8th Street NE • 15th Street SW • West Valley Highway • 15th Street NW/NE • 132nd Ave SE • SE 320th Street • SE 312th Street • SE 304th Street • R Street • Lake Tapps Pkwy SE • Green River Road • 37th Street NW • S 277th Street • Interurban Trail • Green River • White River • Mill Creek 4. Gateways: Gateways are specific places, intersections, or blocks within the city. These essential locations are established because they constitute the first impression into of Auburn. Gateways are intended to create a “welcome” into distinct areas of the city or into the city itself. They are therefore highly important to plan, construct, maintain, and enhance their appearance and function. Gateway locations and policies are formally designated by adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. Priority is given to those gateways that are along a priority impression corridor. Priority gateways function as an entrance to an impression corridor. The priority gateways are italicized below. Gateways (see Map 1.9) • Auburn Way North and Auburn Avenue (where Page 293 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-32 the roads converge) • East Main Street and M Street NE/ SE (at the intersection) • Auburn Way South and 4th Street SE • Auburn Way S and 6th Street SE • West Main Street between C Street NW and B Street NW • All roads with an entry into the city • Hwy 167 Off Ramps • SR 18 Off Ramps Implementing Zoning Designations A. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plans Special Plan Area Policies District Policies. LU-140. Through regulation, capital investment, and community planning, identify, promote and market district identity. Subarea Policies. LU-141. Each subarea will contain its own vision, goals, policies and strategies. LU-142. BNSF Rail Yard - This approximately 150-acre Special Planning Area is located in the south-central portion of the city and surrounded by SR-18 to the North, Ellingson Road to the South, C Street SW to the west and A Street SE to the East. The Special Planning Area should consider both sides of C Street and A Street. Consideration should be given to: • The needs of Burlington Northern. • Providing pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular access across the site to connect the southeast and southwest sides of the city. • Providing a more visually appealing “entry corridor” into the city from the south along A and C Streets. • Allowing for a mix of uses including single and multifamily development and commercial and industrial uses where appropriate. LU-143. Stuck River Road - A portion of the Stuck River Road Special Planning Area is currently the site of a large sand and gravel mining operation. This area and other adjacent land comprising a total of approximately 664 acres has been designated as a long-term resource area (mineral resource area), so development of the Special Area Plan for this area should be a low priority as mining is expected to continue on this site for as long as 30 years. The land uses for the Stuck River Road Special Planning Area will be determined through the subarea planning process and the City Council’s adoption of the subarea plan. Potential land uses applied through the subarea planning process could include single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, institutional, and recreational. Some light industrial uses may be appropriate for consideration and designation through the subarea planning process if the uses are “industrial or business park” in character, conducted entirely within an enclosed building, and exhibit a high degree of performance standards and are non-nuisance in nature and if appropriately limited in extent and location. A mix of housing types ranging from single family residential to multi-family residential is appropriate for this planning area. The subarea plan should be adopted taking into consideration the period during which mining is expected and the intent of the ultimate development of the area. An active permit has been processed by the city with respect to the mining activity on a portion (approximately 664 acres) of the mineral extraction operation. The permit process should continue, however, any permit for mining in the mineral resource area should be granted for the life of the resource, with reviews conducted periodically (every five years) to determine whether changes in the originally proposed mineral extraction operation have arisen and give rise to the need for additional or revised permit conditions to address the new impacts (if any) of any such changes. Any permit applications for additional acreage within the mineral resource area shall be processed by the City. Development of this area should not occur until adequate public facilities are available to support the development consistent with City concurrency policy. The City recognizes the potential for expanding the Stuck River Road Special Planning Area to include additional land east of Kersey Way and north of the Covington-Chehalis power line easement and will consider a proposal by all affected property owners. If the area is expanded, the number of non-multiple Page 294 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-33 family, non-manufactured home park dwellings units may be increased proportionate to the increase in acreage. Any such proposal shall specifically apportion the types and quantities of development to occur within each separate ownership. LU-144. Lakeview - The Lakeview subarea is currently the site of two independent sand and gravel mining operations. While mining activity continues in the eastern operation, indications in 1995 are that the western operation has ceased. Activity in the western portion is now limited to a concrete batch plant and future site reclamation. Following reclamation, the area should be developed as a primarily single-family residential neighborhood of low to moderate urban density. A planned development would be particularly appropriate for this approximately 235-acre site. The permitted development density of the site will depend heavily upon the ability of the transportation system near the site to handle the new uses. Consideration shall be given to the environmental, recreational and amenity value of White Lake, the historical and cultural significance, as well as tribal ownership and jurisdiction of the Muckleshoot Tribe in the development of the Lakeview Plan element. Permit applications have been accepted and are currently being processed by the city with respect to the mining activity in the eastern portion of the area. The permit process should continue, however, any permit for continued mining in this portion of the area should be limited to 10 years to encourage completion of the mining, and subsequent reclamation by the property owner in preparation for development. The Lakeview Plan element should be adopted prior to the City’s acceptance or processing of any other permit applications for the mining operation in the Lakeview Special Planning Area. The environmental information and analysis included in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Lakeview (November 1980), shall be considered in the development of the Lakeview Plan element. While heavy commercial or industrial uses would not be appropriate as permanent uses of this area, conversion of the area now zoned for heavy industry to office commercial (or similar) uses would be appropriate. LU-145. Mt. Rainier Vista - This 145-acre subarea is located south of Coal Creek Springs Watershed. Overall development of the Mt. Rainier Vista subarea plan shall be consistent with the following conditions: 1. Primary consideration in the use and development of the property shall be given to protection of Coal Creek Springs’ water quality. Development types, patterns and standards determined to pose a substantial risk to the public water source shall not be allowed. 2. The maximum number of dwelling units will be determined as part of any sub-area plan process. Dwelling units shall be located within portions of the property where development poses the least risk of contamination for Coal Creek Springs. Lands upon which any level of development would have a high risk for contaminating the water supply shall not be developed, but would be retained as open space. The development pattern shall provide for a logical transition between areas designated for rural uses and those designated for single family residential use. All dwelling units shall be served by municipal water and sanitary sewer service, and urban roads. If 53rd Street S.E. is the major access to serve the Special Planning Area, the developer will be responsible for developing the street to urban standards, from the property owners’ eastern property line that abuts 53rd Street, west to the intersection of 53rd and Kersey Way. 3. Percolation type storm sewer disposal systems shall not be permitted. All surface water drainage shall be conveyed consistent with the City’s current storm drainage standards. Treatment of stormwater shall occur prior to its discharge to any surface water body, consistent with standard public works or other requirements in general effect at the time of development. 4. The site shall be zoned temporarily, at one unit per four acres, until the sub-area plan is completed, and the long-term urban zoning determined. 5. The Mt. Rainier Vista special planning area boundary may be modified through the development of the subarea plan. 6. The Mt. Rainier Vista and Stuck River Road Special Planning Areas shall be coordinated subarea plans. Page 295 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-34 Designated Areas - Areas of Concern Policies LU-146. AWS/Auburn Black Diamond Rd – The area between Auburn-Black Diamond Road and the Burlington Northern Railroad currently lacks urban facilities necessary to support urban development. Major development proposals shall be carefully assessed under SEPA to ensure that the development can be supported by the available facilities. Once property owners are able to demonstrate to the City that they can provide urban services (municipal water and sewer service, urban roads and storm water management) necessary to support the intensity of development proposed within the entire area, the Plan designation and zoning for this area should be changed to an urban residential or commercial classification. The appropriate classification(s) shall be determined after a review of the development proposal and the pertinent Comprehensive Plan policies. LU-147. Pike Street NE – The area located north of 8th NE, east of Harvey Road, and south of 22nd NE is inadequately served by residential arterials. No increase in density or other development which would increase traffic demand in this area should be approved. LU-148. 8th Street NE – The areas paralleling 8th Street NE located between Auburn Way and M Street are designated for multiple family residential while 8th Street NE is designated as a minor arterial. However, the road is not currently constructed to this standard and is not able to support current traffic demand adequately. The Plan designation would greatly increase traffic volumes. Implementation of the Plan designations should not occur until 8th Street NE is constructed to the adequate arterial standard and water service is upgraded. Up zones should not be granted from current zoning until these stems are upgraded or guaranteed. Designated Areas - Economic Development Strategy Areas Policies LU-149. The City should adopt a formal subarea plan for each of the seven economic development strategy areas (listed below) as an element of the Comprehensive Plan. Each economic development strategy area subarea plan should identify the uses, intensities, and infrastructure development necessary to support the types of business and activities that are most consistent with community aspirations. Each subarea plan should address and include policies regarding the expected level of housing density (or residential growth targets) and employment growth targets. • Auburn Way South Corridor • Auburn Way North Corridor • NW Auburn Manufacturing Village • 15th St. SW/C St. SW/W Valley Hwy. N • A St. SE • SE 312th St. /124th Ave SE • M St. SE between Auburn Way N and Auburn Way S Adopted Areas Policies LU-150. Adoption or revision of a subarea plan will be treated as a comprehensive plan amendment and will comply with the Growth Management Act, Countywide planning policies, Vision 20, 50, and the Core Comprehensive Plan. LU-151. Adventist Academy - Adopted under Resolution No. 2254 on November 14, 1991. The Auburn Adventist Academy is Special Planning Area (Adopted Area) is a multi-use campus operated by the Western Washington Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists. The Campus plays a large role in the Western Washington Conference of Seventh- Day Adventists’ private elementary and secondary education system in Washington and hosts many community events as well as an annual regional camp meeting for Adventists from Washington and around the world. The Campus previously housed Harris Pine Mill, a furniture manufacturer, for many years. The Mill provided financial benefit to the Academy’s budget and provided employment opportunities, learning experiences, and vocational education for Academy students. The Academy continues to include in its plan industrial uses that support the mission of the school financially. The reuse of existing mill buildings and redevelopment of buildings lost to a fire in 1989 are the focal points of the current industrial development. In addition to institutional and industrial uses, the Academy also operates a landing strip and associated aircraft hangars for student aviation and Page 296 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-35 flight training. A single-family subdivision is located to the south of the airstrip. In addition to these uses, the Academy wishes to allow development of uses such a multi-family and senior housing and assisted living and memory care which will generate perpetual revenue through a long-term land lease on a portion of the Campus lying generally north of Auburn Way South and south of 32nd Street S.E. that will directly aid its mission. The financial benefit from these uses will allow funding an endowment, subsidize student tuition, provide financial aid for students needing tuition assistance, for new educational programs, for additional faculty, facility maintenance and upgrades, and other needs. The plan focuses on provides predictability to planning, zoning, subdivision, and development decisions within the Special Planning Area (Adopted Area) made by the city. LU-152. Auburn North Business Area - Adopted under Resolution No. 2283 on March 2, 1992. The Auburn North Business Area Special Planning Area Plan was the result of a comprehensive planning study due to increased development pressure north of the Central Business District. Since the Central Business District, which contains Downtown, the core of Auburn, is adjacent to these areas, future development in this area is crucial. A comprehensive and cohesive direction was also needed based on increased development proposals and rezone requests. In addition to development concerns, many of the considerable undeveloped parcels contain wetlands. All of these factors made development controls beyond zoning and development regulations advisable. LU-153. Lakeland Hills - Adopted under Resolution No. 1851 on April 18, 1988. Lakeland Hills area lies between the Stuck River and the southern City limits of Auburn in the most southwestern part of the city. The area consists of planned residential and commercial subdivisions, and is predominately residential in nature, offering a range of housing types, including single family and multi-family dwellings. The Lakeland Hills Plan was intended to provide long-term predictability to both the city and potential developers. As a planned community, development and design must be consistent with the policy guidance of the Lakeland Hills Plan. LU-154. Lakeland Hills South - Approved under Pierce County Hearing Examiner Case Z15/UP70.Lakeland Hills South lies south of the Lakeland Hills special plan area and is the most southwestern part of the city. The area is predominately residential, allowing for a range of housing types, with commercial uses, including Lakeland Town Center, in the center. Nonresidential uses, including civic, religious, and municipal services are allowed throughout the area through an Administrative Use Permit. Unlike Lakeland Hills, Lakeland Hills South was accepted into Auburn was a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The Lakeland Hills PUD, originally the Lakeland Hills South Planned Development District (PDD), was approved under Pierce County Hearing Examiner Case no Z15-UP70 in 1990. Lakeland Hills South PUD is intended to provide enhanced flexibility to develop a site through innovative and alternative development standards. As a PUD, specific development and design standards are prescribed. LU-155. Auburn Downtown Plan (Downtown Urban Center) – Adopted under Ordinance No. 5549 on May 21, 2001. Downtown Auburn is the business, governmental, and cultural hub of Auburn, its physical and cultural heart. Many stores, restaurants, service providers, and small offices are well-represented throughout this district. Downtown hosts many community events and activities, such as the weekly Auburn International Farmers Market in the summer, Soundbites! Concert Series (in the City Hall Plaza) and the Veterans Day Parade. Downtown features public art that includes temporary installations such as Pianos on Parade and a permanent outdoor Downtown Sculpture Gallery with rotating pieces. This dynamism is possible because the district is a collection of uses that coexist in close proximity to one another. Due to the value, importance, and complexity of this district, The Auburn Downtown Plan identified four general needs to be addressed by the plan: • Update of the existing plan in order to continue Downtown revitalization • Concern over the reopening of Stampede Pass • Multiple large projects proposed for Downtown • Scarce private investment In conjunction with project-based items, a regulatory element that emerged from the goals of the Auburn Downtown Plan was the Downtown Urban Center (DUC) zoning district, which was established in 2007. While the DUC zoning district is intended specifically Page 297 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element | LUE-36 to address the needs of downtown, though the implementation of policies identified by the Downtown Auburn Plan, many challenges related to public and private investment, development, and strategic planning have yet to be addressed as downtown has evolved. The Auburn Downtown Plan is in the process of being updated and is expected to be considered for adoption in 2025, after this Periodic Comprehensive Plan update is adopted in 2024. The DUC zoning districts and DUC boundaries found in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, related Zoning Map, and Implementing Zones is consistent with direction in the updated Auburn Downtown Plan. LU-156. Northeast Auburn Special Plan Area – Adopted under Ordinance No. 6183 on June 5, 2008. The Plan was prepared in fulfillment of the policies included in the Comprehensive Plan for the area between Auburn Way North and the Green River, south of 277th Street (52nd Street NE) and north of approximately 37th Street NE in the City of Auburn (Map No. 14.2). The planning area was narrowed to an area covering approximately 120 acres, north of 45th Street NW and between Auburn Way North and the existing I Street NE right-of-way. The Northeast Auburn/ Robertson Properties Special Area Plan focuses on proposed develop of the Auburn Gateway project area, a 60-acre group of properties owned or under consideration for purchase by Robertson Properties Group, owners of the Valley 6 Drive-In Theater. The plan calls for a mix of office, retail, and multifamily development under a new zoning designation (C- AG Auburn Gateway) for the central portion of this planning area, created to accommodate mixed use development. The plan calls for phased development in coordination with the provision of new roads, stormwater and other utilities, and flood management measures. Impression Corridor Policies LU-157. Create specific plans for each identified corridor, outlining development policies and regulations, necessary capital improvements, and implementation strategies. In the absence of any specific corridor plans, this section contains general policies that are to be applied within designated impression corridors. LU-158. Coordinate corridor planning, design, construction, and maintenance with other agencies, such as BNSF, the Muckleshoot Indian Reservation, and the Washington State Department of Transportation. Where one agency may more effectively manage the corridor, management or ownership consolidation is appropriate. LU-159. Promote the elimination or renovation of existing derelict or unmaintained structures, signs, fences, and properties along impression corridors through regulatory or enforcement mechanisms. LU-160. Work with private and public property owners to educate, create incentives, and enforce regulations that are intended to improve the overall appearance of identified corridors. LU-161. Emphasize the design, orientation, construction materials, landscaping, and site layout for development proposals of new and existing buildings along impression corridors. New construction and the renovation of existing buildings create important opportunities for enhancing the appearance of impression corridors. LU-162. Establish regulations that ensure coordinated, attractive commercial signage is of an appropriate size and quantity. Signage regulations along these corridors may be different than those in other areas. LU-163. Take advantage of opportunities to provide informational signs, wayfinding signs, and traffic control signs that are attractive, useful, and integrated into a larger citywide signage plan or policy. LU-164. Outdoor storage of materials, inventory, and other goods and off-street surface parking should be located at the rear of the property. If outdoor storage cannot be located in the rear of the property, then it should be screened from view from adjacent rights-of- way. LU-165. Design, construct, and enhance impression corridors to accommodate multimodal uses. LU-166. Design and construct vehicular access points in a manner that consolidates access points serving multiple uses. LU-167. Signage, landscaping, and monument features should be used to establish prominent access points. LU-168. Discourage aerial utilities. LU-169. Invest in impression corridors by acquiring rights-of-way, constructing and widening sidewalks, Page 298 of 435 City of Auburn Land Use Element | LUE-37 installing landscaping, building center medians, constructing parklets, providing street furniture, and constructing other improvements. Gateway Policies LU-170. Prioritize by ranking all gateways and develop potential opportunities and designs for each location. LU-171. Develop land use regulations that incorporate gateway priorities and concepts into private development proposals that are located at identified gateways. LU-172. Coordinate with the Washington State Department of Transportation to understand options and implement actions at gateway location. Many of the gateway locations are within the WSDOT right-of- way. LU-173. Develop design layouts for gateway locations. Designs will identify key areas that greet residents and visitors as they enter the city or downtown center, opportunities for signage and monument features, and landscaping. LU-174. Maintain established gateways. Page 299 of 435 MUCKLESHOOT CASINO T167 T167 T18 T18 DOWNTOWN Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Map ID: 1142 Printed On: 4/10/2024 Draft 2024 City of Auburn Land Use Map L A K E T A P P S L A K E T A P P S 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 MILES Bridges Overlay (Ordinance: 6922) West Hill Overlay (Ordinance: 6122) Lea Hill Overlay (Ordinance: 5346 & 6121) Urban Separators Overlay Potential Annexation Areas PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC OPEN SPACE NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL THREE NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL TWO NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ONE INDUSTRIAL MIXED-USEDOWNTOWN URBAN CENTER COMMERCIAL Downtown Urban Center RESIDENTIAL CONSERVANCY Page 300 of 435 T167 T167 T18 T18 Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Map ID: Printed On: 3/8/2024 Draft 2024 City of Auburn Growth Centers L A K E T A P P S L A K E T A P P S 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles M Street/ E Main Academy I Street Corridor Stuck River Road Subarea Auburn Way S Outlet Collection Lea Hill South Downtown Downtown Urban Center Page 301 of 435 T167 T167 T18 T18 Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Map ID: 6094 Printed On: 3/8/2024 Draft 2024 City of Auburn Districts L A K E T A P P S L A K E T A P P S 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 MILES SOUTHEAST AUBURN LAKELAND HILLS WEST HILL SOUTH AUBURN PLATEAU NORTH AUBURN LEA HILL DOWNTOWN URBAN CENTER Page 302 of 435 T167 T167 T18 T18 Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Map ID: 6061 Printed On: 3/8/2024 City of Auburn Designated Areas L A K E T A P P S L A K E T A P P S 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 MILES SE 312TH ST/ 124TH AVE SE AUBURN WAY N CORRIDOR AIRPORT NW AUBURN MANUFACTURING VILLAGE PIKE ST NE 8TH ST NE WEST AUBURN M ST SE AUBURN BLACK DIAMOND RD SE LAKEVIEW A ST SE MOUNT RAINIER VISTA STUCK RIVER ROAD 15TH ST SW/C ST SW/ WEST HIGHWAY N AUBURN WAY S CORRIDOR Designated Areas Page 303 of 435 T167 T167 T18 T18 Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Map ID: 6093 Printed On: 3/8/2024 Draft 2024 City of Auburn Adopted Areas 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 MILES L A K E T A P P S L A K E T A P P S NORTHEAST AUBURN DOWNTOWN URBAN CENTER LAKELAND HILLS LAKELAND HILL SOUTHAUBURN NORTH BUSINESS AREA ACADEMY Page 304 of 435 T167 T167 T18 T18 Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Map ID: 6070 Printed On: 3/8/2024 City of Auburn Impression Corridors L A K E T A P P S L A K E T A P P S 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 MILES Impression Corridors Page 305 of 435 T167 T167 T18 T18 Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Map ID: 6092 Printed On: 3/8/2024 Gateways L A K E T A P P S L A K E T A P P S 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 MILES Gateways Page 306 of 435 Housing Element City of Auburn DRAFT - PLANNING COMMISSION ACCEPTED VERSION Page 307 of 435 Page 308 of 435 Table of Contents Housing Element .......................................................................................1 Why is Housing Important to Auburn’s Future? ............................................................1 Vision ...............................................................................................................................................1 Conditions and Trends ..................................................................................................2 Affordability .....................................................................................................................................2 Household Size ................................................................................................................................2 Housing Stock .................................................................................................................................2 Diversity ...........................................................................................................................................4 Trends ..............................................................................................................................................5 Racially Disparate Impacts ...........................................................................................5 Displacement Risk ...........................................................................................................................5 Planning Approach .......................................................................................................7 Housing Choices for All ...................................................................................................................7 Housing and Employment Targets ..................................................................................................8 Housing Need by Income Level ......................................................................................................9 Housing Capacity in Future Land Use .............................................................................................10 Goals and Policies ........................................................................................................12 Goal 1: Healthy Homes and Neighborhoods ...................................................................................12 Goal 2: Support Housing Growth ....................................................................................................12 Goal 3: Maintenance and Preservation ...........................................................................................13 Goal 4: Housing Attainability and Affordability ...............................................................................14 Goal 5: Supportive Services ............................................................................................................15 Goal 6: Implementation and Monitoring .........................................................................................16 Maps and Figures Figure 1 - Housing Stock by Year Built ..........................................................................3 Figure 2. Race and Ethnicity in Auburn (2021) .............................................................4 Figure 3. Housing Objectives and Tools .......................................................................17 Tables Table 1. Housing Need by County .................................................................................9 Table 2. Housing Capacity by Income Level .................................................................10 Table 3. Residential Capacity by Zone..........................................................................11 Page 309 of 435 Page 310 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Element | HE-1 Why is Housing Important to Auburn’s Future? The Housing Element can serve as a useful management tool to meet changing community needs for housing and address land use, economic development, transportation, environmental, and other concerns. • A variety of housing choices can meet the needs of Auburn’s current and future residents across all ages and affordability levels, help residents maintain and retain their homes, and promote services and amenities that improve neighborhood livability. • Well-planned housing can support Auburn’s economic goals by making it attractive and possible for residents to live near their jobs and by serving as a source of customers to support commercial districts. • Housing in proximity to transit or mixed-use projects can help reduce the need for costly infrastructure such as roads and sewers, and reduce environmental impacts related to transportation. In addition, housing in proximity to a variety of transportation modes can increase a household’s disposable income and savings by reducing household transportation costs. • Well-designed and located housing can reduce energy and water consumption, and it can promote healthy lifestyles. For these reasons, as well as others discussed or referenced in this Housing Element, an emphasis on encouraging Middle Housing, Mixed-Use, Transit- Oriented Development is core to planning for housing both in the near-term and by 2044. Housing Element Vision Auburn is a place that those in our diverse community are proud to call home for a lifetime. Auburn provides opportunities for attainable housing in a variety of styles to meet the needs of all ages, abilities, cultures, and incomes. Our neighborhoods are safe and attractive, offer gathering places to meet friends and family, are connected by trails, streets, and transit, and are well kept. Our households are aware of the opportunities and services offered by governmental, educational, employment, health, and service providers that can enhance their quality of life. Volunteerism to improve our parks, schools, streets, and homes makes our neighborhoods and families stronger. Our quality housing and neighborhoods support our local economy. Page 311 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Element | HE-2 Conditions and Trends This section summarizes key findings of the Housing Needs and Characteristic Assessment (HNCA), which was updated in 2023. The HNCA provides a comprehensive picture of Auburn’s housing conditions, needs, and regional context. Analysis and data to support required analysis, policy choices, and to help illustrate the housing picture in Auburn was collected from a variety of sources. In 2021, the City of Auburn prepared and adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP), funded by a state grant (authorized by HB 1923) for the purpose of identifying city strategies and recommendations to increase residential capacity. Findings in the HAP may vary slightly from those completed for the HNCA due to differences in horizon years. Both of these data sources, as well as others from the Washington State Department of Commerce, Puget Sound Regional Council, King and Pierce Counties, as well as other sources are referenced in the HNCA and this Housing Element. The Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment can be found in Appendix X of the Comprehensive Plan. The conditions and trends inform Housing Element goals and policies to address projected housing need in Auburn. Affordability The cost of housing in Auburn has substantially increased from 2010 to 2020. Between 2010 and 2020, the average monthly rent in Auburn increased by 49 percent ($459 per month). In this same period, the median sales price for a home increased by 88 percent ($195,550) based on 2017-2021 American Community Survey Data. Of the approximate 15,507 renter households in Auburn, more than half (53 percent) are cost- burdened, and more than one-quarter (27 percent) are severely cost-burdened. About a quarter of households are considered unaffordable for renters and homeowners in Auburn according to state and federal affordability thresholds. While Auburn is more affordable than other cities in King County, housing is unaffordable for most households. Household Size Trends in household size indicate that Auburn will need to ensure the availability of a variety of housing types to match the needs of both small and large households. Auburn has both a larger household size (2.7) and a larger share of family households compared to King and Pierce Counties overall. Data on household composition indicates however, that 38% of the City’s households are made up of single-person and two-person households without children, and Auburn also has a higher-than-average percentage (7%) of single-parent households compared to King and Pierce County (4% and 6%, respectively). Overall, 24% of Auburn households are married with children, compared to 21% in King and Pierce Counties. The types of homes needed for smaller households may be different than those needed for larger households, putting an emphasis on planning for a variety of housing types and sizes in the future. Housing Stock Auburn’s housing stock is older than average, and much of its rental housing stock is in fair or poor condition. Though housing is affordable in Auburn, the City could lose some of its most affordable rental housing as structures approach the end of their useful lives. About half of Auburn’s housing stock is 2-3-bedroom units, accounting for 56.7% of housing units. Page 312 of 435 Page 313 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Element | HE-4 Diversity Auburn is diverse. Approximately 25% of Auburn residents speak a language other than English. Auburn’s racial and ethnic makeup is more diverse than that of King County and Washington as a whole, with 48% of residents identifying as Black, Indigenous, or People of Color (BIPOC), compared with 42% in King County and 34% statewide. Auburn’s diverse communities may have different housing, neighborhood amenities, and service needs. For example, outreach conducted with the Hispanic community has shown that most would recommend Auburn as a place to live for family and friends, and though residents wanted their children to grow up and remain in Auburn, they desired improved security and traffic calming. Outreach participants were interested in helping to improve their neighborhood and in volunteering. Figure 2. Race and Ethnicity in Auburn (2021) Source: 2020 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05 Page 314 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Element | HE-5 Trends Overall, Auburn’s housing market is characterized by strong growth in both the homeownership and multifamily rental markets. These trends are important to consider as the City works to encourage development to reach the 10,429 units needed by 2040. Key findings include the following: • Multifamily rents in Auburn increased 47 percent from $1.14 per square foot in 2010 to $1.68 in 2020 Q3. Auburn did not see a dip in rents in 2011-2013 like many of its peer cities. In addition, thus far through 2020, multifamily rents are continuing to grow in Auburn, approaching levels in Kent and Tukwila which have started to level off. • Auburn’s rental vacancy rates are low, indicating continued demand for housing. Multifamily vacancy rates in Auburn increased by 2.7 percentage points from 8.3 percent in 2008 to 11.0 percent in 2020 Q3, spurred by the recent Copper Gate affordable apartment complex, which added 500 units to Auburn’s housing market in late 2020. Although this increase in vacancy is reflected by an influx of new multifamily units that have yet to be rented, the mostly positive net absorption in the City from 2008 to 2019 indicates demand for multifamily housing is strong. • About 60 percent of the new units developed in Auburn between 2010 and 2018 are for homeownership, while only about 40 percent are intended as rentals. These ownership trends, coupled with strong price growth, indicate strength in the market. • Auburn has not been producing enough housing to meet its demand from household formation (net in-migration and people forming new households, such as moving out of a family home). Over the 2010-2019 time period, only 7.8 housing units (of all types and sizes) were constructed for every 10 new households that formed. This translates into housing underproduction and is a contributor to Auburn’s rent and price increases. • An additional 12,112 housing units are needed in Auburn citywide by 2044 to accommodate growth. Racially Disparate Impacts The Housing Element and Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment (Appendix A) identifies data and strategies to undo local policies and regulations that result in racially disparate impacts. As described in Appendix A - Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment and earlier in this Element, Racially Disparate Impacts were identified in Auburn such as potential for displacement due to the percentage of residents, especially renters, who are cost burdened and at high risk of displacement if market forces shift. Considerations for displacement are also addressed in the Land Use Element when developing future land use goals. Where appropriate, goals, policies, actions, and overall strategies have been created or revised to address these issues as a first step towards undoing racially disparate impacts. This includes refinements to goals and policies to preserve existing housing stock, create opportunities for increased capacity for the development of multi- family, mixed-use, and middle housing throughout the city to accommodate a range of affordability levels, and regional coordination to address housing issues. Displacement Risk The highest displacement risk in Auburn is the few housing units located in southwest Auburn where mostly industrial and commercial is located. In particular, a mobile home park located in this block group is particularly vulnerable to displacement. Downtown Auburn is also susceptible to moderate to high displacement risk. The downtown area currently contains 426 subsidized affordable units in several developments, slightly more than a quarter of the housing units in the area. A full analysis is located in the Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment. As part of an evaluation of racially disparate impacts, the city identifies housing costs and cost-burdened households as especially vulnerable to displacement. In Auburn, 42 percent of the community identifying as Hispanic or Latino (of any race) is either cost-burdened or severely cost-burdened (<50% AMI) and persons of color are 37 percent cost-burdened or severely cost- burdened, compared to 31 percent identifying as white. Page 315 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Element | HE-6 Source: Washington State Department of Commerce Displacement Risk Map Page 316 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Element | HE-7 These communities are about 50 percent renters and 50 percent homeowners, while those identifying as white are 64 percent homeowners in Auburn. The gap in homeownership is addressed through thoughtful and effective policy including increasing affordable ownership opportunities by encouraging diverse housing stock. Overall, the Auburn community spends a greater amount of income on rental housing costs compared to King County, with 51 percent of renters in the very low or extremely low-income bands (<50% AMI) in Auburn and 39 percent in King County. While Auburn has a naturally occurring affordable housing stock of 55 percent serving very-low and extremely- low incomes, this means there is only 11 percent additional capacity available to serve extremely-low and very low- incomes. If housing cost trends in King County continue, and Auburn housing prices in Auburn continue to rise, the amount of naturally affordable housing is expected to decrease. Again, preservation strategies and housing policies supporting a range of development types is key while encouraging housing growth. Planning Approach Auburn’s preferred Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map sufficiently addresses housing needs for all economic segments of the Auburn community. The Comprehensive Land Use map considers adequate capacity for housing and employment targets and housing needs by income level through a Centers approach. Centers in Auburn are high-intensity and density cores characterized as primarily as mixed-use areas served by Middle Housing and commercial development. Most new housing is planned to be built in the neighborhood centers and downtown. More information on the Comprehensive Land Use Map and future land uses can be found in the Land Use Element, Chapter 1 of the Comprehensive Plan. Housing Choices for All Central to planning for future housing is providing a range of housing types to choose from which facilitates home ownership across a wide range of households and affordability levels. Consideration “Middle Housing” is key to increasing housing types in Auburn. Middle Housing, typically attached to one-another, provide options to increase residential density in existing residential neighborhoods and are designed at the scale and overall aesthetic of these areas. In 2023, the Washington State Legislature passed HB 1110 which requires jurisdictions to incorporate Middle Housing into Comprehensive Plans and related development regulations. This Housing Element, and updated city code, fully complies with HB 1110 requirements by allowing for townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, stacked flats, cottage housing, courtyard housing in residential zones throughout the city. In addition, the City also acknowledges Accessory Dwelling Units (or ADUs) as an important piece of Middle Housing , complying with HB 1337 legislation allowing ADUs in residential zones throughout the City. Middle Page 317 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Element | HE-8 Housing, in combination with Mixed-Use Development, are critical development types that enable the City to meet future housing needs and provide a variety of housing options for current and future residents. Housing and Employment Targets Based on legislative changes, communities must plan for housing and employment targets allocated by Countywide Planning Policies (CPP). These growth targets are consistent with PSRC Vision 2025 requirements and originate at the state level. King County CPP, and the related 2021 King County Urban Growth Capacity Report, identifies targets of 12,000 net new residential units and 19,520 net new jobs between 2019-2044. Pierce County CPP identifies 112 net new residential units and 0 net new jobs targets by 2044. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps and policies adopted in the Comprehensive Plan demonstrate adequate capacity and strategies in order to accommodate these housing and employment targets. Middle Housing: Example of a Duplex from Auburn Housing Action Plan Implementation project, 2023 Page 318 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Element | HE-9 Housing Need by Income Level The Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment projects housing need by income level using Area Median Income (AMI) bands. This assessment, as required by the Department of Commerce in coordination with counties, identifies the number of units necessary to serve varying AMI levels and for Emergency Housing. These figures were provided by both King and Pierce Counties using their own methodologies. The full methodology for the projections is provided in the assessment. As shown in Table 1, Auburn has a need for housing primarily at the 80% or greater AMI and for less than 30% AMI. Policies in this Element describe how Auburn plans to address these housing needs. Table 1. Housing Need by County County Total 0-30%>30% to 50% >50% to 80% >80% to 100% >100% to 120%>120% Net New Emergency Housing NeedsNon PSH PSH King Supply (2019)28,049 1,076 237 8,029 8,075 4,427 3,302 2,903 58 Net New Need (2044)12,000 1,543 812 309 616 1,146 1,299 6,275 2,293 Pierce Supply (2019)3,963 0 33 134 493 1,141 680 1,482 8 Net New Need (2044)112 14 20 21 16 7 6 27 7 Total Net New Need (2044)12,112 1,557 892 330 632 1,153 1,235 6,302 2,300 Source: King County Ordinance 19660, Countywide Planning Policies; Pierce County Ordinance 2023-22s, Countywide Planning PoliciesThe overall housing need by 2044 in Auburn is 9,722 additional permanent units between 30% and greater than 125% AMI range, and 2,300 additional temporary/emergency housing beds totaling 12,112 new housing units. Barriers that limit the development of affordable housing, including emergency housing, such as allowing appropriate housing types to serve various income levels, permitting a range of development serving all income levels in various zones, and development-related bonsues related to inclusion of affordable housing are included in this Element and in Auburn City Code. The Housing Needs by Average Median Income (AMI) analysis discussed in the next section describes how the city is ensuring adequate zoned capacity and development types to accommodate a range of affordable housing. Supportive and Emergency Housing Supportive housing is defined by Washington State in RCW 35.70A.30 as either Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) or Non-Permanent Supportive Housing(non-PSH). Households earning below 30% of the AMI are considered extremely low income and severely cost-burdened. In Auburn by 2044 the city needs an additional 2,389 supportive housing units for households earning below 30% AMI. Permanent supportive housing includes supportive services such as health care and housing assistance. Auburn needs 812 additional permanent supportive housing units by 2044 in King County (King County CPPs) and another 20 in Pierce County (Pierce County CPPs). Non-permanent supportive housing is to provide temporary or transitional shelter and supportive services to those struggling to stay housed. Auburn needs 1,543 additional non-permanent supportive housing units by 2044 in King County (King County CPPs) and 14 in Pierce County (Pierce County CPPs). Auburn also has a severe shortage of emergency housing beds compared to the projected need in 2044. As of 2020, there are 66 emergency/temporary housing beds citywide and 2,300 are needed by 2044 (King and Pierce CPPs). An additional 115 beds a year will need to be built between 2024-2044. Page 319 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Element | HE-10 Housing Needs by AMI Capacity Analysis Table 2. Housing Capacity by Income Level Income Level (% AMI)Zone Categories Servicing these Needs Housing Needs Capacity prior to Zoning Adjustment Post-Rezone Capacity Capacity surplus or deficit King County 0-30% PSH High Density-Mixed Use 2,389 566 3,004 6150-30% Other >30-50%High-Density, ADU 962 1,532 4,823 3,861>50-80% >80-100%Moderate Density, ADU 2,458 5,058 35,889 33,431>100-120% >120%Low-Density 6,303 348 1,846 (4,457) Pierce County >80-100%Moderate Density, ADU 112 100 509 397 Aggregated Total -12,112 7,504 46,070 33,958 In addition to meeting the residential and employment capacity targets through zoning and policy decisions, the city meets the aggregate King and Pierce County housing needs for income level groups. The only exception is the >120% Average Median Income (AMI) category, which includes primarily low-density housing. However, this AMI category is not required to be met under HB 1220 requirements as high-income earners are represented in this group and can also purchase moderate density housing options as well. In Pierce County, the City’s primary residential zone is R-2 Residential Low which for purposes of this capacity analysis aligns with the 80-120% AMI range. This zone can adequately accommodate the total housing need of 112, however AMI below 80% is not accounted for in this analysis. As indicated earlier, the housing target for the Pierce County portion of Auburn is only 112 housing units and as a result the city does not intend to rezone small areas of land in order to satisfy AMI requirements since actual development is unpredictable. The R-2 Residential Low zone can accommodate middle housing, single unit detached housing, and ADUs that can realistically serve a range of incomes, and the city will continue to provide flexibility in the development types allowed in this part of the city to best accommodate the full range of AMI levels. An estimated 1,852 new Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are accounted for prior to rezoning, as these developments are currently allowed in various zones are expected to occur naturally over the next 20-years. In total, 10% of new ADUs are planned for in the 50-80% AMI range, 80% in the 80-120% AMI range, and 10% in the greater than 120% AMI range. The high-density and moderate-density land uses where ADUs are primarily expected are found in throughout the city. Housing Capacity in Future Land Use Total Housing Capacity Residential capacity by zone is based primarily on the assumptions outlined Buildable Lands Report process in 2021, updates to reflect changes to zoning and density assumptions since that time. Downtown Urban Center mixed-use development assumes a distribution of 75% residential and 25% commercial, whereas the R-NM Neighborhood Mixed Use assumes a 50-50% split for mixed uses both vertically and horizontally. The residential capacity estimates accommodating 46,070 housing units at max buildable capacity and 33,655 net new housing units, exceeding the 12,112 net new housing unit target. This increase is due largely to Middle Housing policies consistent with HB 1110 which allow for Middle Housing in all residentially zoned areas. The R2 – Residential Low zone is found widely throughout the city. Page 320 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Element | HE-11 Table 3. Residential Capacity by Zone Residential & Mixed-Use Zoning Districts Zone category Developable Acres Net zoning changes (acres) Assumed Density - DU/Acres Residential Capacity (units)Net New (Units) King County Residential Conservancy (RC)Low Density 745 0 1 745 - R-1 Residential Low Density 275 0 4 1,101 - R2 – Residential Low Moderate Density 294 1158 25 35,799 28,441 R3 – Residential Moderate Moderate Density 0 22 30 660 660 R4 – Residential High High Density 79 -1 50 3,890 -50 Neighborhood Mixed-Use (R-NM) High Density Mixed-Use 0 89 30 2,670 2,670 Manufacture Home/ Community (R-MHC)Low Density 27 0 10 273 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 125 High Density Mixed-Use 0 5 100 125 500 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 75 High Density Mixed-Use 0 5 95 119 475 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 55 High Density Mixed-Use 0 4 90 90 360 Total 1,420 1,285 -45,561 33,146 DUC Neighborhood Residential High Density Mixed-Use 0 3 30 90 Pierce County R2 – Residential Low Moderate Density 20 20 25 509 509 Total 20 20 -509 509 Total New (2044) Housing Capacity 46,070 33,655 Page 321 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Element | HE-12 Goals and Policies Goal 1: Healthy Homes and Neighborhoods H-1. Recognize the important role of public improvements, facilities, and programs in providing a healthy home environment within the community. H-2. Through integrated planning for land use, parks and recreation, transportation, housing, and jobs, support active living and healthy eating opportunities. H-3. Promote safe and connected neighborhoods. A. Continue to implement crime prevention programs such as neighborhood block watches. B. Through the land use and building permit process, implement principles of crime prevention through environmental design. C. Promote community volunteerism to increase the well-being and safety of residents. D. Invest in transportation improvements that will create safe neighborhoods for walking, biking, and connecting to transit. H-4. Promote housing that meets the needs of Auburn’s workforce, is located near and designed to take advantage of affordable multimodal transportation options and contributes to a regional jobs–housing balance. H-5. Improve streetscapes in developed neighborhoods. Continue to repair and/ or replace deteriorated sidewalks and remove barriers to pedestrian traffic. H-6. Seek and provide assistance for the reduction of lead-based paint hazards and measures to remove mold, improve energy conservation and provide for healthy indoor air quality. H-7. Promote the City’s neighborhood program. Connect residents to volunteer activities. H-8. When evaluating proposed developments, apply site and building design standards, require quality streetscape, landscape, on-site recreational and open space, and low-impact development measures that will improve community character and environmental quality. H-9. As neighborhoods change, work to eliminate the displacement of those who are under-served or under- represented. H-10. Promote housing stability for the most vulnerable residents. How can Auburn plan for Active Living and Healthy Eating? • Provide for a complete community with a variety of work, shopping, recreation, health and education, and home environments. • Implement a connected nonmotorized trail and park system with neighborhood gathering spaces. Work with transit providers to connect neighborhoods to commercial and social services. • Facilitate access to regional transportation and job centers in and near Auburn. • Support art projects and cultural events to provide opportunities to build a sense of community investment, improve aesthetics, bring people together cross-culturally, and involve neighborhood youth. Support community gardens to improve access to healthy food and to build community relationships. Goal 2: Support Housing Growth H-11. Provide a land use plan and zoning that offers opportunities to achieve a variety of housing styles and densities for private and nonprofit housing providers. H-12. Support development of a variety of housing choices by allowing Middle Housing types in residential zones including townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, cottage housing, courtyard apartments, and accessory dwelling units. H-13. Provide dense housing choices downtown and other areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan where infrastructure is more available or can be improved with regional and local funds. H-14. Encourage residential development downtown, particularly housing that is integrated with commercial Page 322 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Element | HE-13 development. H-15. Allow accessory dwelling units as an affordable housing strategy and Middle Housing option. H-16. Promote greater opportunities for home ownership for all incomes and ethnicities in the community through development of middle housing options and fee-simple development. H-17. Implement incentives for developing underutilized parcels into new uses that allow them to function as pedestrian-oriented mixed-use neighborhoods. Existing uses that are complementary, economical, and physically viable shall integrate into the form and function of the neighborhood. H-18. Use innovative zoning provisions to encourage infill development of underutilized parcels in zones that have been identified in the Comprehensive Plan as areas where infill residential development should be encouraged. Certain development requirements for infill development may be relaxed, while requiring adherence to specific design requirements to ensure compatibility with the character of nearby existing residential structures. H-19. Allow appropriately designed manufactured housing within Neighborhood Residential areas, consistent with state law. H-20. Allow manufactured housing parks, transitional housing, supportive housing, and multiplex housing in appropriately zoned areas. H-21. Adopt incentives, strategies, actions and regulations to create and sustain neighborhoods that provide equitable access to parks and open space, safe pedestrian and bicycle networks, clean air, soil and water, healthy foods, high-quality education, affordable and high-quality transit options and jobs. H-22. Prioritize affordable housing when surplusing publicly owned land or property to provide opportunities for increased affordable housing. Goal 3: Maintenance and Preservation H-23. Conserve Auburn’s existing housing stock because it is the most affordable form of housing. H-24. Inventory and map dilapidated properties. H-25. Organize, educate and assist property managers and owners in the creation and preservation of safe neighborhoods. A. Offer an owner–landlord training program to better market, manage and maintain residential rental property. B. Encourage retention of professional management assistance. C. Recognize and publicize well-maintained apartment properties, such as by awarding a “multifamily property of the year.” D. Advise landlords with problem buildings about the benefits of donating their property or selling it below market cost to a specially designated nonprofit organization. H-26. Promote housing improvements by property owners and building managers. Seek available assistance for housing rehabilitation. Assistance will include the development of residential infrastructure and the rehabilitation of individual properties. A. Find public and private sources of capital and offer low-interest loans for rehabilitation. B. Continue to participate in the Emergency Home Repair Program and consider partnering with nongovernmental organizations to maximize funds. C. Encourage green lending for improved energy conservation, indoor air quality, and other measures. D. Help identify professional volunteers at educational or professional associations to plan redesign or architectural upgrades of the properties. E. Support additional healthy housing and preservation strategies, such as property tax exemptions to preserve affordable housing opportunities and utilizing community health workers to offer property owners and residents the education and resources needed to maintain housing. H-27. Evaluate and update codes applicable to housing and provide effective and appropriate enforcement. A. Enforce city ordinances regarding abandoned properties. B. Consider a multifamily inspection program. Page 323 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Element | HE-14 C. Consider public identification of landlords who are found to be out of compliance for extended time periods and unwilling to take steps to ameliorate substandard conditions. D. Consider a landlord compliance program where code enforcement penalties can be reduced if attending landlord training programs. E. Work with park owners, managers, and park tenants to develop policies and regulations to preserve manufactured home parks and the affordable housing they offer. F. Consider an Auburn Housing Authority. H-28. Ensure that rental housing units comply with life and fire safety standards and provide a safe place for tenants to live, including renters with disabilities. H-29. Promote the maintenance, energy efficiency, and weatherization of existing affordable housing stock. Goal 4: Housing Attainability and Affordability H-30. Promote affordable housing that meets changing demographic needs. H-31. Promote housing stability for the most vulnerable residents. H-32. Work in partnership with King and Pierce Counties and other cities to address countywide needs for affordable housing to households with moderate, low, very low, and extremely low incomes, including those with special needs and our veterans. A. The King County need for housing, countywide, by percentage of area median income is: i. 80%-120% of AMI (moderate) – 26% of total housing need ii. 50%–80% of AMI (low) – 14% of total housing need iii. 30%–50% of AMI (very low) – 11% of total housing need iv. 30% and below AMI (extremely low) – 13% of total housing need B. Address the King County need for housing affordable to households at less than 30% AMI (extremely low income) and for moderate and market rate income (greater than 80% AMI) in Auburn, through all jurisdictions working individually and collectively. C. The Pierce County need for housing, countywide, by percentage of area median income is less than 1% for all AMI groups because the target is 112. D. Focus Auburn’s efforts toward the countywide and community need for low- and moderate- income housing on preserving existing affordable housing with robust maintenance and repair programs, minimizing displacement impacts, and ensuring long-term affordability of existing housing. E. Act as a County leader in the exploration and implementation of new funding mechanisms and strategies to develop housing affordable at 30% AMI and below across King County and throughout South King County. H-33. Encourage and assist in the renovation of surplus public and commercial buildings and land into affordable housing. Additionally, explore opportunities to dedicate revenues from sales of publicly owned properties, including tax title sales, to affordable housing projects. H-34. Seek, encourage, and assist nonprofit organizations in acquiring depreciated apartment units for the purpose of maintaining and ensuring their long-term affordability. H-35. Review and streamline development standards and regulations to advance their public benefit, provide flexibility, and minimize additional costs to housing. H-36. Promote compliance with federal and state fair housing laws. Support fair housing opportunities for all regardless race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability. H-37. Explore the use of density bonuses, parking reductions, multifamily tax exemptions (MFTE), fee waivers and exemptions, and permit expediting to encourage the development of housing affordable at below-market rate. H-38. Where practical, ensure that housing created Page 324 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Element | HE-15 or preserved using local public resources or by regulation benefits low-income households and retains its affordability over time. H-39. Partner with Affordable Housing Providers – partner with local affordable housing providers and services who have additional knowledge and resources that are not available to the city. H-40. Support existing programs that provide emergency rental assistance for families facing homelessness due to temporary economic hardship. H-41. Engage with communities disproportionately impacted by housing challenges in developing, implementing and monitoring policies that reduce and undo harm to these communities. Prioritize the needs and solutions expressed by these disproportionately impacted communities for implementation. H-42. Support the long-term preservation of income-restricted affordable housing with expiring affordability covenants through acquisition by acting as a facilitator between affordable housing groups interested in purchasing the property and property owners. H-43. Explore opportunities to implement a Community Preference policy or a first right to return policy that prioritizes members of the community in new affordable housing developments. Goal 5: Supportive Services H-44. Encourage and support human and health service organizations that offer programs and facilities for people with special needs. Support programs in particular that help people to remain within the community, including those that are veterans, disabled, seniors, single-parent households, and the homeless. H-45. Assist low-income people, who are displaced as a result of redevelopment, find affordable housing in accordance with state and federal laws and regulations. H-46. Develop strategies that seek to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing at-risk of redevelopment and/or in deteriorating physical condition. H-47. Continue to ensure that funding becomes available to support youth, veterans, and social services in Auburn. H-48. Support seniors who wish to age in place in their homes, such as with home rehabilitation services, adult day health and Senior Center activities. H-49. Provide opportunities for transitional housing assisted living and retirement communities. H-50. Promote universal design principles to ensure housing is designed to be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. H-51. usable by all people regardless of age or abilities. H-52. Provide empowering training for residents who want to participate in civic activities and who would like to improve their knowledge and skills around community leadership. H-53. Provide information in multiple languages to Auburn’s diverse communities regarding services offered by local and regional governmental, educational, employment, health, and other providers to improve residents’ quality of life and to promote resident engagement and household economic independence. H-54. Offer financial and homebuyer education to encourage household saving and budgeting to consider home ownership. H-55. Provide information and resources that educate and guide low-income persons toward affordable housing opportunities. Develop materials in multiple languages. H-56. Review proposals to site facilities providing new or expanded human services within the City to determine their potential impacts and whether they meet the needs of the Auburn community. Important caveats in the City’s consideration will include the following: A. While Auburn will willingly accept its regional share of facilities that provide residential services, or influence residential location decisions, Auburn will expect other communities to accept their share as well. B. The funding of human service centers sited in Auburn that serve an area larger than Auburn would rely on an equitable regional source of funding. Page 325 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Element | HE-16 C. The siting of all facilities shall be based on sound land use planning principles and should establish working relationships with affected neighborhoods. Goal 6: Implementation and Monitoring H-57. Partner with South King County jurisdictions in ongoing efforts to coordinate the human, educational, and housing needs of our diverse cultural communities, such as through the Road Map Project, interjurisdictional housing and human services forums, and other efforts. H-58. Pursue partnerships with non-profits, housing authorities, SKHHP, and other organizations to preserve existing unregulated and naturally occurring affordable housing including through acquisition. H-59. Work with other jurisdictions and health and social service organizations to implement a coordinated, regional approach to homelessness. H-60. Support national, state and especially regional efforts to address the housing and human service needs of the region and the City. H-61. Explore all available federal, state and local programs and private options for financing affordable housing, removing or reducing risk factors, and preserving safe neighborhoods. H-62. Work in partnership with public and private housing providers, businesses, and other agencies in the provision of housing assistance to Auburn residents and business employees. H-63. Support nonprofit organizations during all stages of siting and project planning and when applying for county, state, and federal funding. H-64. Through the building permit process, inventory and track affordable housing opportunities within Auburn. Distribute affordable housing information to nonprofit agencies serving the homeless and low- income people. H-65. Monitor housing supply, affordability, and diversity in Auburn and its contribution to the countywide and regional housing need. H-66. Explore options to identify and monitor unregulated affordable housing for the purpose of long-term preservation particularly in urban centers, near transit, and/or where most redevelopment pressure is anticipated. H-67. Review and amend, a minimum every 5 years, local housing policies and strategies. Page 326 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Element | HE-17 H-68. Consider opportunities to evaluate potential displacement risk for naturally occurring affordable housing and vulnerable communities, especially those with historical and cultural ties to the community in daily work, and mitigate or review actions that significantly increase this risk. Housing Objectives and Implementation The City has developed housing objective implementation strategies addressing housing diversity, condition, attainability, and programs to serve special needs. The City will monitor the objectives over time. Figure 3. Housing Objectives and Tools Outcomes Indicators Example Tools Improve housing quality Increased quality of rental housing • Housing rehabilitation and repair loans • Loans for energy conservation and healthy indoor air quality • City-sponsored and nonprofit property manager programs • Housing inspection program Code enforcement • Community volunteer program Meet demand for new housing units Land capacity to meet or exceed housing target • Land use plan and zoning • Variety of housing options Promote housing ownership Maintain or increase homeownership rates • Accessory dwelling units • Middle Housing • Unit-Lot Subdivision Allow for a variety of housing types to meet size, age, and cultural trends Increased numbers of middle housing units and apartment units with neighborhood recreation and service amenities Retention of housing stock with larger units • Middle Housing on small and infill lots • Accessory dwelling units • Mixed-use zoning • Incentivize infill development Increase opportunities for housing to extremely-low, very-low, low-, and moderate-income households Increased numbers of ownership dwellings available to moderate incomes Increased mixed-use development for all incomes Increased preservation and improvement of rental housing with long-term affordability commitments • Accessory dwelling units Downtown and Growth Center incentives for apartment and mixed-use • Infill incentives • Permit and impact fee waivers • See also “improve housing quality” above • Expansion of MFTE program outside of Downtown Improved opportunities for special needs housing and services Greater match of housing to special needs including housing for all ages and abilities as well as the homeless • Community services programs • Partnerships with nonprofit housing providers and nongovernmental organizations Monitor housing supply, affordability, and diversity Address achievement of indicators above • Monitor in conjunction with regular and annual Comprehensive Plan updates and new countywide planning policy housing targets Page 327 of 435 Economic Developement Element City of Auburn DRAFT - PLANNING COMMISSION ACCEPTED VERSION Page 328 of 435 Page 329 of 435 Table of Contents Economic Development Element ..............................................................1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 Vision ...............................................................................................................................................1 Planning Framework ....................................................................................................2 Vision for 2044 ................................................................................................................................2 Conditions and Trends ..................................................................................................2 Auburn Profile ..................................................................................................................................2 Household and Income Characteristics ..........................................................................................2 Resident Labor Force and Employment Characteristics .................................................................3 Daily Inflow and Outflow .................................................................................................................5 Growth Projections ..........................................................................................................................6 Planning Approach .......................................................................................................6 Values ..............................................................................................................................................6 Goals and Policies ........................................................................................................6 Goal # 1 – Retention of Existing Businesses ...................................................................................6 Goal # 2 – Attract New Businesses .................................................................................................7 Goal # 3 – Missing or Underrepresented Industries .......................................................................8 Goal #4 – Supporting Industry Clusters ..........................................................................................8 Goal #5 – Downtown Auburn .........................................................................................................8 Goal # 6 – High Standards ..............................................................................................................9 Goal #7 – Incentives ........................................................................................................................9 Goal #8 – Partnership ....................................................................................................................10 Goal #9 – Tourism ...........................................................................................................................10 Goal #10 – Diversity ........................................................................................................................10 Goal #11 – Displacement ................................................................................................................11 Maps and Figures Figure 1 - Inflation-Adjusted Median Household Income in Auburn with Regional Comparison (2020) ...............................................................3 Figure 2 - Auburn Workforce Top Industry Sectors (2019) ............................................3 Figure 3 - Top Ten Employers in Auburn (2022) ...........................................................4 Figure 4 - Top Industry Sectors in Auburn (2002-2019) ...............................................4 Figure 5 - Auburn Daily Commuting Patterns (2019) ....................................................5 Page 330 of 435 Page 331 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element | EDE-1 Introduction Economic development is a crucial aspect of the City of Auburn’s overall well- being and quality of life. A strong and diverse economy provides opportunities for residents through job creation, business growth and a robust tax base that funds essential services such as police, streets, and parks. The Economic Development Element of the Comprehensive Plan serves as a guide to attract, retain and grow businesses in the city, expand economic opportunity for everyone, ensure that economic expansion is carried out in a sustainable fashion, and drive regional economic growth. It recognizes that economic development is not a standalone endeavor but is closely linked to other key elements of the plan, including land use, infrastructure, transportation, housing, and sustainable resource management. The Economic Development Element is designed to establish policies and strategies that promotes the implementation of Auburn’s vision for a strong, inclusive, and diverse local and regional economy. The Economic Development Element therefore provides a comprehensive overview of Auburn’s economy, sets policy direction for economic growth, and identifies strategies, programs, and projects to improve the local and regional economy. Economic Development Element Vision The City of Auburn is a diverse and inclusive economy that promotes prosperity for all members of the community. New business and industry desire to locate in Auburn and existing businesses are able to grow and prosper. The economic landscape is welcoming to large and small businesses as well as an array of different industry sectors. Economic growth is carried out in a climate friendly manner that effectively weathers economic volatility. A pathway to success exists for all residents and business owners regardless of their background or socioeconomic status. Page 332 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element | EDE-2 Planning Framework Vision for 2044 To achieve this vision, the city will focus on strategic partnerships, targeted investments, and inclusive policies and programs. In 2044, Auburn will be a city where people want to start their careers, raise their families, and enjoy all that life has to offer. It will be a place where businesses want to locate and visitors want to spend time. Our vision for the future is one in which Auburn is a model of sustainable living, where residents, business owners, and workers enjoy a high quality of life while also reducing their impact on the planet. We are working to create an efficient economy that minimizes waste and maximizes resource efficiency. Conditions and Trends Auburn Profile Auburn is a vibrant and growing city located in the Pacific Northwest region, situated about 15 miles north of Tacoma and 20 miles south of Seattle and is part of the greater Seattle metropolitan area. Most of the city is in King County, with a small portion extending into Pierce County. Auburn is currently ranked as the 14th largest city in Washington State and shares its borders with Federal Way, Kent, Pacific, Algona, Sumner and unincorporated King County. The Muckleshoot Indian Reservation lies partly within and partly adjacent to the City. Auburn is known for its natural beauty, strong economy, and diverse community, offering residents and visitors a high quality of life and a sense of belonging. The city boasts a thriving business community, top rated schools, and ample recreational opportunities, including access to the Green River, White River and the Cascade Mountains. Auburn also has a rich history and cultural diversity reflected in its many festivals, events, and community organizations. Auburn is a city that is constantly evolving and improving, yet always maintains its small-town charm and is a place where people come to start their careers, raise their families, and enjoy all that life has to offer. Household and Income Characteristics In 2020, Auburn was estimated to have 29,220 households, an increase of 12% since 2010. The average household size was 2.75, larger than the King County average of 2.43. This is likely due to the larger share of family households in Auburn, at 68%, compared with 59% in King County, and a smaller share of householders living alone. This reflects Auburn’s suburban development patterns compared with some of the denser urban areas in Seattle and its closer-in suburbs. About 60% of Auburn’s households are homeowners and 40% are renters, a slightly lower share of homeowners than Washington as a whole, but higher than the King County average. Page 333 of 435 City of Auburn Economic Development Element | EDE-3 Figure 1 - Inflation-Adjusted Median Household Income in Auburn with Regional Comparison (2020) Source: 2020 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table S2503, CPI Inflation Index Auburn’s median household income was $76,410 in 2020, an increase of 19% from $64,443 in 2010 (adjusted for inflation). As shown in Figure 1, Auburn’s incomes are on par with statewide and Pierce County averages but lag behind the higher incomes of King County households primarily as a result of Seattle and Eastside residents. Rental households in Auburn earn significantly less than ownership households – the average renter household earns $54,396 compared with $98,153 for ownership households. Auburn’s BIPOC households are more likely to be renters. Around 46% of renters are non-white residents, compared to 33% of homeowners. These types of intersections of income, race, access to housing and wealth-building are important considerations when planning to accommodate the needs of all Auburn residents. Resident Labor Force and Employment Characteristics Figure 2 - Auburn Workforce Top Industry Sectors (2019) Source: US Census On The Map Page 334 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element | EDE-4 The top ten industry sectors in which Auburn residents were employed in 2019 is shown in Figure 2. Auburn has traditionally been a blue-collar community since its initial early 20th century population boom stemming from the construction of a railroad freight terminal. Despite a decrease in manufacturing employment in the 1990s and early 2000s, 13% of Auburn residents were currently employed in the industry in 2019. Since the recession of 2008, the number of Auburn residents employed in health care, retail, and construction have increased substantially and the overall diversity of jobs worked by Auburn residents has increased, reflecting the rapidly increasing population and shifts in demographics discussed previously. Figure 3 - Top Ten Employers in Auburn (2022) Source: Washington Employment Security Department The top employers in Auburn are shown in Figure 3. Boeing is the largest employer in the City, as it has been several decade, followed by a variety of retail, manufacturing, and wholesale businesses, as well as Multicare, the regional hospital and health care center in Downtown Auburn. The top ten employers in Auburn currently account for about 23% of the jobs in the City, down from 55% in 2011 and 85% in 2002, further demonstrating the increasing diversity of business activity in Auburn in recent decades Figure 4 - Top Industry Sectors in Auburn (2002-2019) Source: US Census On The Map Page 335 of 435 City of Auburn Economic Development Element | EDE-5 As of 2019, there were about 46,383 jobs located in Auburn. The top sectors are shown in Figure 4 along with their change over the past two decades. Despite decreases in the manufacturing industry from 1990 and 2000 noted in Auburn’s previous (2014) comprehensive plan, the sector has seen rapid increases since the 2008 financial crisis and now accounts for over 20% of jobs in the City. Other notable shifts include a rapid increase in construction jobs over the past several years as well as a decrease in retail which corresponds to an increase in wholesale trade, perhaps reflecting increasing patterns of online rather than in-store shopping. Daily Inflow and Outflow As of 2019, 5,288 Auburn residents, or 15% of the population both lived and worked in the City. The remaining 85% of those who worked in Auburn commuted from outside the City. As shown in Figure 5, there are more people who work in Auburn and live elsewhere than those who live in Auburn and work elsewhere. This results in an increased pool of residents and employees who engage with City services and businesses. Although this data predates the COVID-19 pandemic, the relatively large share of in-person manufacturing and retail jobs in the City suggests that the commuting patterns may have been less affected by the pandemic in Auburn compared with other areas which have a higher share of office jobs. Figure 5 - Auburn Daily Commuting Patterns (2019) Source: US Census On The Map Page 336 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element | EDE-6 Growth Projections Understanding future population and employment growth is essential for planning. King County, Pierce County, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) are each involved in forecasting population and job growth in Auburn over the coming decades, and this section summarizes the current forecasts from these agencies which can be used to inform future actions on land use, infrastructure, housing, economic development, and transportation in Auburn. Planning Approach Values Character Our community values the unique perspectives and experiences that our diverse population brings, and we strive to create inclusive spaces that celebrate our differences and foster a sense of belonging for all. Wellness We are a secure community with walkable commercial districts where the perception and reality are that crime activity is low. We prioritize the health and well-being of our residents by investing in programs and infrastructure that promote active living, access to healthy food, and mental health support for all residents. Service Our economic development strategies are guided by a commitment to equitable growth, which means ensuring that all businesses and entrepreneurs have equal access to resources and opportunities to succeed. Economy We are working to create a resilient and equitable economy that benefits all members of our community, including those who have historically been marginalized or underrepresented. Celebration We actively promote our local businesses and have been successful at making our residents more aware of what is available locally as well as attracting visitors from beyond our City. We take pride in our vibrant arts and culture scene, which serves as a cornerstone of our community and attracts visitors from around the region. We are committed to supporting and promoting local artists and cultural institutions. Environment Our economy is growing and diversifying because of our efforts to protect our rivers, streams, wetlands, and other environmental resources. Sustainability Residents are staying in Auburn to work and shop, and we are widely considered a regional dining, shopping, and entertainment destination. Goals and Policies Goal # 1 – Retention of Existing Businesses Retain existing businesses by developing growth opportunities, cultivating local talent, promoting safety measures, and facilitating supportive expansion and relocation options. Policies ED-1. Collaborate with local educational partners (e.g. Green River College & Auburn School District) and vocational centers to develop programs that are aligned with the skills needed by businesses in Auburn. This will necessitate a deep understanding of employer needs and educational/employment pipelines and includes fostering partnerships with businesses to provide internships, apprenticeships, and job placement opportunities for local talent. ED-2. Implement and promote security measures in commercial areas, including physical improvements such as enhanced lighting, surveillance, and Page 337 of 435 City of Auburn Economic Development Element | EDE-7 landscaping as well as strengthening communication amongst the business community and the City in order to create a secure environment that encourages businesses to succeed. ED-3. Nurture/foster a collaborative environment by conducting regular gatherings and forums for businesses, community leaders and local government representatives to share their ideas, needs, strategies, and concerns. ED-4. Develop and implement a support system for existing businesses within the city by assisting them in optimizing their operations and addressing challenges they may encounter during expansion or relocation within the city. Provide comprehensive information on available commercial properties, zoning regulations, and necessary permits. Offer proactive assistance to navigate local government procedures, ensuring a seamless transition for businesses committed to staying and growing in Auburn. ED-5. Promote diversity and inclusion within the local business community by supporting initiatives that encourage greater participation and inclusion of minority owned businesses. Create resources and programs that provide equitable opportunity for businesses owned by underrepresented groups to be fully engaged in the local business community and the full array of resources and partnerships that exist. ED-6. Establish a dedicated business retention program that proactively engages with local businesses to understand their needs, challenges, and opportunities. Identify and provide resources and support to address issues before they become significant barriers to continued operation and/or expansion. Goal # 2 – Attract New Businesses Attract new, high performing businesses by identifying market gaps, precisely defining the types of businesses Auburn seeks, strategically marketing Auburn’s advantages, and optimizing available land and space. Policies ED-7. Perform regular market analyses to identify emerging trends, gaps, and opportunities in the local and regional markets. Conduct periodic research and collaboration with local education centers, research institutions and industry experts in order to stay updated on emerging needs and opportunities. Emphasize efforts and prioritize opportunities that attract businesses that are positively contributing to a more sustainable and climate-friendly operation. This can be in the form of businesses that are designing, creating, selling and distributing climate-friendly products and approaches or businesses that are seeking to incorporate sustainable development or building management practices. ED-8. Clearly define the types of businesses that align with the city’s economic development strategies, considering local strengths and market demands. Engage with local business associations and community stakeholders to gather input on desired business types. Develop industry profiles to guide prospective businesses in understanding the local market. ED-9. Implement targeted marketing campaigns to showcase the city’s advantages and attract businesses that fit the defined criteria. This includes developing a comprehensive marketing strategy highlighting Auburn’s infrastructure, workforce, incentives, and quality of life. Leverage digital platforms, industry conferences, and targeted events to reach potential businesses and investors. ED-10. Establish incentive programs to encourage desired businesses and industries to choose Auburn as their location. Collaborate with local and state governments to create tax incentives, grants, and other financial support mechanisms. Develop customized incentive packages based on the specific needs of target businesses. Build out a set of incentives that are specifically targeted towards attracting climate-friendly businesses to locate and grow in Auburn. ED-11. Foster collaboration between the public and private sectors to create a supportive environment for attracting high-performing businesses. This includes establishing a platform for ongoing dialogue and collaboration between local government and business leaders and encouraging private sector participation in infrastructure development, workforce training, and other initiatives. Page 338 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element | EDE-8 Goal # 3 – Missing or Underrepresented Industries Identify and support emerging high performing business sectors with growth potential, contributing to a resilient and dynamic economic landscape, particularly in industries that are currently underrepresented. Policies ED-12. Identify and analyze emerging high performing business sectors with growth potential through ongoing collaboration with industry professionals, research institutions, and local business leaders. Develop a systematic process for monitoring market trends and assessing the viability of missing new economic sectors. ED-13. Direct strategic investments and resources towards industries that are currently underrepresented in the local economy but show potential for growth. This involves creating incentive programs and support mechanisms tailored to the specific needs of these industries to foster their development. ED-14. Establish programs to support entrepreneurs and startups within the identified high potential sectors. Provide mentorship, access to resources, and networking opportunities to nurture the growth of emerging businesses in underrepresented industries. ED-15. Collaborate with educational institutions and industry partners to develop training programs and educational initiatives that align with the needs of emerging sectors. This ensures a skilled workforce is ready to contribute to the growth and development of underrepresent industries. ED-16. Foster a collaborative economic ecosystem by encouraging partnerships between local businesses, startups, research institutions, and government agencies within the identified sectors. Facilitate networking events, conferences, and collaborative projects to strengthen the overall business environment. Goal #4 – Supporting Industry Clusters Implement strategies that support local and regional industry clusters which includes approaches that support Auburn specific clusters as well as regional clusters that represent the Highway 167 Corridor clusters, King and Pierce County identified clusters, and regionally identified Puget Sound clusters. Policies ED-17. Retain and recruit businesses that support an already robust aerospace industry by encouraging establishment and growth of manufacturing, innovation and design, and transport of materials and goods. ED-18. Seek legislative solutions and private partnerships that are designed to offset the local impacts that occur as a result of logistics uses that are space consumptive, have high impacts on local street conditions, and that result in low performing ratio of jobs to square footage. ED-19. Upon successful completion of Policy P.2, support the logistics needs that exist along the Highway 167 Corridor between the Port of Seattle and the Port of Tacoma. ED-20. Expand upon opportunities to build out the local educational systems with the intention to create a stronger and more targeted employment pipeline that supports local industry clusters. Goal #5 – Downtown Auburn Develop downtown as a livable, walkable and drivable destination by fostering an active community through art, entertainment, and evening activity. Enhance building design, amenities and safety measures to create a welcoming environment that encourages residents and visitors to explore Auburn. Policies ED-21. Implement public art initiatives and cultural programs in downtown Auburn to enhance the aesthetic appeal and cultural vibrancy of the area. This includes installing public art installations, organizing Page 339 of 435 City of Auburn Economic Development Element | EDE-9 cultural events, and collaborating with local artists and performers. ED-22. Foster an active downtown community by organizing regular events, festivals, and markets in downtown Auburn. This involves collaborating with local businesses, community groups, and event organizers to create a diverse calendar of activities that attract residents and visitors. ED-23. Offer incentives for mixed use developments in the downtown area, encouraging the combination of residential, commercial, and entertainment spaces. This policy aims to create a vibrant and dynamic urban environment that supports both daytime and evening activities. ED-24. Develop comprehensive parking and transportation plans to ensure convenient access to downtown. This involves strategically placing parking facilities, promoting public transportation options, and encouraging alternative modes of transportation to make the area both drivable and accessible. ED-25. Enhance security measures, including increased police presence, improved lighting and surveillance systems, to ensure a secure environment for residents and visitors, especially during evening activities. Collaborate with local law enforcement agencies to address security concerns proactively. ED-26. Improve and expand the existing facade improvement program to support local businesses in upgrading their storefronts, signage, and exterior aesthetics. This not only contributes to the overall visual appeal of downtown but also encourages economic growth. ED-27. Develop a mix of incentives and penalties that seek to eliminate ongoing vacancy of ground floor commercial spaces. Goal # 6 – High Standards Promote high quality architectural design, pedestrian circulation, landscaping, lighting, public amenities, security investments, and signage that are customized to the various commercial and mixed-use areas of the city. Policies ED-28. Implement lighting standards that contribute to the security and quality of commercial areas. This involves strategically placed lighting fixtures, street lighting, and architectural lighting to enhance visibility and create a secure and attractive environment during both day and night. ED-29. Invest in infrastructure, such as improved multimodal transportation systems, electric vehicle charging stations, rideshare features, parks and open space, and enhanced security measures, to ensure the well-being of pedestrians and cyclists in commercial and mixed-used zones. ED-30. Establish design standards and procedures within commercial and mixed-use areas. This ensures that development plans align with the preferences and needs of the local community. ED-31. Establish a mechanism for regular design reviews to assess ongoing and proposed developments in commercial and mixed-use areas. This process ensures that projects align with established design standards and contribute positively to the overall urban beauty. Goal #7 – Incentives Develop and implement a comprehensive incentive program designed to attract and support business recruitment and retention. Incentives will include financial benefits, ease of access, community acceptance, strong connections to local goals, and maintaining support beyond initial opening. Policies ED-32. Routinely provide workforce development, business assistance, and business development programs. ED-33. Implement a streamlined permitting and approval process for businesses, reducing bureaucratic hurdles and ensuring a swift and efficient process. This policy aims to enhance ease of access for both new and existing businesses. ED-34. Develop incentives that encourage local and regional businesses to actively engage with the local community. This includes supporting community events, participating in local initiatives, and fostering a positive relationship with residents to enhance community acceptance. ED-35. Establish economic incentives that are Page 340 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element | EDE-10 geographically targeted and intended to attract specific local and regional businesses, brands, sectors, and amenities within the community. Goal #8 – Partnership Facilitate dynamic partnerships between the city, business community, educational institutions, event organizers and lodging providers. Policies ED-36. Develop a comprehensive framework for promoting dynamic partnerships between the city, business community, educational institutions, and business associations. This framework will outline strategies for collaboration, communication channels, and shared goals. ED-37. Conduct regular meetings and forums to bring together representatives from the city, business community, educational institutions, DAC, chamber. These meetings will serve as platforms for discussing opportunities for collaboration, addressing challenges, and sharing best practices. ED-38. Encourage the development of collaborative initiatives that leverage the strengths and resources of each stakeholder group. This will include joint marketing campaigns, workforce development programs, community events, and infrastructure projects that benefit all parties involved. ED-39. Collaborate with event organizers and lodging providers to coordinate and support events that drive economic activity and tourism in the city. This will involve providing logistical support, marketing assistance, and facilitating partnerships to enhance event experiences. ED-40. Facilitate resource sharing and support services among stakeholders to maximize efficiency and effectiveness. This will involve sharing facilities, equipment, expertise, and access to networks to support mutual goals and initiatives. ED-41. Acknowledge and appreciate the contributions of stakeholders in fostering dynamic partnerships and collaborative efforts. This could include awards, acknowledgments, and public recognition for exemplary partnerships and initiatives that benefit the city and its community. Goal #9 – Tourism Drive the growth of tourism by strategically investing in tourism related initiatives, fostering partnerships with key stakeholders and implementing effective promotional campaigns that are collectively designed to increase the number and length of hotel stays. Policies ED-42. Identify and prioritize strategic tourism initiatives, such as the development of tourist attractions, cultural events, and recreational facilities. Ensure these initiatives align with the city’s unique offerings and contribute to an attractive and memorable visitor experience. ED-43. Foster public private partnerships in the tourism sector to leverage the expertise and resources of both the public and private sectors. Encourage collaboration with local businesses, event organizers, and attractions to create a unified and compelling tourism experience, ED-44. Develop and implement effective promotional campaigns and marketing strategies to increase the visibility of the city as a tourist destination. Utilize digital platforms, social media, and traditional marketing channels to reach target audiences and showcase the city’s attractions. ED-45. Maintain a strong level of communication and coordination with the lodging industry in order to cross promote events and amenities within the city and build Auburn’s reputation as a destination. Goal #10 – Diversity All members of the community operate on a level playing field with equal access to services and where their participation is welcome and heard. Policies ED-46. All economic development goals, policies, and strategies will be designed around inclusiveness and with an intention to reach the entire business community. ED-47. Intentionally identify and recruit missing or underrepresented ethnic and cultural groups to serve on economic development, tourism and downtown boards and commissions. ED-48. Establish opportunities that enable broader Page 341 of 435 City of Auburn Economic Development Element | EDE-11 engagement and listening from underserved communities within the city in the development of plans, strategies and decision making. ED-49. Identify and eliminate barriers that have traditionally made it difficult to start or grow a business due to language. This includes providing translation and interpretation for non-English speaking people and accommodating individuals where a physical disability is eliminating adequate access to services. Goal #11 – Displacement In support of a stronger and more diverse economy the city will plan, protect, preserve and produce housing options that are intended to be attainable to all members of the community where the primary goal is to ensure that residents’ choices about when, whether and under what circumstances to remain in their home or move. Policies ED-50. While the Economic Development Element places a heavy emphasis on the attraction of new businesses it is not the intent of this Plan to displace people, communities, populations, or affordable housing. Nor is it the intent of this Plan or any specific Goal or Policy to be considered higher priority in the event that there are conflicts. ED-51. Establish zoning district boundaries that avoid a result where residential communities are designated as a non-conforming use. ED-52. Avoid issuance of conditional use permits, variances, and other special land use approvals that convert existing residential uses into new commercial uses. This does not include the allowance of home based businesses. ED-53. Establish development standards that mitigate the impacts of noise, light, odor, and building massing generated on commercial sites that are adjacent to existing residential communities. ED-54. Embrace housing policies that support the creation of more housing across the full spectrum of affordability ranges in order to stabilize housing prices and avoid rapid volatility in the housing market. A strong and stable housing market in all sectors of affordability is an important element of a strong, local, and diverse workforce. Page 342 of 435 Historic Preservation Element City of Auburn DRAFT - PLANNING COMMISSION ACCEPTED VERSION Page 343 of 435 Page 344 of 435 Table of Contents Historic Preservation Element ...................................................................1 Introduction and Background .......................................................................................1 Vision ...............................................................................................................................................1 Values ...........................................................................................................................2 Conditions and Trends ..................................................................................................2 Main Street ......................................................................................................................................2 Historic Registry ..............................................................................................................................2 Goals and Policies ........................................................................................................5 Goal 1. To enhance and maintain the quality of historical resources in the region. .......................5 Page 345 of 435 Page 346 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Historic Preservation Element | HPE-1 Introduction and Background Through the recognition and preservation of its past, Auburn can ensure its uniqueness and strengthen its identity as it moves into the future. The City recognizes the importance of maintaining this connection with its past by including policies which address the enhancement and maintenance of historic resources within this Comprehensive Plan. This importance is also recognized by both the State and the County by the inclusion of historic preservation as one of the goals of the Growth Management Act (GMA) and in the King County Countywide policies. Planning Approach to maintain, preserve, and enhance the City’s historic, cultural and archaeological resources to provide a sense of local identity and history to the visitors and residents of the community. In 2010 the United States Census Bureau identified Auburn’s population as being 70,180 residents. Auburn grew in population to 84,858 residents in 2022, a 20% increase in 12 years but has since gone down in population to 82,657 in 2024... The growth applied substantial development pressure onto the city and enabled new businesses and services to prosper, but without the proper management of growth and development, these forces have potential to negatively impact the historic sites and cultural practices that exist in Auburn, and which contribute to the reason why residents and visitors are drawn to Auburn in the first place. Proper identification and stewardship of historic and cultural assets is critical as the city works to balance competing demands on space, housing, services, and resources, because said assets help to create an identifiable identity for Auburn and often enable residents to better connect with their community. These assets may be historically significant structures, landmarks, and places and practices of tribal importance. Historic Preservation Element Vision Unlike many cities within the Puget Sound Region, Auburn has a long and established history. Auburn has been a vibrant and freestanding community for over 100 years. As a result, Auburn developed its own downtown as the focus of business and community life. The downtown in particular, and the community as a whole, were linked to the railroads, which were the major mode of transportation throughout the region for decades. In the past several decades, the region has experienced significant population growth. Due to the nature of this growth, the differences between one community and another have blurred, and communities are becoming more and more alike. If Auburn is to retain its identity as a unique community, it must seek to emphasize its differences and celebrate them. Auburn’s history is a part of its identity that is unique to Auburn. Page 347 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Historic Preservation Element | HPE-2 Values Auburn’s history is identifiable and unique, contributing to an evident community identity. By preserving where this community has already been, we better inform where it’s going. Under pressure to grow its economy while simultaneously meeting the emerging needs of its residents, Auburn’s municipal policies aimed at preserving the city’s historic and cultural assets will be shaped by our shared values. These values are: Character Historic structures and culturally significant sites are protected, ensuring that Auburn’s community identity is grounded in its historic legacy. Wellness Efforts to support the livability of historic neighborhoods and structures are supported through city programs, projects, and collaboration with communities. Service The ongoing function and operations of historic structures and places are supported through the investment into, and maintenance of, the utilities that serve them. Economy One-of-a-kind historic structures and places are revitalized, enhancing property values, and encouraging consumers to remain in place and purchase goods. Celebration Auburn’s history and local culture is actively promoted to residents and visitors in collaboration with city- supported organizations and official programs. Environment Investment, maintenance, and restoration of existing buildings and places are prioritized, disincentivizing urban sprawl into natural and open spaces. Sustainability Growth and business activity in Auburn does not damage local historic sites and culturally important practices continue to be emphasized and supported. Conditions and Trends Main Street In 2017 the Heritage Building, a structure which housed apartments and local storefronts since 1924, tragically burned down, creating a gap in Auburn’s otherwise well-defined and preserved Main Street. Four years later, in 2021, the Max House Apartments, another mature Main Street-defining structure also caught fire, eventually spreading to the historic and beloved Auburn Avenue Theater, rendering both buildings unsalvageable. Today, the city and stakeholders continue work to reimagine the sites of the three lost Main Street structures, and though their absence serve as an opportunity to imagine a new direction, their loss nonetheless remains an important reminder of the importance of historic preservation, because many culturally and historic assets cannot be replaced so easily once gone. Historic Registry There are currently six properties in the city of Auburn listed on either the King County Landmarks List or the National Register of Historic Places. When a property is added to either of these lists it means that their historic status is secured and they are now subject to a number of legal protections to prevent their removal, destruction, or alteration. Page 348 of 435 City of Auburn Historic Preservation Element | HPE-3 The six properties are: Auburn Masonic Temple Designated 2002 • In the late 1800s, settlers in Auburn formed King Solomon Lodge No. 60, becoming the town’s second fraternal order. They built the Auburn Masonic Temple in 1924, a historic Italian Renaissance Revival-style building listed on the King County Landmarks List in 2002 and National Register of Historic Places in 2015. It is located at 10 Auburn Way S. Auburn Pioneer Cemetery Designated 2016 • Auburn Pioneer Cemetery, established in the 1860s, is the city’s oldest cemetery. It underwent various name changes and was designated a landmark in 2016. In 2019, the restored cemetery was officially dedicated, featuring new walkways, signage, and the Tora Kato monument’s restoration. It is located at 850 Auburn Way N. Auburn Post Office Designated 2000 • Built in 1937, the Auburn Post Office transitioned to King County’s use in the 1960s. In 2016, the City of Auburn acquired the building to create the Auburn Postmark Center for the Arts & Culture Center preserving its character for diverse community arts activities. It is located at 20 Auburn Ave. Auburn Public Library Designated 1995 • In 1914, Auburn celebrated the opening of its Carnegie Library, located at 3rd Street NE and Auburn Avenue. Designed by architect David J. Myers and funded by a $9,000 grant from the Carnegie Corporation, the 5,000 square-foot brick building featured a central librarian’s desk, a children’s section, and an adult section, serving the city for 50 years. It is located at 306 Auburn Ave. Page 349 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Historic Preservation Element | HPE-4 Mary Olson Farm Designated 2000 • Mary Olson Farm, a partnership between the White River Valley Museum and City of Auburn, is a fully restored 1880s subsistence farm, known for its preservation and conservation awards. This historic 67-acre site includes seven wooden buildings, an orchard, and meadows, offering a glimpse into early 1900s farm life. It is located at 28728 Green River Road. Oscar Blomeen House Designated 1991 • Built by owner Oscar Blomeen in 1914, the Oscar Blomeen House features a corner turret and a rich history. It served as Auburn’s first hospital during the 1917-1919 influenza epidemic, a maternity hospital, and a surgical center. It’s also an example of post-Victorian architecture with Craftsman influences. It is located at 324 B St NE. Page 350 of 435 City of Auburn Historic Preservation Element | HPE-5 Goals and Policies Goal 1. To enhance and maintain the quality of historical resources in the region. HP-1. Encourage the protection, preservation, recovery and rehabilitation of significant archaeological resources and historic sites in Auburn HP-2. Educate City staff to recognize significant resources and structures or provide City staff with access to professionals who specialize in historic preservation. HP-3. Seek grant opportunities to conduct historic building inventories of neighborhoods. HP-4. Develop an Historic Preservation Plan to identify and protect Auburn’s historic resources. HP-5. Update the historic site and building inventory as part of this plan to include additional buildings, signage, corridors, and public spaces of historical significance. HP-6. Amend existing historic preservation codes and incentives as needed to implement the Historic Preservation Plan. HP-7. The City should consider the impacts of new development on existing historic buildings and resources as a part of its environmental review process and encourage alternatives to demolition. HP-8. Propose adaptive reuse ideas to encourage the rehabilitation of sites and buildings with unique or significant historic characteristics. HP-9. Archival quality historical documentation should be required when a historical building cannot be preserved. Buildings eligible for landmark status shall require the most detailed level of archival documentation and/or measured drawings. HP-10. Require appropriate mitigation measures if demolition is imminent, such as establishing a mitigation fund that could be used to further preservation elsewhere in the City. HP-11. Future development in the Downtown area should be sensitive to the character of surrounding buildings and the historical context of the area. HP-12. Retain existing buildings with historic characteristics and research the potential for placing additional buildings on the historic register. HP-13. Modifications of existing buildings shall consider the appropriate treatment or restoration of historic architectural features. HP-14. Make restoration of historic buildings known to the public through publication of projects to foster pride in downtown Auburn. HP-15. The White River Valley Historical Museum is recognized as the primary repository of historic artifacts which relate to the City’s historic and cultural heritage. HP-16. Promote activities that create awareness and support cultivating the heritage of Auburn by offering walking or biking tours, festivals, and other means. HP-17. Recognize Auburn’s past prior to the arrival of settlers by promoting Native American sites and artifacts. HP-18. Market the economic benefits to business owners and community groups when promoting cultural and historical events to gain a variety of involvement from various sectors in the City. Page 351 of 435 T167 T167 T18 T18 Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Map ID: 3337 Printed On: 3/8/2024 Historical Landmark & Registry Inventory 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 MILES 1 AUBURN PIONEER CEMETERY King County Register of Landmarks 0721059020 2 AUBURN POST OFFICE King County Register of Landmarks and National Register 0483000090 3 AUBURN PUBLIC LIBRARY King County Register of Landmarks, Washington Heritage Register, and National Register 1735800115 4 BLOMEEN, OSCAR HOUSE Washington Heritage Register and National Register 5405100005 5 KING SOLOMOM MASONIC LODGE NO 60 HALL King County Register of Landmarks 7331400475 6 MARY OLSON PARK Washington Heritage Register, National Register, Washington Heritage Barn Register 3222059032 ID HISTORIC SITE NAME STATUS PARCELALLEYALLEY ALLEY ALLEYALLEYAUBURN WAY SF ST NEPRIVATE 8TH ST NE A PL SE E MAIN ST B ST SW5TH ST NW W MAIN ST AUBURN WAY ND ST NE3RD ST NE 1ST ST NE 9 T H S T N E 1ST ST SW 1ST ST NW 1ST ST SE 3RD ST NW 7TH ST NE AUBURN AVE2ND ST NE F PL NE E ST NEN DIVISION STB ST NE4TH ST NE 6TH ST NE E ST SEA ST NEH ST NEPARK AVE NE C ST NW6TH ST NW A ST NWHistoric Site 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 2 3 4 1 Page 352 of 435 Climate Element City of Auburn DRAFT - PLANNING COMMISSION ACCEPTED VERSION Page 353 of 435 Page 354 of 435 Table of Contents Climate Element ........................................................................................1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 Vision ...............................................................................................................................................1 Values ..............................................................................................................................................2 Conditions and Trends ..................................................................................................2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .............................................................................................................2 Identified Priority Climate Hazards .................................................................................................4 Risk Index ........................................................................................................................................6 Climate Policy at a Glance ............................................................................................7 Resilience Sub-Element .................................................................................................................7 Goals, Policies, and Actions ............................................................................................................8 Emissions Mitigation Sub-Element ...............................................................................13 Goals, Policies, and Actions ............................................................................................................13 Glossary of Terms .........................................................................................................17 Acronyms ......................................................................................................................19 Maps and Figures Figure 1 – Auburn Community Emissions Forecast and Reduction Goals. ..................3 Figure 2 – Projected Change in Days with Maximum Humidex Above 90° in Washington by 2050-2079. .....................................................................................5 Figure 3 – Projected Percent Change in Magnitude of 25-year Storm inking County by 2020-2049. ......................................................................................5 Figure 4 – Risk Index for Auburn and South King County. ..........................................6 Tables Table 1 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Target .............................................3 Page 355 of 435 Page 356 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Climate Element | CE-1 Introduction The Climate Element of the City of Auburn’s comprehensive plan is a strategic document to guide policy implementation in Auburn as it pertains to addressing anticipated climate-related changes to the city’s and region’s local environment. The city is undertaking planning for climate change as a response to House Bill 1181, passed by the Washington State Legislature in July 2023, and which requires that the city adopt climate planning goals, policies, and actions into its comprehensive plan by 2029. The City of Auburn is choosing to proactively engage in planning for climate change now, as opposed to by 2029. This is in part due to the immediate importance of preparing for climate change, and in anticipation of the expected long-term timelines of a number of climate response strategies. What does the Climate Element do? • Identify priority climate-driven natural hazards anticipated to impact Auburn • Determine community vulnerability, resilience, and risk • Provide policy guidance for ensuing 20 years of planning for climate change The Climate Element is organized by two overarching principles: Resilience and Mitigation. The resilience sub-element will lay out policies and strategies devised to improve the health of Auburn’s natural environment and citizens, while protecting local services and assets from negative impacts associated with climate change. The mitigation sub-element will lay out policies and strategies directed at reducing city and community emissions contributions to global greenhouse gas levels and work to discourage other environmentally harmful actions. Climate Element Vision Nestled in the heart of the Green River Valley with Mt. Rainer as a backdrop, Auburn is a historic and welcoming community with an innovative industrial-based economy and a wealth of outdoor and cultural activities at its doorstep. Yet the vitality, livelihoods, and surrounding environment that make up the fabric of Auburn’s community are threatened by human- driven climate change as concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continue rising to levels not measured for millions of years. By taking action to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change, Auburn is living out its commitment to its core community values of sustainability, environmental stewardship, and economic vibrancy and ensuring that it remains a livable, sustainable, and safe place to live, work, and visit. Page 357 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Climate Element | CE-2 Values Auburn is a dynamic community with much to offer both residents and visitors. Here, people understand the value of protecting cherished community assets, both urban and natural. With severe climate-driven changes expected to come to Auburn over the coming decades, Auburn’s shared community values will stand as clear directions which will shape and guide municipal climate policy. These values are: Character Auburn’s surrounding natural environment is restored and investments in Auburn’s resilience enhance the aesthetic and social qualities of the built environment. Wellness Resilience and emissions mitigation investments are grounded in environmental justice and target front-line communities who are most at risk of suffering adverse health impacts as a result of climate-related hazards. Service The city ensures the long-term maintenance and protection of vital infrastructure and services in order for residents to continue to rely on them in the face of extreme weather events. Economy Auburn is a leader in providing green job opportunities and training and ensures that it remains a vibrant and supportive community in which to conduct business. Celebration Places and assets of communal value are protected from degradation under extreme weather events and worsening climatic conditions. Environment The natural environment is protected and restored and the built environment appropriately safeguards natural lands. 1 Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc. Climate Action Plan of the City of Auburn, 2018 2 Cascadia Consulting Group inc. Greenhouse Gas Inventory for the City of Auburn, Washington, 2018 Sustainability Activity in Auburn does not deteriorate the local natural environment and its emission contributions continue to decline. Conditions and Trends Greenhouse Gas Emissions In 2007 the City of Auburn joined the U.S. Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement, committing to reducing the city’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and subsequently conducted its first GHG emissions inventory, marking 2008 as the baseline year to compare future emissions against. That year, it was revealed that community activities in Auburn – transportation, residential and commercial building energy use, and waste – were responsible for 848,324 metric tons of Carbon Dioxide, CO2 (mtCO2e) emitted. Municipal emissions – emissions directly caused by City of Auburn activity – were revealed to contribute 10,373 mtCO2e that year.1 In 2018 the City commissioned its second greenhouse gas inventory and determined that community and municipal emissions had each declined since 2008 despite Auburn’s population having grown during this same time period. Community emissions declined by 16% and municipal emissions declined by 19%. Auburn was able to achieve these reductions through significant cuts to electricity demand on municipal buildings, lower diesel and gasoline community demand due to commute trip reduction plans, and the implementation of waste diversion programs.2 Nonetheless, the City’s State and County partners have adopted ambitious emissions reductions timelines, and though Auburn has found success in its approach to emissions reduction, the City will have to take on a more aggressive stance of curbing its emissions sources in order to meet its legally mandated reduction targets on time. Page 358 of 435 City of Auburn Climate Element | CE-3 Table 1 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Target 2030 2040 2050 Statewide*-45%-70%-95% PSRC**-50%--80% King County**-50%--80% Pierce County*-45%-70%-95% *Pierce county and statewide targets based on 1990 GHG emissions levels. **PSRC and King County targets based on 2007 levels. Figure 1 – Auburn Community Emissions Forecast and Reduction Goals. Source: Greenhouse Gas Inventory for the City of Auburn, Washington (2018) Page 359 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Climate Element | CE-4 Identified Priority Climate Hazards Climate change-related hazards are not expected to impact communities and regions uniformly, some communities may get wetter, others drier, some may be impacted by significant sea-level rise while others will not. Some communities are also going to be more vulnerable to particular climate change- related hazards than others due to the presence or absence of particular infrastructure, its state of repair, and exposure to risk. A community’s demographic characteristics may also contribute to its vulnerability; for example, a community with a notable degree of respiratory illness may find it valuable to prioritize preparing for worsening air quality. Each of these are things to keep in mind when identifying priority climate hazards of which are most important to prepare for. The process of identifying priority climate hazards projected to afflict Auburn relied on the University of Washington’s Climate Mapping for a Resilient Washington tool, a climate analysis tool developed to help jurisdictions across Washington understand and visualize various climate change impacts and vulnerabilities across the next century and determine the specific affects. Priority Climate Hazards Anticipated to Im- pact Auburn Most • Rising Temperatures and Extreme Heat • Severe Storms and Flooding • Drought and Wildfires Given the regional context, the characteristics of the city’s infrastructure, and the economic and public health vulnerabilities of Auburn at large, the climate- change related hazards which are expected to present the greatest concern for the Auburn community are rising temperatures and exposure to extreme heat, increasingly severe storms and flooding, and more frequent droughts and wildfires.3 3 Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc. Climate Element Comprehensive Plan Framework, 2023 4 University of Washington Climate Impacts Group. Climate Mapping for a Resilient Washington, 2022 5 University of Washington Climate Impacts Group Rising Temperatures and Extreme Heat In the Pacific Northwest, average annual temperatures rose 1.5°F over the last century, resulting in a reduction of snowpack across the Cascade Mountains, more frequent droughts, and more extreme heat events. Left unaddressed, the impacts of rising temperatures will have tangible effects on public health and quality of life in Auburn. Warmer temperatures and extreme heat can increase heat stress and worsen air quality, heighten allergy symptoms, and exacerbate respiratory illness. Greater average annual temperatures are also expected to coincide with an increase in the number of very hot days – days over 90°F – which may result in greater health risks to those who work outdoors or vulnerable populations such as the elderly. Rising temperatures also carry the potential to affect our region’s bodies of water and negatively impact the quality of Auburn’s natural environment. Warmer streams and lakes can harm fish stocks and produce harmful algal blooms; in 2012 for example, over 80 percent of surveyed streams in King County exceeded state standards for salmon habitat protection. Meanwhile higher temperatures can intensify droughts by reducing snowpack and water storage, leading to a drier landscape in and around Auburn.4 Severe Storms and Flooding Climate change is expected to cause precipitation patterns to shift into the extremes, with far less rainfall occurring in the summer months resulting in drought-like conditions for portions of the year, while heavier-than- normal rains are expected to increase the likelihood and frequency of flooding events the rest of the year.5 In Auburn this means greater likelihood for floods in low-lying areas surrounding the Green and White Rivers during severe storms, more potential for landslides along sloped areas of the city as a result of erosion and soil displacement caused by heavy rains, and water quality concerns in the event that runoff exceeds the capacity of existing stormwater management facilities and infiltrates polluted lands. Each of these potential impacts also carry additional concerns for public health, economic activity, the quality of Auburn’s natural environment, and produce direct financial costs to Auburn residents. Page 360 of 435 City of Auburn Climate Element | CE-5 Figure 2 – Projected Change in Days with Maximum Humidex Above 90° in Washington by 2050-2079. Source: University of Washington Climate Impacts Group (2023) Figure 3 – Projected Percent Change in Magnitude of 25-year Storm inking County by 2020-2049. Source: University of Washington Climate Impacts Group (2023) Page 361 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Climate Element | CE-6 Drought and Wildfires Places in Washington once thought to have minimal wildfire risk are increasingly becoming less so as global average annual temperatures continue to rise, drying out more and more Washington land which in turn serves as greater reserves of potential fuel for wildfires to spread. Wildfire risk is expected to grow significantly in many neighboring counties, including King County, increasing the intensity and frequency of days with unhealthy levels of air quality in Auburn due to smoke. This will exacerbate respiratory illness, limit outdoor activities, and harm the natural environment.6 If current emissions trends continue, greater conservation of water during drought years will be necessary and increased demand on emergency services in response to reduced access to potable water will become more likely. Risk Index These identified priority climate hazards are expected to interact with Auburn’s prevailing resiliency and vulnerability characteristics in such a way that FEMA has determined that much of Auburn is at relatively high or very high risk of negative impacts from climate change, underscoring the necessity to plan for climate change.7 6 Federal Emergency Management Agency. National Risk Index, 2023 7 Federal Emergency Management Agency. National Risk Index, 2023 Figure 4 – Risk Index for Auburn and South King County. Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency (2023) Likelihood of drought in any given year by 2100 (High Global Emissions Scenario) Page 362 of 435 City of Auburn Climate Element | CE-7 Climate Policy at a Glance The state legislature requires that Auburn’s Climate Element include several components in order to be in compliance with the Growth Management Act. Likewise, the Climate Element will reflect the requirements set by the Puget Sound Regional Council and Auburn’s King and Pierce County partners. Sub-Elements The Climate Element will feature goals, policies, objectives, and implementation strategies which will be organized into two sub-elements, one which addresses resilience and one which addresses greenhouse gas emissions mitigation. Resilience Sub-Element The first of two sub-elements, the Resilience sub- element will layout methods to address climate resilience, environmental justice, and equity. This section of the Climate element will also identify natural hazards which will be exacerbated by climate change, and the potential approaches to assess community vulnerability. The sub-element will also address conservation of natural areas and the introduction of green infrastructure investments, which will allow Auburn to overcome future hazards. The Resilience Sub-Element will: • Take Stock of Assets • Identify Vulnerabilities • Assess Risks • Recommend Protections Greenhouse Gas Emissions Mitigation Sub-Element The Emissions Mitigation sub- element will identify significant sources of emissions, establish methods of measuring municipal and community emissions, and set emissions reduction targets to work toward. This is an important aspect of planning for climate change as greenhouse gas emissions are largely contributing to the projected change in global climate. The Emissions Mitigation Sub- Element will: • Identify Community and Municipal Emissions • Establish Reduction Targets • Recommend Mitigation Efforts Resilience Sub-Element The Washington State Department of Commerce defines resilience as, “…the ongoing process of anticipating, preparing for, and adapting to changes in climate and minimizing negative impacts to our natural systems, infrastructure, and communities.” Auburn can improve its resilience by introducing mitigation efforts against natural hazards, adapting to unpreventable impacts, protecting and restoring natural areas, and developing recovery responses. The goals, policies, and implementation strategies of the Resilience sub- element are organized into six key themes: 1. Public Health and Community Resilience 2. Infrastructure and Emergency Preparedness 3. Cultural Resources and Practices Page 363 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Climate Element | CE-8 4. Water Conservation and Stormwater Management 5. Natural Habitats and Urban Green Space 6. Economic Development * Policy developed for concurrency with King County’s Strategic Climate Action Plan ** Policy developed for concurrency with Washington Department of Commerce Climate Planning guidance *** Policy developed for concurrency with Puget Sound Regional Council’s Vision 2050 Goals, Policies, and Actions Theme 1. Public Health and Community Resilience Policies related to identifying climate vulnerable communities, investing in programs and services that reduce vulnerability in vulnerable and frontline communities, and prioritizing green affordable housing should be considered. Goal 1. Conduct, and periodically update, a climate vulnerability and risk assessment C-1 * Integrate a climate impacts risk assessment and policies into the local hazard mitigation plan. C-2 ** Support enhanced data collection for hazard events of all magnitudes to provide a fuller understanding of the community’s hazard characteristics — including those affected by climate change. C-3 *** Promote the use of health impact assessments and other tools to address the potential impacts of health, equity, and climate change on vulnerable communities. Goal 1 Actions Action 1.1 *** Conduct, and periodically update, a climate vulnerability and risk assessment that includes a focus on the built environment, community, and natural systems. Support enhanced data collection for hazard events to provide a fuller understanding of the community’s hazard characteristics—including identifying demographic groups/community members most vulnerable to climate impacts. Use assessment findings to evaluate changes to comprehensive plan goals and policies and enhance resilience. Goal 2. Minimize disproportionate impacts of climate change on vulnerable and frontline communities and focus/maximize associated benefits C-4 * Improve access to services throughout the community by investing in partnerships with frontline communities to co-identify and remove systemic and physical barriers to services that increase climate resilience such as green living environments and adequate public facilities. C-5 * Identify those communities disproportionately impacted by extreme heat events and prioritize equitable access to emergency preparedness resources for vulnerable populations and areas. Develop and distribute tools and resources for the community to stay safe during extreme heat events. Goal 3. Prioritize green, affordable housing to meet projected growth and needs of the community C-6 Support projects that bring renewable energy and/ or higher standard of energy efficiency to communities of color, low-income populations, and members of limited-English speaking communities, based on evaluation and assessment of barriers and challenges. C-7 *** Uphold the Growth Management Act to prioritize dense, mixed use, transit-oriented development (TOD) and affordable housing by encouraging integrated site planning and green building, with a focus on early consideration of these in the site development process. Encourage the location of new green, affordable housing units near community amenities and services, such as transit and green space. C-8 * Give consideration to and promote a local community response to homelessness with affordable, green housing and those which include supportive services. Page 364 of 435 City of Auburn Climate Element | CE-9 Theme 2. Infrastructure and Emergency Preparedness Policies related to and offering equitable access to adaptation resources (i.e., resilience hubs), developing strategies to aid community members ability to respond to extreme weather events (i.e., extreme heat, wildfire smoke events), and ensuring critical and non-critical infrastructure is resilient in the face of climate change should be considered. Goal 4. Equitably protect public health and safety by identifying and planning for risks associated with climate change. C-9 *** Ensure that people, including the community’s most vulnerable groups, are resilient to climate and weather-related hazards by better understanding hazard type and impact and equipping people and the community to prepare for and respond to emergency situations. C-10 *** Develop community-serving facilities augmented to support residents and that coordinate resource distribution and services before, during, and after a hazard event. C-11 *** Work toward a distribution of growth that promotes equitable access for frontline communities and reduces the potential for displacement through program services such as municipal emergency preparedness with consideration of climate impacts such as extreme heat, flooding, wildfire smoke, and drought. C-12 *** Factor climate impacts into the planning of operations and coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery activities among first responders and partners, including public health, law enforcement, fire, school, and emergency medical services (EMS) personnel. Goal 4 Actions Action 4.1 ** Create evacuation plans and outreach materials to help residents plan and practice actions that make evacuation quicker and safer. Goal 5. Protect the community from extreme heat impacts and wildfire smoke C-13 ** Prioritize at-risk community members for actions that mitigate wildfire smoke, including providing filter fans or incentivizing infrastructure updates that protect against wildfire smoke (e.g., HVAC updates and MERV 13 filters for air intake) for facilities that serve high-risk populations. C-14 * Review and update land use and development codes to encourage the use of passive cooling approaches to reduce urban heat island effects. Utilizing energy efficient cooling technologies, reflective and/or vegetated roofs, and the integration of trees where appropriate, landscaping, and green space should be implemented to help reduce the health effects of extreme heat on frontline communities and vulnerable populations. C-15 * Encourage the use of methods that contribute to improved indoor air quality during wildfire smoke events. C-16 ** Develop and implement notification alerts within the community to reduce the risk of exposure to wildfire smoke and particulate matter. C-17 ** Promote equitable access to green space within a half-mile of all community members. C-18 ** Support programs to distribute cooling units and install heat pumps, prioritizing households with residents (e.g., low-income seniors) most vulnerable to extreme temperature events. Goal 5 Actions Action 5.1 * Develop and implement an urban heat resilience plan or strategy that includes heat mitigation and management actions to prepare for and respond to chronic and acute heat risk in the community. The strategy should be informed by urban heat island mapping and may include coordinated efforts such as cooling centers, early warning systems, development/ land use codes, and energy grid resilience. Utilize the King County Extreme Heat Mitigation Strategy to align with county planning efforts. Action 5.2 * Develop community wildfire preparedness, response, and recovery plans as part of local hazard mitigation plans. Page 365 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Climate Element | CE-10 Action 5.3* Provide community education and outreach on flood mitigation best management practices and expand household-level wildfire mitigation assistance. Action 5.4 * Provide community education and outreach on wildfire smoke mitigation best management practices. Ensure outreach is accessible and prioritize frontline communities. Action 5.5 ** Develop and implement a wildfire smoke resilience strategy in partnership with local residents, emergency management officials, regional clean air agency officials, and other stakeholders. Action 5.6 ** Develop and implement an urban heat resilience strategy that includes land use, urban design, urban greening, and waste heat reduction actions. Goal 6. Ensure that infrastructure (critical and noncritical) and utilities are resilient to climate change impacts (e.g., precipitation events and stormwater flooding) C-19 * Integrate local climate impacts risk assessment into hazard mitigation planning. C-20 *** Factor climate impacts into the planning of operations and coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery activities. C-21 * Encourage coordination and support public education by utility providers that raises awareness of the need for water and energy conservation and empowers individuals across diverse audience segments to take action. C-22 *** Account for climate change impacts in planning, designing, and operating stormwater management approaches, including stormwater infrastructure and stormwater best management practices. C-23 * Identify areas prone to flooding and encourage the reduction of flooding through improvements to drainage systems, particularly in traditionally underserved areas. C-24 ** Incorporate post-wildfire debris flow and flooding hazard information into critical area delineation in fire-prone communities. Goal 6 Actions Action 6.1 ** Develop and improve transportation network with consideration of infrastructure within floodplains and other critical areas to provide for alternate routes and network resiliency. Action 6.2 ** Analyze how the municipal water system maintains adequate pressure during major drought events as well as under reasonably forecasted drought conditions. Goal 7. Provide all residents an equitable opportunity to learn about climate impacts, influence policy decisions, and take action to enhance community resilience through community engagement efforts. C-25 ** Create and implement culturally contextualized outreach and education initiatives and materials that will inform the community about near-term and longer-term climate change threats and ways that the community can prepare and build resilience to these changes. C-26 ** Build and support partnerships with community organizations with the capacity and relationships to convene diverse coalitions of residents and to educate and empower them to implement climate resilience actions. C-27 ** Cultivate relationships with climate justice coalitions that can help facilitate frontline community learning and engagement that links local issues with regional and statewide issues. Theme 3. Cultural Resources and Practices Additional policies related to assessing climate vulnerability of the city’s historic resources and establishing and maintaining government-to- government relations with tribes related to preserving sites should be considered. Page 366 of 435 City of Auburn Climate Element | CE-11 Goal 8. Protect and preserve cultural resources and practices to build resilient communities and ecosystems in the face of climate change C-28 ** Promote or work with partners to establish a native plant nursery and seed bank to support long- term restoration and carbon sequestration efforts. C-29 ** Maintain government-to-government relations with Native American tribes for the preservation of archaeological sites and traditional cultural properties that are vulnerable to climate impacts. Theme 4. Water Conservation and Stormwater Management Policies that link climate change with water conservation efforts and stormwater management should be considered. Goal 9. Protect and preserve water quantity and quality from drought, extreme heat, and other hazards exacerbated by climate change consistent with the Utilities element C-30 ** Utilize water conservation methods and technologies in development of irrigation infrastructure within parks and recreation areas to foster climate resilience. C-31 *** Promote water conservation through management of water resources, including efficient irrigation, preventative maintenance, efficient plant selection, and landscape management. Goal 10. Account for climate change impacts in planning, designing, and operating stormwater management approaches consistent with the Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan C-32 *** Identify opportunities to retrofit undersized stormwater infrastructure and areas with uncontrolled runoff to improve flow control and water quality, with a priority on locations providing the most benefit, are identified to be most vulnerable to extreme precipitation climate impacts, and are communities that have been historically under-resourced. Goal 9 Actions Action 9.1 * Review and update development codes and design standards for requirements for stormwater facility sizing, low-impact development, adopt nature-based solutions, and minimize impervious surface areas in private development and city capital improvements to be consistent with the requirements of the City’s NPDES Phase 2 Permit. Theme 5. Natural Habitats and Urban Green Space Additional policies that speak to tree management and link the protection of healthy habitats to climate resiliency should be considered. Goal 10. Support preservation and access to green and open spaces C-33 * Ensure equitable access to parks, green space, and recreational services for all residents consistent with the Land Use Element. Goal 11. Protect and enhance the climate resilience of urban forests by implementing climate-smart forest management C-34 ** Encourage participation in Washington’s small forest landowner assistance cost-share and stewardship programs. Goal 11 Actions Action 11.1 * Review, update, and implement tree protection codes to increase tree retention. Encourage the protection, maintenance, and expansion of tree canopy throughout the community, prioritizing residential and mixed-use areas with the least current tree canopy to equitably distribute benefits. Action 11.2 ** Adopt an urban forest master plan and implementing ordinances to maintain and expand tree canopy cover, improve tree and watershed health, prioritize carbon sequestration, and build climate resilience. Page 367 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Climate Element | CE-12 Goal 12. Ensure the protection and recovery of ecosystems to provide healthy habitat in a changing climate C-35 ** Ensure no net loss of ecosystem composition, structure, and functions, especially in Critical Areas, and strive for net ecological gain to enhance climate resilience in accordance with the Land Use Element and as may be feasible. C-36 ** Identify opportunities to expand habitat protection and improve habitat quality and connectivity to foster climate resilience using conservation area designations, buffers, and open space corridors. C-37 ** Commensurate with resources provided the city should implement actions identified in restoration and salmon recovery plans to improve climate resilience of streams and watersheds. C-38 ** Commensurate with resources provided the city should protect and restore riparian vegetation to reduce erosion, provide shade, and support other functions that improve the resilience of streams to climate change. Theme 6. Economic Development Policies related to developing a green job strategy, equitable access to green job training (including education and workforce training), and a just transition should be considered. Goal 13. Increase access of green jobs, with special consideration to increasing access for frontline communities. C-39 *** Develop a green workforce that is representative of the diversity of the city’s communities and reflects the diverse skill sets, knowledge systems, and experiences of communities through targeted hiring, workforce development, community agreements, and creating intentional pathways for frontline communities across sectors and seniority levels. A Green Workforce refers to jobs that help advance toward a more sustainable society and help to transition from over-dependence on oil industries and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. C-40 ** Ensure that the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan responds to the impacts of climate change and identifies roles and responsibilities to support a sustainable economic recovery after a disaster. C-41 ** Support local businesses’ efforts to generate and store renewable electricity on-site, which can provide back-up power during emergencies and help ensure continuity of operations. C-42 *** Promote local industrial development to support a circular economy that increases demand for recycled materials and reduces demand for new raw materials and their inherent carbon emissions. Goal 13 Actions Action 13.1 * Develop a green jobs strategy in partnership with community groups, community resources such as Green River College, frontline communities, and businesses that: 1. supports sustainable practices, green skills development, and the low carbon transition of the city’s impacted industries. 2. develop pathways for youth and impacted workers to transition into green jobs. 3. ensures opportunities (e.g., local hiring requirements) for these jobs. Page 368 of 435 City of Auburn Climate Element | CE-13 Emissions Mitigation Sub-Element Global climate change and its localized effects are an immediate consequence of overabundant levels of greenhouse gases permeating Earth’s atmosphere and causing heat to be retained on our planet rather than radiate outward. This is why it is critical to eliminate the emission of greenhouse gases as part of widespread human activity. Actions taken to reduce or eliminate the emission of greenhouse gases constitute emissions mitigation. To mitigate its emissions, Auburn must update its municipal and community emissions inventories, identify reduction targets, and target policies and investments to meet them, considerate of available resources. The goals, policies, and implementation strategies of the Emissions Mitigation sub-element are organized into four key themes: 1. Transportation and Planned Development 2. Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency 3. Waste Management and Circular Economy 4. Natural Habitats and Urban Green Space * Policy developed for concurrency with the King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan, including the City of Auburn annex **Policy developed for concurrency with King County’s Strategic Climate Action l1Plan *** Policy developed for concurrency with Washington Department of Commerce l11climate planning guidance **** Policy developed for concurrency with Puget Sound Regional Council’s Vision 11112050 Goals, Policies, and Actions Theme 7. Transportation and Planned Development Additional policies related to electric vehicles (EVs) and EV infrastructure, reducing vehicle miles traveled, and supporting increased density in transit-oriented areas. Goal 14. Reduce GHG emissions by prioritizing accessible multi-modal and low-carbon transportation options C-43 *** Prioritize investments that expand and implement active transportation options, including bicycling and walking, that improve access to transit. C-44 * Encourage the prevention of displacement of households and businesses from transit-oriented locations, with a focus on low-income households and small businesses, as appropriate. Goal 14 Actions Action 14.1 * Encourage increased density near transit- oriented locations to allow for a variety of housing types that support local business and residents. This can be accomplished through zoning regulations. Goal 15. Increase the percentage of EV and other low-emission transportation modes operating within the city C-45 * Work with utility providers and other partners (e.g. developers and EV companies) to encourage increased access to EV charging where it is needed and expand EV charging readiness for buildings by administering and enforcing the Washington State Building Code. Achievement will be commensurate with financial resources and availability of the vehicles, and associated infrastructure, where appropriate. Expansion of access and opportunity for EV charging will be achieved in part through enforcement of Washington State Building Code requirements. These requirements include: • Installation of a dedicated circuit for EV charging at the time of construction of all new dwelling units • Installation of EV Charging Stations, EV- Ready Parking Spaces, and EV-Capable Parking Spaces as a proportional quantity of total parking required for new commercial development projects • Installation of EV Charging Stations, EV-Ready Parking Spaces, and EV-Capable Parking Spaces as a greater proportional quantity of total parking required for new developments that include multiple residential or sleeping Page 369 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Climate Element | CE-14 units such as apartments, hotels, and congregate living facilities C-46 *** Support state and regional requirements for electric delivery vehicles and Transportation Network Corporations (TNC’s). Goal 16. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by promoting densification and efficient land uses in mixed-use urban villages near transit corridors C-47 *** Prioritize dense, mixed use, transit-oriented development, and affordable housing in Auburn and the downtown regional growth center. Goal 16 Actions Action 16.1 * Adopt “missing middle” housing policies and codes to allow for broader housing types in single family zones, particularly near transit, to promote affordability for current and future residents. Theme 8. Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Policies aimed at transitioning to renewable energy sources, promoting energy conservation and efficiency measures, building grid resilience, and educating homeowners about energy efficiency upgrades should be considered. Goal 17. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by transitioning to renewable energy sources, decarbonizing buildings, and increasing energy efficiency C-48 ** Retrofit municipal buildings for energy efficiency, as resources allow. C-49 ** Promote improved energy efficiency in existing commercial and residential buildings by offering expedited permitting process, limiting administrative barriers, and reducing costs for residential solar projects. C-50 *** Maximize renewable energy sources for the supply of electricity and heat to new and existing residential and commercial building construction through administration and enforcement of the Washington State Energy Codes, both commercial and residential. This will also ensure new development accounts for future solar systems and include solar readiness zones, structural integrity, and electrical service capacity in the design and planning of new commercial buildings. C-51 ** Retrofit publicly owned buildings with solar panels and electric heat pumps, as structural stability and resources allow. C-52 *** Support and expand building energy efficiency retrofit programs to reduce building energy use and improve energy resilience, including a focus on affordable housing. C-53 * Explore and promote low interest loan options and incentive programs to finance energy efficiency upgrades for commercial and residential buildings, while seeking other finance mechanisms to fill in potential funding gaps. Investments and programs should be prioritized in historically underserved areas. C-54 * Develop energy efficiency outreach programs for residents and businesses by partnering with Puget Sound Energy (PSE) and other local jurisdictions with the goals to identify and select appropriate and cost-effective energy improvements. This could involve supporting local schools in integrating climate and sustainability education into curriculum. C-55 * Building on proposed WA state policy, strengthen energy efficiency codes to reflect best practices and meet established energy targets (e.g., require energy use disclosure and benchmarking for buildings, starting with commercial and multifamily buildings over a size threshold). C-56 *** Expand local onsite renewable energy production, such as through installation at municipal facilities, support of incentive programs, and coordination of community-based partnership projects and programs. C-57 ** Encourage additional net-zero greenhouse gas emission features in all new residential and commercial structures. C-58 * Incentivize electric heat pumps and restrict natural gas in new commercial and residential construction through administration and enforcement of the Washington State Energy Code. C-59 ** Phase out natural gas use in existing publicly owned facilities by 2040 and retrofit with electric heat pumps as resources allow. C-60 ** Encourage all new publicly owned buildings to be Page 370 of 435 City of Auburn Climate Element | CE-15 powered 100% by renewable energy as availability and resources allow, and evaluate opportunities to retrofit municipal buildings for energy efficiency as resources allow. C-61 ** Develop low-energy-use requirements and building code compliance for residential buildings as incorporated in state building codes. C-62 *** Educate community members about incentives for emerging alternative energy technology, such as tax exemptions for solar installations, and increase community awareness of existing solar arrays and water heating systems in the city. Goal 18. Promote a diverse, clean, efficient grid that increases the grids reliability as demand increases C-63 * Work with and encourage Puget Sound Energy (PSE) to plan, site, build and maintain an electrical system that meets the needs of existing and future development, and provides highly reliable service for City customers and coordinate with non-city utility providers to ensure planning for system growth consistent with the city’s Comprehensive Plan and growth forecasts. C-64 * Advocate for increased grid reliability through state and utility regulatory rulemaking and legislation that supports demand response and environmentally responsible storage technologies that reduce peak load and provide grid flexibility. C-65 * Advocate for energy utilities to adopt efficient practices and explore alternative energy resources, in order to help meet long-term energy needs and reduce environmental impacts associated with traditional energy supplies. Theme 9. Waste Management and Circular Economy Policies aimed at supporting a circular economy, supporting urban agriculture and local food production, encouraging composting, enforcing sustainable construction and demolition (C&D) practices, and environmentally friendly purchasing policies should be considered. Goal 19. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from materials and organic waste by minimizing waste generation C-66 * Encourage local food production, processing, and distribution through the support of home and community gardens (i.e., P-Patches), farmers’ markets, community kitchens, and other collaborative initiatives which provide healthy foods and promote food security. C-67 * Promote prevention and redistribution of food waste, such as through expanding and encouraging community and school gardens, urban agriculture, and farmers markets and working with local grocery stores to support a food donation program to send surplus food. C-68 * Support extended producer responsibility (EPR) related policies and actions that require companies that make consumer products fund the residential recycling system and that ensure that packaging and paper products actually get recycled. Goal 19 Actions Action 19.1 * Update municipal solid waste contract policies and programs to encourage waste prevention and take-back programs, maximize diversion, ensure efficient collection routes, and promote hybrid and electric vehicles to transport and collect waste. Goal 20. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from materials and organic waste by maximizing waste diversion C-69 ** Encourage recycling of construction and demolition debris. C-70 ** Use recycled materials in the construction of transportation and other infrastructure facilities, as resources allow and to the extent feasible. Goal 20 Actions Action 20.1 * Expand commercial recycling and organics collection and service, including making recycling and organics disposal as convenient as garbage service and adequate to serve the number of tenants. Implement compost requirements for food businesses in accordance with HB 1799. Consider the implications of implementing an organics disposal bans and/or requiring services. Page 371 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Climate Element | CE-16 Action 20.2 * Expand recycling and compost service for single-family and multifamily properties and provide technical assistance to help compost successfully. Consider the implications of implementing an organics disposal bans and/or requiring services. Action 20.3 ** Support a business technical assistance program to increase recycling and reduce waste. Action 20.4 ** Support a program that will enable recycling of all construction and demolition debris. Action 20.5 * Support development, implementation, and enforcement of construction and demolition (C&D) recycling and deconstruction ordinances. Theme 10. Natural Habitats and Urban Green Space Protect and enhance carbon sinks like forests and urban green spaces, establish green belt of parks with connections to housing, schools, and businesses. Goal 21. Protect and enhance land carbon sinks (e.g., trees, urban green space) to mitigate GHG emissions C-71 ** Require open space set-asides (such as parks) for new development when appropriate. C-72 *** Maximize tree canopy coverage in surface parking lots to mitigate the negative impacts of urban heat islands caused by excessive impervious surfacing. C-73 ** Improve and expand urban forest management to maximize or conserve carbon storage. C-74 *** Manage natural lands (forests, grasslands, wetlands) to maintain and/or increase their carbon concentrations. Avoid the conversion of carbon- rich ecosystems. Prioritize increasing tree canopy cover and open space in overburdened frontline communities. C-75 * Increase resilience to flooding, protect, and where possible, enhance, and restore existing flood storage, conveyance, and ecological functions and values of floodplains, wetlands, and riparian corridors as resources allow. Page 372 of 435 City of Auburn Climate Element | CE-17 Glossary of Terms Algal bloom A rapid growth of microscopic algae or cyanobacteria in water. Algal blooms can often be harmful to the surrounding environment and human health. Adaptation The process of adjusting to new (climate) conditions in order to reduce risks to valued assets. Assets People, resources, ecosystems, infrastructure, and the services they provide. Assets are the tangible and intangible things people or communities value. Climate change A change of climate attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere. *RCW 28B.30.640(3) Drought In Washington, the legal definition of drought is based on water availability. A drought emergency is declared when water supply conditions are expected to fall below 75 percent of average, and there is potential for undue hardships due to low water supply. Ecosystem A biological environment consisting of all the living organisms or biotic component in a particular area, and the nonliving, or abiotic component, with which the organisms interact such as air, soil, water, and sunlight. Environmental justice The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Erosion The wearing away of rock or soil and the movement of the resulting particles by wind, water, ice, or gravity, usually excluding mass movements. Exposure The presence of people, assets, and ecosystems in places where they could be adversely affected by hazards. Extreme heat Summertime temperatures that are much hotter and/ or humid than average. Extreme weather event A time and place in which weather, climate, or environmental conditions – such as temperature, precipitation, drought, or flooding – rank above a threshold value near the upper or lower ends of the range of historical measurements. Frontline community People who experience the first and worst consequences of climate change. Such residents’ health and livelihoods are often highly vulnerable to climate-exacerbated hazards and economic disruptions, and their communities often lack basic support infrastructure and suffer disproportionately from the compounding impacts of pollution, discrimination, racism, and poverty. Greenhouse gas Gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and certain synthetic chemicals which trap some of the Earth’s outgoing energy, retaining heat in the atmosphere. Hazard An event or condition that may cause injury, illness, or death to people or damage to assets. Mitigation Actions taken to reduce or eliminate the emissions of greenhouse gases (present and future) in order to reduce the rate and extent of climate change damage. Resilience The ongoing process of anticipating, preparing for, an adapting to changes in climate and minimizing negative impacts to our natural systems, infrastructure, and communities. Page 373 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Climate Element | CE-18 Risk The potential for negative consequences where something of value is at stake. In the context of climate change, this term is often used to refer to the potential for adverse consequences of a climate- related hazard. Risk can be assessed by multiplying the probability of a hazard by the magnitude of the negative consequences or loss. Severe storm A storm is classified as ‘severe’ when it produces hail one inch in size or greater, winds in excess of 57.5 miles per hour, or a tornado. Stormwater runoff Water originating from rainfall and other precipitation becomes surface flow or interflow. Vulnerability The propensity of predisposition of assets to be adversely affected by hazards. Vulnerability encompasses exposure, sensitivity, potential impacts, and adaptive capacity. Page 374 of 435 City of Auburn Climate Element | CE-19 Acronyms CO2 Carbon Dioxide C & D Construction and Demolition FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency GHG Greenhouse Gas HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning EMS Emergency Medical Services EPR Extended Producer Responsibility EV Electric Vehicle MERV Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value mtCO2e Metric Ton CO2 Emission TNC Transportation Network Corporation TOD Transportation Oriented Development Page 375 of 435 Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update City of Auburn DRAFT - PLANNING COMMISSION ACCEPTED VERSION Page 376 of 435 Page 377 of 435 Table of Contents Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update ..............................1 About this Document ....................................................................................................1 1 Housing Planning and Policy Context ........................................................................2 State Context ...................................................................................................................................2 Regional Planning and Growth Targets ...........................................................................................3 2 Population and Community Characteristics ..............................................................6 Auburn Population and Community Characteristics .......................................................................6 Population by Age ...........................................................................................................................9 Household Size ................................................................................................................................10 Racial Composition ..........................................................................................................................11 Languages Spoken at Home ...........................................................................................................12 Population Living with a Disability ..................................................................................................12 Workforce and Commuting Profile ..................................................................................................14 3 Household Economics ...............................................................................................17 Household Income ..........................................................................................................................17 Median Household Income by Size Estimates ................................................................................19 Food Stamps/SNAP Program ...........................................................................................................19 Housing Cost Burden ......................................................................................................................21 4 Housing Inventory and Affordability ..........................................................................23 Housing Units ..................................................................................................................................24 Housing Types and Sizes .................................................................................................................25 Tenure ..............................................................................................................................................25 Vacancy Rates .................................................................................................................................26 Housing Units by Year Built .............................................................................................................26 Housing Condition and Quality .......................................................................................................27 Neighborhoods with Unique Housing Conditions or Amenities .....................................................30 Projected Housing Needs by Income Band ....................................................................................31 Displacement Risk and Racially Disparate Impacts ........................................................................32 Housing Attainability .......................................................................................................................35 5 Future Housing and Employment Capacity ...............................................................38 Buildable Lands Reports Analysis ...................................................................................................38 Land Capacity for Affordability and Growth Targets .......................................................................39 Draft Preferred Land Use Scenario .................................................................................................41 Page 378 of 435 Maps and Figures Figure 1. Auburn Housing Targets and Capacity ..........................................................5 Figure 2. Population Growth Rate Comparison ............................................................6 Figure 3. Auburn Population (1920-2020) ....................................................................7 Figure 4. Population Density ........................................................................................8 Figure 5. Auburn, King, and Pierce County Age Category Distributions, 2020 ...........9 Figure 6. Age Category Distributions, 2020 ................................................................9 Figure 7. Average Household Size: Auburn, King County, and Pierce County .............10 Figure 8. Household Size: Auburn, King County, and Pierce County ...........................10 Figure 9. Households and Families: Auburn, King County, and Pierce County ...........10 Figure 10. Race and Ethnicity in Auburn (2021) ............................................................11 Figure 11. Languages Spoken at Home ........................................................................12 Figure 12. Auburn, King County, Pierce County Population Living with a Disability ....12 Figure 13. Auburn’s Estimated Population Living with a Disability ...............................13 Figure 14. Auburn Workforce Top Industry Sectors (2020) ...........................................14 Figure 15. Top Ten Employers in Auburn (2022) ...........................................................15 Figure 16. Top Industry Sectors in Auburn (2002-2020) ..............................................15 Figure 17. Auburn Daily Commuting Patterns (2020) ...................................................16 Figure 18. Means of Transportation to Work ................................................................16 Figure 19. Mean Travel Time to Work ...........................................................................17 Figure 20. Inflation-Adjusted Median Household Income in Auburn with Regional Comparison (2021) ....................................................................17 Figure 21. Household Income Segmentation ...............................................................18 Figure 22. Median Household Income by Household Size ..........................................19 Figure 23. Households Entering and Exiting the Homelessness Response System ....20 Figure 24. Labor Force Participation and Unemployment Rate ..................................21 Figure 25. Percent of Auburn Households Cost-Burdened by Housing .......................21 Figure 26. Average Housing and Transportation Costs Graphics ................................22 Figure 27. PSRC Opportunity Index, Transportation in Auburn ....................................23 Figure 28. Units in Structure .........................................................................................24 Figure 29. Number of Bedrooms ..................................................................................25 Figure 30. Housing Tenure ...........................................................................................25 Page 379 of 435 Figure 31. Vacancy Rates ..............................................................................................26 Figure 32. Residential Housing by Date Built in Auburn ..............................................26 Figure 33. Housing Quality and Mobile Homes in Auburn, 2022 ................................28 Figure 34 - King County Housing Needs by Income Band ...........................................31 Figure 35. Pierce County Housing Needs by Income Band .........................................32 Figure 36. PSRC Displacement Risk in Auburn (2023) .................................................33 Figure 37. Cost-Burdened Renter Households by Race ...............................................34 Figure 38. Cost-Burdened POC Renter Households Map ............................................34 Figure 39. Income Ranges and Area Median Income .................................................35 Figure 40. Cost-burdened and Severely Cost-burdened Renters, Auburn, 2018 ........36 Figure 41. Median Home Sales Price and Average 2-Bedroom Rent ...........................36 Figure 42. Percentage of Rental Units that are Overcrowded, 2008-2012 5-Year Average ...........................................................................................37 Figure 43. Auburn Median Sales Prices........................................................................38 Figure 44. Land Capacity and Growth Target ...............................................................38 Figure 45. Neighborhood (District) No Action Employment and Household Growth Capacity ..................................................................................39 Figure 46. Neighborhood (District) No Action Employment and Household Growth Allocations ..............................................................................40 Figure 47. Gross Residential Capacity by Zone ............................................................42 Figure 48. Gross Development Capacity by Zone ........................................................43 Figure 49. Potential ADU Capacity ...............................................................................44 Figure 50. Classifying Zones by Housing Types Allowed .............................................44 Figure 51. Relating Zone Category to Housing Types and Income Levels ...................45 Figure 52. Capacity by Zone ........................................................................................46 Figure 53. Capacity Compared to Housing Needs .......................................................47 Figure 54. Draft Preferred Zoning Assumptions...........................................................48 Figure 55. Adjusted Residential Capacity by Zone ......................................................49 Figure 56. Adjusted Residential Capacity by Affordability Level .................................50 Figure 57. Adjusted Employment Capacity by Zone .....................................................51 Page 380 of 435 Page 381 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-1 About this Document A housing element is a plan that addresses a community’s current and projected needs for housing, including housing variety, attainability, and preservation. This document is intended to provide an assessment of housing needs and characteristics to support Auburn’s Housing Element Update as part of the City’s effort to update its Comprehensive Plan. This report also meets the requirements of the Countywide Planning Policies for King County (2023) to assess housing needs and conditions to help meet the countywide need for various housing types as well as the City’s specific needs. The report is structured in four parts: • Housing Planning and Policy Context • Population and Community Characteristics • Household Economics • Housing Inventory and Affordability Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update The conditions report draws on publicly available data from the following sources: U.S. Census Bureau • Decennial Census • American Community Survey (5-year estimates) Federal Agencies • U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Washington State Agencies • Washington State Office of Financial Management • The Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction County and Regional Agencies • King County Assessor’s Office • Puget Sound Regional Council • Public Health of Seattle/King County • Seattle/King County Coalition on Homelessness Other • Dupre and Scott • Zillow.com Qualitative information about housing and livability conditions based on community outreach is also considered in the housing element update and can be found in Part II of this document. Page 382 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-2 1 Housing Planning and Policy Context This section provides housing planning and policy context regarding state and regional housing policy affecting Auburn. Auburn is located mid-way between Seattle and Tacoma, Washington’s two largest cities, and is primarily situated within King County, with a small portion of the City extending into Pierce County. Both King and Pierce countywide planning policies apply to Auburn. In addition, multicounty planning policies established by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) apply to the city. State Context Growth Management Act In Washington State, the Growth Management Act (GMA) requires fast-growing cities and counties to develop a comprehensive plan to manage their population growth1. The GMA establishes fourteen goals to guide planning in the state. One of these goals is to plan for and accommodate housing affordable to economic segments. The GMA housing goal is addressed through the Housing Element and this assessment, which includes an inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs. The project needs include units for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households and permanent supportive housing. Recent Housing Legislation Based on a 2022 opinion survey conducted by the Department of Commerce, housing costs are a statewide problem and the state needs more housing supply. Washington state needs 1.1 million new homes over the next year and 91,357 emergency housing beds. Since 2021, the Washington State legislature passed multiple bills to address the state’s housing needs. In 2021, the Legislature passed HB 1220, which substantially amended the housing-related provisions of the GMA. HB 1220 amended the GMA housing goal to require inventories of housing needs by income level, permanent supportive housing, and emergency 1 Growth Management Act, MSRC https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/planning/general-planning-and-growth-management/growth-management-act housing, as well as identify sufficient land capacity for housing needs. New requirements include identifying local policies and regulations that result in racially disparate impact, displacement, and exclusion, and implement policies and regulations to undo them. Housing production should also be encouraged near employment centers and areas of planned employment growth. HB 1110, passed in May 2023, builds from HB 1220 requirements and substantially changes the way many cities in Washington are to plan for housing. The bill requires cities of certain sizes and locations to allow multiple dwelling units (du/) per lot in a middle housing type form. “Middle housing” is defined in the bill as “buildings that are compatible in scale, form, and character with single-family houses and contain two or more attached, stacked, or clustered homes including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, stacked flats, courtyard apartments, and cottage housing.” Cities must allow at least six of the nine types of middle housing to in all residential zones,. Auburn is considered “Tier 1” and must allow 4 middle housing du/on all lots zoned predominantly residential, 6 middle housing du/lot within ¼ of a major transit stop, and 6 middle housing du/lot if at least two are affordable. The bill also includes considerations for parking requirements and for the subdivision of land under single-unit attached middle housing options like townhomes allowing for ownership of the land under the unit. HB 1337, also passed in May 2023, amends RCW 36.70A.696 expanding accessory dwelling unit (ADU) definitions and easing development regulations. Jurisdictions are now required to permit two ADUs per lot in city limits and within GMA urban growth areas. Cities may not require the owner to occupy the property, may not prohibit sales as an independent unit, must allow an ADU of at least 1,000 square feet and adjust zoning to be consistent, set consistent parking requirements, and may not charge more than 50% of impact fees charged for the principal unit. HB 1042 permits the conversion of existing commercial office and mixed-use buildings for residences. Cities may not impose restrictions on housing unit density, parking requirements in excess of the current parking, additional permitting requirements, excess design Page 383 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-3 standard requirements, exterior design or architectural requirements beyond health and safety, prohibitions on the additions of housing, current energy code requirements for unchanged portions of the building, and transportation concurrency or SEPA study. Regional Planning and Growth Targets PSRC VISION 2050 - Regional Housing Strategy In 2022, Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) developed a Regional Housing Strategy to support local 2024 comprehensive plan updates. The strategy is part of the region’s plan for growth known as VISION 2050. The region’s vision for 2050 is to provide exceptional quality of life, opportunity for all, connected communities, a spectacular natural environment, and an innovative, thriving economy. The goal of the Regional Housing Strategy is to ensure that all people have a range of safe and affordable housing choices to create a healthy and prosperous future for the region, including eliminating racial disparities in access to housing. The PSRC region is about two years behind in housing production, with an even greater deficit for affordable housing, and continues to face acute housing challenges. If we are to meet the region’s housing needs now and, in the future, cities, counties, agencies, coalitions, businesses, and other housing advocates need to begin to implement these strategies. With a projected need for more than 800,000 new housing units and more than a third of households anticipated to be at moderate- and lower-income levels, VISION 2050 aims to substantially increase the construction of housing and to build more housing that is affordable to more families. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment concluded that about 34% of new housing will need some level of public incentive – ranging from flexible development standards to direct subsidy — to be affordable to households earning less than 80% area median income (AMI). In response to this need, the Regional Housing Strategy calls for three areas of action: 1. Supply: Build more housing of different types. To meet the region’s vision for a more livable, prosperous, and equitable future, more housing is needed of different types, costs, and access to jobs, transit, and services. 2. Stability: Provide opportunities for residents to live in housing that meets their needs As the region grows and becomes a more expensive place to live, many households are under serious threat of being displaced from their communities. More housing options and strategies are needed to help people have the option to stay in their neighborhoods, with an emphasis on lower-income communities and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) communities that have been systemically excluded from homeownership opportunities. 3. Subsidy: Create and sustain long-term funding sources to create and preserve housing for very low-income households and unhoused residents At the lowest income levels, the market is not capable of building housing at an affordable cost. Eliminating the cost burden for households will require a major increase in funding to subsidize housing costs and to build more housing affordable to households earning less than $50,000 per year. PSRC VISION 2050 – Multicounty Planning Policies The Multicounty Planning Policies (MPPs) contained in VISION 2050 and produced by the PSRC, include policies and actions as well as the Regional Growth Strategy, which promotes a focused regional growth pattern and serves as a guide for counties and cities as they set local growth targets through their countywide processes to implement the strategy. PSRC and local jurisdictions are expected to address these actions through their planning and work programs. VISION 2050 establishes twelve multicounty planning policies in the PSRC region about housing. The policies aim to address an overarching goal where the Page 384 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-4 region preserves, improves, and expands its housing stock to provide a range of affordable, accessible, healthy, and safe housing choices to every resident. The region continues to promote fair and equal access to housing for all people. Housing Countywide Planning Policies King County King County established housing countywide planning policies (CPPs) in 2021 to reflect a commitment to address dramatic housing price increases, which resulted in 156,000 extremely low to low-income households cost-burdened by housing. The policies also address findings that Black, Hispanic, Indigenous, and extremely low-income households are among those most disproportionately impacted by housing cost burden. The county’s overarching goal is to provide a full range of affordable, accessible, healthy, and safe housing choices to every resident in King County. All jurisdictions work to: • preserve, improve, and expand their housing stock; • promote fair and equitable access to housing for all people; and • take actions that eliminate race-, place-, ability-, and income-based housing disparities. There are 27 housing CPPs as of August 7, 2023. On July 25, 2023, the Local Services and Land Use Committee recommended amendments to the housing CPPs. The amendments are intended to incorporate legislative required changes especially due to HB 1220, which substantively amended the Growth Management Act to require jurisdictions to plan for and accommodate housing needs and resulted in other substantive changes to how jurisdictions plan for housing in the housing element of their comprehensive plan. Pierce County In May 2022, Pierce County adopted eight affordable housing policies that shall at a minimum “consider the need for affordable housing, such as housing for all economic segments of the population and parameters for its distribution”. Based on the adopted housing targets compared to the existing housing stock, there is a need for an additional 37,773 additional housing units within the 20-year planning period in unincorporated Pierce County. Buildable Land Capacity The 2021 King County and Pierce County Buildable Lands Reports analyzed parcel-level capacity for new jobs and housing units in Auburn, classifying parcels as Vacant, Redevelopable, or Constant (i.e. unlikely to change) based on land values, home values, zoning, and other data. As part of this comprehensive planning process, the data from these Buildable Lands Reports was further refined to take into account development since 2019 and other potential parcels deemed developable by the city and consultant team. Based on the available land capacity as currently zoned, Auburn shows a deficit of capacity for both the 2044 housing unit and jobs targets, as detailed below. These figures differ from the total housing units and total job capacity described in the 2021 Urban Growth Capacity Report, Exhibit 31 because city zoning as of 2023 was used for this analysis. The future land use map developed during this comprehensive plan is intended to accommodate these 2044 housing and jobs targets through new zoning and land uses in various corridors and nodes throughout Auburn, and in the Downtown area in particular. The housing unit targets set have since increased with amendments to both counties CPPs, which is explained further in the Land Capacity for Additional Housing section. Page 385 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-5 Figure 1. Auburn Housing Targets and Capacity Housing Units King and Pierce Counties combined adopted housing unit growth target (per Countywide Planning Policies) 12,112 units (2019-2044) 11,141 units (adjusted to 2021-2044 based on existing and pipeline development from 2019-2021) (Note: the Pierce County portion of Auburn has a 2020 to 2044 growth target of just 4 units and is thus ignored for this analysis.) 2021 King County Urban Growth Capacity Report Capacity 7,927 units 2022 Pierce County Buildable Lands Report 656 units Total Countywide Planning Policies Housing Capacity 8,583 jobs Employment King County adopted employment growth target (per Countywide Planning Policies) 19,520 jobs (2019-2044) (note: Pierce County has already exceeded their adopted job growth targets for 2035 and has no additional targeted growth) 2021 King County Urban Growth Capacity Report Capacity 7,927 jobs 2022 Pierce County Buildable Lands Report 656 jobs Total Countywide Planning Policies Employment Capacity 8,583 jobs Estimated Capacity under current zoning 8,236 jobs Page 386 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-6 2 Population and Community Characteristics This section describes who lives in Auburn, including total population, age distribution, household size, racial and ethnic composition, and languages spoken at home. This information allows the city an understanding of who the City serves and whether some people have special housing needs. Auburn Population and Community Characteristics Figure 2. Population Growth Rate Comparison 2019 Population Estimate 2020 Population Census 2021 Population Estimate 2022 Population Estimate 2023 Population Estimate 2019-2023 Average Annual Growth Auburn 86,353 87,256 88,080 88,750 88,820 0.71% King County 2,227,755 2,269,675 2,287,050 2,317,700 2,347,800 1.32% Pierce County 905,841 920,393 928,200 937,400 946,300 1.10% Source: OFM Forecasting and Research Division, 2023 Auburn is located mid-way between Seattle and Tacoma, Washington’s two largest cities, and is primarily situated within King County, with a small portion of the City extending into Pierce County. As of 2023, it was ranked the 14th most populous city in Washington, with a population of 88,820.2 Its location in the densely populated and urbanized area between Seattle and Tacoma has provided for substantial population growth since World War II and particularly since 2000, as shown in Figure 3. 2 Washington Office of Financial Management (OFM) April 1, 2023 Official Population Estimates Page 387 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-7 Figure 3. Auburn Population (1920-2020) Source: Washington Office of Financial Management In the 1950-2000 era, the City grew rapidly, with an average population increase of 4.2% per year and a total increase of 36,550 residents over the 50-year period. In the 22-year period since 2000, Auburn has grown by another 45,703 residents, outpacing the growth of the previous 50 years as well as annexing three areas with substantial development potential since 1990. Housing units increased by 12% between 2010 and 2020, though population increased by 25% over the same period, suggesting that the supply of housing units may not be keeping up with demand. Rapidly increasing population can also have effects on many aspects of planning and city management, including infrastructure capacity, transportation and traffic, and school capacity. Page 388 of 435 Page 389 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-9 Population by Age Based on the 2020 Census, the last universal assessment of population structure, Auburn’s population of 19 years old or younger made up 27.9% of the total population, and the senior population (ages 65 years and over) was 11.4% of the total population. Figure 5 compares Auburn to King County and Pierce County averages using broad age categories. Figure 5. Auburn, King, and Pierce County Age Category Distributions, 2020 19 and Younger 20 – 64 Years 65 Years and Over Auburn 27.9%60.7%11.4% King County 22.3%64.5%13.2% Pierce County 25.9%60.3%13.8% Source: US Decennial Census, 2020 • Auburn has a higher percentage of residents 19 years old and younger than both King and Pierce County averages, a similar percentage of residents between 20-64 years old as both counties, and a lower percentage of residents over 65 years old compared to both counties, but the differences are not substantial. Figure 6. Age Category Distributions, 2020 Source: US Decennial Census, 2020 • The largest age group in Auburn is 35 to 39 years old, making up 8.5% of the population total. This group will start turning 65 by 2050. • In the next ten years, another 10,392 individuals will be 65 years or older, adding another 12% to the retiree population. • Auburn’s growing population is becoming younger over the years with those under 20 years old making up over a quarter of the population. Page 390 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-10 Household Size Figure 7. Average Household Size: Auburn, King County, and Pierce County Average Household Size Average Family Size Auburn 2.71 3.27 King County 2.40 3.02 Pierce County 2.61 3.10 Source: 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimate • According to American Community Survey estimates in 2021, Auburn has an average household size of 2.71 persons, a slight increase from 2.67 in 2010. • The median household size is higher compared to King County which has an average household size of 2.40 persons, and higher than Pierce County which has an average household size of 2.61 persons. Figure 8. Household Size: Auburn, King County, and Pierce County Household Size Auburn King Pierce 1-person household 22.6%29.9%24.4% 2-person household 32.8%34.0%34.1% 3-person household 18.1%15.1%17.1% 4-or-more-person household 26.6%21.1%24.4% Source: 2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table S2501 • Auburn has a lower percentage of 1-person households compared to King County but is similar to Pierce County. • There is no significant difference in percentage between 2- and 3-person households in Auburn compared to King and Pierce counties. • One-third of Auburn households are 2-person households. Figure 9. Households and Families: Auburn, King County, and Pierce County Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table DP02 Page 391 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-11 • A quarter of households in Auburn are married with no children. • Auburn has a slightly higher percentage of those married with children compared to King and Pierce counties. • In general, Auburn’s household composition is similar to both King and Pierce Counties. • Auburn has a slightly larger percentage of single parents with children households (7%) compared to King County (4%) and Pierce County (6%). Racial Composition Auburn’s racial and ethnic makeup is more diverse than that of King County and of Washington as a whole, with 49% of residents identifying as BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, or People of Color), compared with 43% in King County and 34% statewide. The City has become increasingly diverse since 2010, with notable increases in the share of Hispanic/Latino residents from 10% to 17%, Black/African American residents from 5.7% to 7%, and Native American, Hawaiian, and Alaskan residents from 3% to 4.8%. Figure 10. Race and Ethnicity in Auburn (2021) Source: 2020 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05 An increasingly diverse population can present language accessibility issues. About 69% of Auburn residents speak only English at home, with 12% speaking Spanish, 9% speaking an Asian or Pacific Island language, 7% speaking other Indo-European languages, and 2% speaking other languages at home. Notably, around 45% of Auburn residents who speak a language other than English at home have limited English proficiency, an important consideration as the city continues to become more diverse. Page 392 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-12 Languages Spoken at Home Figure 11. Languages Spoken at Home Auburn King County Pierce County English Only 70.1%71.6%84.9% Spanish 11.5%6.6%6.0% LEP Spanish 42.6%40.6%33.7% Other Indo-European Languages 7.1%6.9%2.7% LEP Other Indo-European Languages 41.2%26.0%32.0% Asian and Pacific Island Languages 9.2%12.1%5.5% LEP Asian and Pacific Island Languages 47.1%43.7%44.5% Other Languages 2.1%2.8%0.8% LEP Other Languages 33.0%38.0%32.6% Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table S1601 • An increasingly diverse population can present language accessibility issues. About 70% of Auburn residents speak only English at home, with 11% speaking Spanish, 9% speaking an Asian or Pacific Island language, 7% speaking other Indo-European languages, and 2% speaking other languages at home. • Notably, around 40% of Auburn residents who speak a language other than English at home have limited English proficiency (LEP), an important consideration as the City becomes more diverse. Population Living with a Disability Figure 12 compares Auburn, King County, and Pierce County populations living with a disability. Figure 13 shows characteristics of Auburn’s population living with a disability. Figure 12. Auburn, King County, Pierce County Population Living with a Disability Total civilian non-institutionalized population With Disability % of Total Auburn 84,846 10,160 12.0% King County 2,238,712 216,031 9.6% Pierce County 896,180 122,382 13.7% Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table S1810 Page 393 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-13 Figure 13. Auburn’s Estimated Population Living with a Disability Total With a disability Percent with a disability Total civilian non-institutionalized population 84,846 10,160 12.0% Population 5 to 17 years 16,204 1,345 8.3% With a hearing difficulty (X)207 0.9% With a vision difficulty (X)205 0.9% With cognitive difficulty (X)731 4.5% With ambulatory difficulty (X)46 0.3% With a self-care difficulty (X)156 1.0% Population 18 to 64 years 53,507 11,126 20.8% With a hearing difficulty (X)920 1.7% With a vision difficulty (X)1,008 1.9% With cognitive difficulty (X)2,837 5.3% With ambulatory difficulty (X)2,620 4.9% With a self-care difficulty (X)1,374 2.6% With an independent living difficult (X)2,367 4.4% Population 65 years and over 9,439 6,709 71.1% With a hearing difficulty (X)1,381 14.6% With a vision difficulty (X)581 6.2% With cognitive difficulty (X)834 8.8% With ambulatory difficulty (X)2,385 25.3% With a self-care difficulty (X)156 7.9% With independent living difficulty (X)1,372 14.5% Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, S1810 • Approximately 12% of Auburn’s total population is living with a disability. This is higher compared to King County (9.6%) and slightly lower than Pierce County (13.7%). • About 20% of the adult population aged 18 to 64 are living with a disability. • The most prevalent disability for those under 18 years is cognitive difficulty and also for those 18-64. • A quarter of those over the age of 64 experience ambulatory difficulty (difficulty walking). Page 394 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-14 Workforce and Commuting Profile Understanding future population and employment growth is essential for planning. King County, Pierce County, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), and the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) are each involved in forecasting population and job growth in Auburn over the coming decades, and this section will summarize the currently available forecasts from these agencies which can be used to inform future actions on land use, infrastructure, housing, economic development, and transportation in Auburn. Jobs to Housing Ratio The Jobs to Housing ratio in Auburn as of 2021 was 1.48. This is higher than the King County average of 1.34, showing Auburn’s importance as a regional jobs center, particularly in Manufacturing and Health Care. Major Employment Locations The top ten industry sectors in which Auburn residents were employed in 2020 is shown in Figure 14. Auburn has traditionally been a blue collar community since its initial early 20th century population boom stemming from the construction of a railroad freight terminal. Despite a decrease in manufacturing employment in the 1990s and early 2000s, 12% of Auburn residents were currently employed in the industry in 2020. Since the recession of 2008, the number of Auburn residents employed in health care, retail, and construction have increased substantially and the overall diversity of jobs worked by Auburn residents has increased, reflecting the rapidly increasing population and shifts in demographics discussed previously. Between the 2019 and 2020 data, healthcare jobs overtook manufacturing for the highest share of jobs worked by Auburn residents. Figure 14. Auburn Workforce Top Industry Sectors (2020) Source: US Census Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics (LEHD), via Census On The Map Page 395 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-15 The top employers in Auburn are shown in Figure 15. Boeing is the largest employer in the City, as it has been for several decades, followed by a variety of retail, manufacturing, and wholesale businesses, as well as Multicare, the regional hospital and health care center in Downtown Auburn. The top ten employers in Auburn currently account for about 23% of the jobs in the City, down from 55% in 2011 and 85% in 2002,3 further demonstrating the increasing diversity of business activity in Auburn in recent decades. Figure 15. Top Ten Employers in Auburn (2022) Source: Washington Employment Security Department As of 2020, there were 45,804 jobs located in Auburn. The top sectors are shown in Figure 16 along with their change over the past two decades. Despite decreases in the manufacturing industry from 1990 and 2000 noted in Auburn’s previous (2014) comprehensive plan, the sector has seen rapid increases since the 2008 financial crisis and now accounts for over 20% of jobs in the City. There have been recent increases in construction jobs and interestingly in retail, even with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the most recent data year. Full impacts of the pandemic on Auburn’s job growth and distribution will become clearer when further years’ data becomes available from the Census. Figure 16. Top Industry Sectors in Auburn (2002-2020) Source: US Census Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics (LEHD), via Census On The Map 3 2015 Auburn Comprehensive Plan Page 396 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-16 Daily Inflow and Outflow: The Auburn Commute As of 2020, 5,359 Auburn residents, or 15% of the population both lived and worked in the City. The remaining 85% of those who worked in Auburn commuted from outside the City. As shown in Figure 17, there are more people who work in Auburn and live elsewhere than those who live in Auburn and work elsewhere. This results in an increased pool of residents and employees who engage with City services and businesses. Although this data predates the COVID-19 pandemic, the relatively large share of in-person manufacturing and retail jobs in the City suggests that the commuting patterns may have been less affected by the pandemic in Auburn compared with other areas which have a higher share of office jobs. Means of Transportation and Travel Time to Work Means of transportation and travel time to work indicators provide a sense of how Auburn compares to both counties overall in terms of convenience and preference for using alternative modes of transportation (excluding car, truck, or van) and commute burden. Figure 18 shows the means of transportation for workers over 16 years old in Auburn, King County, and Pierce County, while Figure 19 provides mean travel time to work for workers over 16 years who do not work at home. Figure 18. Means of Transportation to Work Total Workers 16 and Older Auburn King Pierce Total Workers 16 and Older 42,071 1,203,566 439,523 Car, truck, or van - drove alone 72%55%75% Car, truck, or van - carpooled 12%9%10% Public transportation 5%11%3% Walked 2%5%2% Other means (bicycle, motorcycle, taxi, etc.)1%3%1% Worked from home 9%18%9% Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table DP03 • The majority of workers in Auburn, King County, and Pierce County travel by car, truck, or van alone. • More workers carpool in Auburn (12%) compared to King (9%) and Pierce (10%) counties. • Only 1% of commuters travel by other means in Auburn such as by bicycle, motorcycle, or taxi. • The mean travel time to work in Auburn is consistent with travel times in King and Pierce counties. Figure 17. Auburn Daily Commuting Patterns (2020) Source: US Census On The Map Page 397 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-17 Figure 19. Mean Travel Time to Work Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table DP03 3 Household Economics This section examines household incomes, and households’ ability to provide food, shelter, and transportation. It helps estimate what portion of the population does not have the resources necessary to meet basic needs, as well as where assistance may be most beneficial. Household Income In 2021, Auburn was estimated to have 30,547 occupied households, an increase of 17% since 2010. The average household size was 2.77, larger than the King County average of 2.44. This is likely due to the larger share of family households in Auburn, at 72%, compared with 57% in King County, and a smaller share of householders living alone. This reflects Auburn’s suburban development patterns compared with some of the denser urban areas in Seattle and its closer-in suburbs. About 59% of Auburn’s households are homeowners and 41% are renters, a slightly lower share of homeowners than Washington as a whole, but higher than the King County average. Figure 20. Inflation-Adjusted Median Household Income in Auburn with Regional Comparison (2021) Source: 2010, 2021 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table S2503 Page 398 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-18 Auburn’s median household income was $79,415 in 2021, an increase of 45% from $54,613 in 2010. As shown in Figure 20, Auburn’s incomes are on par with statewide and Pierce County averages but lag behind the higher incomes of Seattle residents and other King County households. Rental households in Auburn earn significantly less than ownership households – the average renter household earns $50,091 compared with $106,521 for ownership households. Auburn’s BIPOC households are more likely to be renters. Around 46% of renters are non- white residents, compared to 33% of homeowners. These types of intersections of income, race, and access to housing and wealth-building are important considerations when planning to accommodate the needs of all Auburn residents. Figure 21. Household Income Segmentation Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table S1901 • Auburn is more similar to Pierce County in household income segmentation than it is to King County. • 31% of households in Auburn earn less than $50,000 per year, compared to 28% in Pierce County and 23% in King County. • The American Community Survey estimates that 9.6% of Auburn’s population is below the poverty level (ACS 2017-2021). This is slightly higher than Pierce County (8.8%) and King County (8.4%). Page 399 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-19 Median Household Income by Size Estimates Figure 22. Median Household Income by Household Size Auburn King County Pierce County Average Median Income:$79,415 $106,326 $82,574 1-person households $36,164 $56,235 $43,374 2-person households $81,881 $117,288 $86,479 3-person households $103,806 $140,378 $101,655 4-person households $111,504 $164,768 $109,688 5-person households $102,773 $146,709 $111,186 6-person households $114,849 $133,729 $116,300 7-or-more-person households $102,332 $124,283 $132,707 Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table B19019 • The average median household income across all households is lower in Auburn ($79,415) than in King ($106,326) and Pierce ($82,574) counties. • In Auburn 7-or-more-person households have a lower median income than those with 5 or 6-person households. • King County households have significantly higher median income than Auburn households regardless of household size. Food Stamps/SNAP Program • Approximately 15.6% of households in Auburn receive food stamps (ACS, 2017-2021 Estimates, Table DP03). • This is higher compared to the percentage of households receiving food stamps in King and Pierce Counties, where 8% of households in King County receive food stamps, and 11.7% of households in Pierce County receive food stamps. • Approximately 54% of households in Auburn receiving food stamps have children under 18 years old. • This is significantly higher compared with King County, where 40% of households receiving food stamps have children under 18, and higher compared with Pierce County, where 45% of households receiving food stamps have children under 18 years. • 16.8% of households receiving food stamps in Auburn identify as being Hispanic or of Latino origin. • 35% of households receiving food stamps in Auburn have had 2 or more workers in the past 12 months. • According to the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction Washington State as of October 2022, 71.3% of the Auburn School District student population are eligible for Free or Reduced- Price meals. This is significantly higher than the Washington State percent of 52% eligible students out of the total enrolled population. • 12,312 Auburn School District students out of a total of 17,165 enrolled were eligible for free lunches as of October 2022 for the 2022-2023 school year. Page 400 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-20 Homeless Population Estimating the total homeless population is difficult. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development requires jurisdictions to conduct a Point in Time (PIT) count, which is an estimate of people experiencing sheltered and unsheltered homelessness on a single night. In King County, the 2022 PIT count estimated 13,368 individuals experiencing homelessness, a significant increase since the reported 2014 count of 3,123. In prior years, the unsheltered PIT was conducted by volunteers on one night in January, using a combination of a census and a survey. The PIT is widely understood to be an undercount, especially as it represents a single night rather than a full year. Some likely individuals and families are improvising with camping, sleeping in their cars, rotating through weekly motels, and spending nights in someone’s spare room or couch with no fixed living situation. The recent King County Department of Community and Human Services Cross Systems Homelessness Analysis found that at least 40,871 people experienced homelessness at some point in 2020 (KCRHA, 2022). Unsheltered homeless counts illuminate the local gap in services for the homeless. Homelessness continues to have a disproportionate impact on communities of color. Based on the PIT analyses, 25% of people experiencing homelessness in King County identify as Black/African-American, but according to the 2020 U.S. Census, only 7% of King County’s population identifies as Black/African-American. Similarly, 9% of people experiencing homelessness identify as American Indian, Alaskan Native, or Indigenous, but that group makes up only 1% of King County’s population (KCRHA, 2022). As shown in Figure 23, in 2022 the number of households entering the homelessness response system was higher than the number of those exiting it, by about 1,000. Figure 23. Households Entering and Exiting the Homelessness Response System Source: Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) as of July 1, 2023 • According to the King County Regional Homelessness Authority (KRHA), when the number of households entering the homeless response system is higher than the number of those exiting it, the number of households becoming homeless and receiving services increases. • More households are entering the system than exiting the system. • Response efforts to COVID-19 decreased the number of those entering homelessness due to a combination of eviction moratoriums, stimulus payments, unemployment insurance, emergency rental assistance, and drops in rental prices (King County DCHS, 2021). Page 401 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-21 Employment and Labor Force Participation Figure 24. Labor Force Participation and Unemployment Rate Population 16+ Years Old % in Civilian Labor Force Unemployment rate % of Civilian Labor Force Below the Poverty Level Auburn 65,949 68.3%5.0%47.4% King County 1,836,285 70.2%4.6%49.9% Pierce County 718,566 66.1%5.0%43.8% Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table S2301 • Almost half (47.4%) of Auburn’s labor force is below the poverty level. This is slightly lower than King County and slightly higher than Pierce County. This means about half of Auburn’s population consists of the “working poor”. • Auburn’s unemployment rate is consistent with King and Pierce counties and is exceptionally low at 5%. • Historically, Auburn has had a higher percentage of labor force below the poverty level than King County, but this has changed in the past five years. Housing Cost Burden Households are considered “cost-burdened” if they spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs, including rent, mortgage, and utilities. Households that spend more than 30 percent of their monthly income on housing costs, including rent and utilities. A severely cost-burdened household spends more than 50 percent of its monthly income on housing costs. This metric can be used to analyze the gap between housing costs and affordability in Auburn. Figure 25. Percent of Auburn Households Cost-Burdened by Housing Source: 2006-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, HUD • About 45% of Auburn homeowners are not cost-burdened by housing costs compared to 21% of renters. • One of every five renter households is either cost-burdened or severely cost-burdened by housing costs in Auburn. • About 5% of Auburn homeowners are severely cost-burdened by housing. Page 402 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-22 Housing and Transportation Costs The standard definition of cost burden does not factor in transportation costs. However, today, housing advocates and researchers stress the importance of considering transportation costs in affordability analyses, because many households relocate to the outer edges of metro areas in search of affordable housing, thereby increasing their transportation costs. Housing costs combined with transportation costs can exacerbate households’ ability to meet their basic living needs within their means. Center for Neighborhood Technology publishes a Housing+ Transportation Affordability Index (H&T Index) (most recently as of 2022), providing a ready-made data source for assessing the possible transportation cost burdening of Auburn residents. The H+ T Index calculates, through a series of statistical models, the transportation and housing costs for the “regional typical” and “regional moderate” household; “typical” means a household earning the regional AMI with the regional average number of commuting workers and persons per household, and “moderate” meaning a household earning 80% of AMI (but having the same number of workers and persons per household). Figure 26 shows that households in Auburn spend a combined 40% of their income on housing and transportation costs. Most households in Auburn spend about $15,000 annually on transportation costs. Figure 26. Average Housing and Transportation Costs Graphics Source: Housing and Transportation Affordability Index, http://htaindex.cnt.org/, October 2022 Placing housing near multiple modes of travel can help reduce travel costs to some degree and is supportive of recent legislation with HB 1110 permitting denser middle housing in proximity to transit stops. Growth in areas of opportunity is based on an “Opportunity Index,” which combines measures of five key elements of neighborhood opportunity and positive life outcomes: education, economic health, housing and neighborhood quality, mobility and transportation, and health and environment. The level of opportunity score (very low, low, moderate, high, very high) is determined by sorting all census tracts into quintiles based on their index scores. Areas of opportunity that experience greater proportions of growth may experience an increased risk of displacement. The Puget Sound Regional Council created an opportunity mapping tool that assesses the amount of opportunity that exists in neighborhoods. Areas with lower opportunity are defined as places that score “Very Low to Low” – which represents the bottom 40% of scores in the region. Areas with higher opportunity are defined as places that score “Moderate to Very High Opportunity” – which represents the top 60% of scores among all tracts. Figure 27 shows the opportunity index indicates there are high to very high opportunities for improved transportation in Auburn. Page 403 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-23 Figure 27. PSRC Opportunity Index, Transportation in Auburn Source: Opportunity Mapping in Central Puget Sound Web App, PSRC, 2022 4 Housing Inventory and Affordability This section describes the City’s housing inventory including the proportion of housing that is affordable to segments of the City’s population. The information shows information citywide and compares information to King County and Pierce County statistics. Historically, the Growth Management Act, RCW 30.60A.070 required each fully planning city and county to prepare a housing element to meet the housing GMA goal. In 2022 with the passing of HB 1220, the housing GMA goal was amended to “plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all economic segments”. With this change in the goal, the previous requirement to include an inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs was expanded to incorporate income-segment needs and emergency and permanent supportive housing. VISION 2050, a regional growth strategy adopted by Auburn and PSRC jurisdictions, also identifies that the housing element should provide opportunities for a range of housing types and choices to meet the housing needs of all income levels and demographic groups. Additionally, King County’s Countywide Planning Policies provide a framework for all jurisdictions to plan for and promote a range of affordable, accessible, and healthy housing choices for current and future residents. In 2021, 76% of low-income households in King County spent more than 30% of their income on housing. Only 21 units are affordable and available for every 100 extremely low-income households in King County. Page 404 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-24 Housing Units The housing inventory changes daily as new units are built and older units are torn down. The Washington State Office of Financial Management estimates current housing units for all Washington jurisdictions over time. Figure 28 shows the proportion of housing units by unit type. The types include: • One unit, • Two or more units, and • Mobile homes and special units. • Special units include permanent residents living in travel trailers, RVs, boats, sheds, tents, and others. Figure 28. Units in Structure Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table DP04. • The majority of housing units in Auburn, King County, and Pierce County are single-family units (one unit). Auburn has fewer single-family units than Pierce and King Counties. • Auburn has a larger proportion of housing units in mobile homes and special units (7%) compared to King County (1%). Page 405 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-25 Housing Types and Sizes Figure 29. Number of Bedrooms Auburn King County Pierce County Bedrooms Housing Units Percent Percent Percent No bedroom (studios)774 2.4%7.7%2.5% 1 bedroom 4,572 12.4%16.7%9.2% 2 bedrooms 9,457 29.2%23.9%22.9% 3 bedrooms 8,930 27.5%26.4%41.6% 4 bedrooms 7,282 22.5%19.1%19.1% 5 or more bedrooms 1,405 4.3%6.2%4.7% Total Housing Units 32,420 100%100%100% Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table DP04. • About half of Auburn’s housing stock is 2-3-bedroom units, accounting for 56.7% of housing units. • Auburn’s housing stock is about 26% large units with 4 or more bedrooms, which aligns with the approximately 26% of households with 4 or more persons (see Figure 8). This suggests Auburn does not have a shortage of larger units to accommodate its larger households. • Auburn has a lower percentage of units with no bedrooms (studios) compared to King County, but similar in comparison with Pierce County. Tenure Tenure relates to the ownership status of a housing unit. A housing unit is “owned” if the owner or co-owner lives in the unit, even if it is mortgaged or not fully paid for. A cooperative or condominium unit is “owned” only if the owner or co-owner lives in it. All other occupied units are classified as “rented,” including units rented for cash rent and those occupied without payment of cash rent. Figure 30. Housing Tenure Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table DP04 • Auburn is similar to both King and Pierce Counties in housing tenure rates. Approximately 60% of housing units are owner-occupied and about 40% are renter-occupied. Page 406 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-26 Vacancy Rates Vacancy rates are a leading indicator of a housing market, which can indicate future changes in housing prices and demand. Figure 31. Vacancy Rates Unit Type Auburn King County Pierce County Homeowner 1.6%0.8%0.8% Renter 5.5%4.2%3.7% Vacant Housing Units 4.6%5.7%5.6% Source 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table DP04 • Auburn’s overall vacancy rate is 4.6%, which is lower than both King County and Pierce County and below the healthy market rate of 5-8%. • Auburn’s vacancy for owner-occupied units is 1.6%, higher than both King and Pierce counties. The homeowner vacancy rate is extraordinarily low for Auburn and both King and Pierce Counties, suggesting limited supply for those seeking to purchase a home. • Auburn’s renter vacancy rate is 5.5%. In general, a vacancy rate of 5% or less for rental units is considered a very tight market that will put upward pressure on prices and potentially stimulate investment in new housing stock. Housing Units by Year Built Figure 32. Residential Housing by Date Built in Auburn Source: 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table DP04 Page 407 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-27 Across all housing units, the age of structure is the single most important physical attribute in predicting the degree of structure quality. National research has demonstrated a negative correlation between the age of a unit and its condition. Generally speaking, a residential unit will have a functional life of around 40 years, at which point additional investments will be needed to maintain structural adequacy. Figure 32 presents the age of housing units for all residential structures in Auburn. • Most of the new housing (built from 2001 to the present) has been concentrated mainly in the south and northeast regions of the city, particularly the Lakeland neighborhood and Lea Hill neighborhood. • Most of the lots in the Downtown vicinity were developed before 1950. In South Auburn, housing was generally built in the 1950s. These structures are more than 50 years old, and many likely have structural deficiencies. • There is some evidence of site-level redevelopment within these neighborhoods, which bodes well for future investment by property owners. • Less than 20% of Auburn’s housing stock was built in 2010 or later. Housing Condition and Quality Housing quality has many dimensions including structural integrity, energy efficiency, wear and tear, housing design, and relationship to amenities and services. There is no comprehensive data set that reports the quality of housing across all these domains. This analysis examines multiple dimensions of housing quality to ascertain the specific housing quality challenges experienced in Auburn. County Assessors rate the building condition of each residential unit in their jurisdiction. The Building Condition values are rated relative to age and grade (that is, taking into account the age of the structure and the original building quality in terms of materials, craftsmanship, and design). They include: 1 = Poor- Worn out. Repair and overhaul needed on painted surfaces, roofing, plumbing, heating, and numerous functional inadequacies. Excessive deferred maintenance and abuse, limited value-in-use, approaching abandonment or major reconstruction; reuse or change in occupancy is imminent. Effective age is near the end of the scale regardless of the actual chronological age. 2 = Fair- Badly worn. Much repair is needed. Many items need refinishing or overhauling, deferred maintenance obvious, and inadequate building utility and systems all shortening the life expectancy and increasing the effective age. 3 = Average- Some evidence of deferred maintenance and normal obsolescence with age in that a few minor repairs are needed, along with some refinishing. All major components are still functional and contribute toward an extended life expectancy. Effective age and utility are standard for like properties of its class and usage. 4 = Good- No obvious maintenance required but neither is everything new. Appearance and utility are above the standard and the overall effective age will be lower than the typical property. 5 = Very Good- All items are well maintained, many having been overhauled and repaired as they have shown signs of wear, increasing the life expectancy and lowering the effective age with little deterioration or obsolescence evident with a high degree of utility. Page 408 of 435 Page 409 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-29 • King County and Pierce County Assessors’ ratings of residential structure quality show a large proportion of the residential structures are considered to have average conditions (depicted in yellow), suggesting Auburn has a significant amount of housing stock for which maintenance has been deferred. Much of the housing stock in Auburn is older than 40 years and many structures may be approaching the need for more comprehensive refurbishment and updates to keep structures in a useful condition. • Areas close to the downtown are dominated by housing rated as “good” and show evidence of investment indicated by the intermixing of higher-rated quality buildings such as in the area around Auburn High School and Washington Elementary School. Areas that are both dominated by lower ratings (average and poor) and show more homogeneity (lacking newer or higher-rated- structures) are likely to have more significant housing quality deficiencies. • Building conditions rated ‘poor’ represent housing that has the greatest quality deficiencies and may pose a health or safety risk to inhabitants. Exhibit 32 overlays the number of mobile homes, demonstrating areas with higher concentrations of mobile homes tend to show average to fair to poor conditions. Mobile homes differ from stick-on-site built homes and are more difficult to update incrementally due to both structural and financing constraints. As a result, full replacement is necessary for mobile units with deferred maintenance or outdated systems. Code Enforcement The City’s Code Compliance is a division of the Department of Community Development. They are responsible for enforcing several City ordinances including property maintenance, public nuisance regulations which include junk vehicles and tall grass. The enforcement of these codes helps maintain the character and quality of neighborhoods. Approximately 2,500 complaints are received and investigated each year. This also includes ensuring that the proper permits have been issued for construction of projects, land clearing, grading and filling of property, placement of signs, and that businesses are operating in compliance with the City of Auburn Zoning Code. The City has also established more specific requirements for housing conditions, as City staff have seen tenants living in substandard conditions with mold, moisture, rodent, and insect problems. Page 410 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-30 Neighborhoods with Unique Housing Conditions or Amenities The City is made up of several neighborhood districts, as described in the city’s Comprehensive Plan. These districts indicate general geographic areas of the city and may not reflect the boundaries or naming conventions found in other sources, such as real estate records. A summary of housing conditions and amenities is included below. Downtown Downtown is the City’s core and was developed in the late 1880s to early 1900s. Downtown is designated it as a Regional Growth Center by the Puget Sound Regional Council. It has a population of about 2,267 and an employment base of 3,162 as of 2022 (2024 Auburn Downtown Plan). About a quarter of the housing units downtown are single- unit detached homes, primarily in the western and eastern quadrants. Almost a third of housing units in the downtown are in large developments of 50 units or more. The share of multifamily units in Auburn’s downtown is much higher than that in the city as a whole, which is about half of single-unit detached homes. In Auburn’s downtown, there is a significantly higher age of housing when compared with the region. Almost a quarter of housing units downtown were built before 1940, compared with only 4 percent in the city as a whole. This reflects Auburn’s longer history as a city at an important railway junction dating back to the early 20th century. North Auburn North Auburn has housing focused east of Auburn Way North. Many of the properties were developed prior to the 1950s, with others developed in the 1970s, and few after the year 2000. The majority of residential properties in North Auburn are in “good” or “average” condition (see Figure 34). There are a few concentrated areas of mobile home units in the northern part of the neighborhood near the river that are in “poor” condition. Park land is located in several locations, along the river, the freeway, as well as in the southern portions of this neighborhood. South Auburn South Auburn was largely developed before or during the 1950s and 1960s. The majority of residential properties in the South Auburn neighborhood are in “good” or “average” condition. There are large concentrated areas of mobile homes in the southern part of the neighborhood near the river that are in “poor”, “fair” or “average” condition. The City’s Les Gove Community Campus with the library and Senior Center, as well as other centers and play areas, is located in South Auburn. West Hill West Hill to the northwest has single-unit detached homes built in the 1980s predominantly, with some apartment complexes developed before the 1950s. Most of the residential properties in the West Hill neighborhood are in “average” condition. West Hill has few mobile home units dispersed throughout the neighborhood. There are a few properties near the northern city boundary that are in “fair” or “poor” condition, representing units built in the 1950s. There is little park land in the West Hill Area, but there are some schools that provide some amount of open space and recreation opportunities. Lea Hill Lea Hill reflects development across many decades, with the central area developed pre-1950s to the present day. The northern area developed in the 1960s, and the northeast in the 1990s. The majority of residential properties in the Lea Hill neighborhood are in “good” or “average” condition. Plateau The Plateau neighborhood was developed in the 1960s and 1970s predominantly. The majority of residential properties in the Plateau neighborhood are in “good” or “average” condition. Lakeland Lakeland is a master-planned community at the City’s southern border and was developed between 1990 and 2010. The majority of residential properties in the Lakeland neighborhood are in “average” condition or are new. Parks are located in several places within the development. Page 411 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-31 Southeast Auburn Southeast Auburn is more lightly populated than other areas of the City. Homes are focused to the south and were developed generally between 1950 and 1990. The majority of residential properties in Southeast Auburn neighborhood are in “average” condition. Open space is located along the river. Source: Leland Consulting Group and City of Auburn, 2023 Projected Housing Needs by Income Band Projected housing needs by income band in Auburn are set by both King and Pierce counties, respectively. Analysis describing how Comprhenisve Plan Land Use and Zoning adequately accommodates King and Pierce County housing units by income band is found in section 5 of this document. King County On August 15, 2023 the King County Council unanimously adopted the Housing-related Countywide Planning Policy amendments recommended by the Growth Management Planning Council in GMPC Motion 23-1. The amendments include implementation HB 1220 and housing availability by income band. The County CPP states, “while significant new housing growth is necessary to reach overall King County housing growth targets, new housing growth will not sufficiently address the housing needs for lower-income households without additional government support for the creation of units restricted to income-eligible households—both rent- restricted units and resale restricted homes (“income-restricted units”); and the preservation of homes currently affordable at or below 80 percent of area median income. Local jurisdictions can create enabling environments and generate local revenue to support new housing development and housing preservation, but successful implementation requires resources and involvement from other levels of government, nonprofits, and the private sector.” Figure 34 - King County Housing Needs by Income Band Source: King County Ordinance 19660, Table H-1 Auburn is required to supply housing capacity for 12,000 new housing units, including 2,293 units of emergency housing. As shown in Figure 34, the greatest need for housing by affordability level is in the “extremely low” and “moderate” income levels. In addition to creating adequate capacity to accommodate the new housing units by 2024, goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan were evaluated and amended where appropriate to assist in creating these new units. Pierce County Pierce County Council adopted new growth target allocations for Cities, Towns, and Unincorporated areas of Pierce County on July 7, 2023. Countywide Pierce County needs to accommodate 111,511 new housing units by 2044. This includes 112 new housing in the Pierce County portion of Auburn which is already nearly built out per Pierce County Buildable Lands Analysis. The greatest need for housing is in the 0-30% AMI range, accounting for nearly half of the 112 total units. Page 412 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-32 Figure 35. Pierce County Housing Needs by Income Band Pierce County Permanent Housing Needs by Income Level (% of Area Median Income) Total 0-30% >30-50%>50-80%>80-100%>100-120%>120% Emergency Housing Needs (Beds) Non- PSH PSH * Unincorporated Pierce County Est. Supply (2(2020)152,322 2,134 292 17,603 42,774 32,502 21,957 35,060 0 Allocation (2020-2044)32,048 4,140 5,594 5,943 4,697 2,022 1,833 7,817 1,961 Auburn Est. Supply (2(2020)3,963 0 33 134 493 1,141 680 1,482 8 Allocation (2020-2044)112 14 20 21 16 7 6 27 7 Source: CPP Pierce County, Ordinance No 2023-22, Exhibit B Displacement Risk and Racially Disparate Impacts Identification of Areas with Higher Risk of Displacement Potential As described in the demographics section above, Auburn has a very diverse population – by age, race, ethnicity, and household composition (e.g., family or non-family household). The City has included housing preservation as a key goal driving this Housing Action Plan, particularly as it relates to preserving housing for low-income households. Housing preservation is an anti-displacement effort and can help mitigate and minimize the negative effects that often arise from new housing development. The highest displacement risk in Auburn is the few housing units located in southwest Auburn where mostly industrial and commercial is located. In particular, a mobile home park located in this block group is particularly vulnerable to displacement. Downtown Auburn is also susceptible to moderate to high displacement risk. The downtown area currently contains 426 subsidized affordable units in several developments, slightly more than a quarter of the housing units in the area. A full analysis is located in the Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment. Areas of Risk The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) has taken steps to analyze and map displacement risk in the region. According to PSRC, “In the central Puget Sound region, communities of color, low-income households, small businesses, and renters are recognized as being at higher risk of displacement.” To visualize and help plan to mitigate these pressures, PSRC developed five key categories of metrics which can be used to help identify populations at risk of displacement: • Socio-demographic indicators, including race, ethnicity, linguistic isolation, educational attainment, housing tenure, cost burden, and household income. • Transportation Indicators, including access to jobs by car and transit and proximity to current and future transit service. • Neighborhood Characteristics, including proximity to grocery stores, restaurants, parks, and schools. • Housing Indicators, including development capacity and rental costs • Civic Engagement, measured by voter turnout. Page 413 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-33 Figure 36. PSRC Displacement Risk in Auburn (2023) Source: Puget Sound Regional Council PSRC developed a mapping tool that aggregates these indicators into high, medium, or low displacement risk areas. As shown in Figure 35 the neighborhoods of West Hill and Southeast Auburn are primarily at lower risk of displacement. The neighborhoods of Lea Hill and South Auburn are primarily at moderate risk of displacement. Central Auburn including downtown and North Auburn are at the highest risk of displacement. A recent meta-analysis of anti-displacement by researchers at UC Berkeley and UCLA found that neighborhood stabilization and tenant protection strategies in the short term and the production of subsidized housing in the long term had the highest potential to prevent displacement.4 The Auburn downtown area currently contains 426 subsidized affordable units in several developments, slightly more than a quarter of the housing units in the area. Racially Disparate Impacts Racially disparate impacts occur when policies, practices, rules or other systems result in a disproportionate effect on one or more racial groups. The PSRC provides community profiles for jurisdictions to keep a complete inventory of data from the U.S. Census Bureau. The profile includes housing and household level metrics to support analysis of racial disparate impacts in Auburn. As discussed in the demographics section and shown previously in Figure 2, Auburn is a highly-diverse city with 49% percent identifying as BIPOC. According to CHAS Across races and ethnic groups, rental households are relatively equally cost-burdened. The “other” category, which includes those identify as two or more races is the highest where 72% of those identifying and renters are cost-burdened (see Figure 36). Owner households are also similarly cost-burdened across races and ethnic groups with less overly burdened compared to renters. 4 Chapple, Karen and Loukaitou-Sideris, Anastasia. “White Paper on Anti-Displacement Strategy Effectiveness.” Prepared for the California Air Resources Board. February 28, 2021. Page 414 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-34 Figure 37. Cost-Burdened Renter Households by Race As shown in Figure 37, the highest concentration of cost-burdened persons of color renter households is located in downtown Auburn. This is also consistent with the displacement risk analysis that shows downtown residents are at the highest risk of displacement overall. Another neighborhood with a higher concentration of cost-burdened POC renter households is West Hill. The city should prioritize affordable and diverse housing options in downtown and West Hill to mitigate displacement risks and disparate impacts to BIPOC communities. Figure 38. Cost-Burdened POC Renter Households Map Page 415 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-35 Overall, the diversity in Auburn increases the likelihood of racially disparate impacts, particularly displacement occurring citywide but especially in the downtown. The city has adopted several housing policies that aim to identify and prevent racially disparate impacts. Both the city’s Downtown and Housing Action Plans propose actions that aim to promote equitable development and mitigate displacement risk, with consideration given to the preservation of historical and cultural communities as well as investments in low-, very low-, extremely low-, and moderate-income housing production and preservation. Housing Attainability A primary determinant of whether housing is attainable for a household is whether the household’s income can support the cost of the housing. King County’s Countywide Planning policies require each jurisdiction to assess the affordability of its housing inventory and to plan for meeting local needs for affordable housing as well as accommodating a share of the countywide need for affordable housing. The Countywide Planning Policies provide guidelines for determining housing affordability using Area Median Income (AMI) to establish housing market segments ranging from Very-Low Income Housing Needs to Moderate Housing Income Needs. Area Median Income is the midpoint of all household income so that half the households earn more than the median income and half the households earn less than the median. The HUD median family income is $146,500 for the Seattle-Bellevue HUD Metro FMR Area, which includes Auburn (2023). The American Community Survey five-year estimates a median household income of $106,326. For purposes of determining housing affordability, this analysis uses HUD income limits. While Auburn’s AMI is also reported and is lower, it is not the basis for the income analysis that follows as the analysis keys on the countywide information. The Countywide Planning Policies require jurisdictions to analyze housing affordability using 0-30%, 31-50%, 51-80% and over 80% ratios to the HUD-published Area Median Income (2021 King County Countywide Planning Policies. Figure 38 represents the income limits for families of four to afford housing in each need category without becoming cost-burdened. Figure 39. Income Ranges and Area Median Income Income Limits Seattle-Bellevue HUD Metro Area Median Income (HUD)$146,500 Moderate Income Housing Need (80% of AMI)$100,900 Low Income Housing Need (50% of AMI)$68,500 Very-Low Income Housing Need (30% of AMI)$41,100 Area Median Income (ACS)$79,415 Source: HUD, 2023 and 2017-2021 American Community Survey Affordability of Renter-Occupied Housing In general, attached housing, such as apartments, is less expensive partly owing to the lower cost of land per unit, and thus serves a greater proportion of lower-income households. To improve understanding of housing attainability for households with lower incomes, we examine the income distribution of households who rent compared to the supply of available rental housing. Breaking out renter-occupied housing units according to income levels, households that rent housing in Auburn and King County tend to have lower incomes. Page 416 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-36 Figure 40. Cost-burdened and Severely Cost-burdened Renters, Auburn, 2018 Income Category Total Renter Households Cost-Burdened Severely Cost-Burdened 0-30%4407 88%72% 30-50%4009 71%25% 50-80%4299 33%0% 80-100%1381 0%0% 100%+1411 0%0% Total 15,507 53%27% Source: PUMS (2018) • In 2018, 88 percent of renters earning less than 30% of AMI were cost-burdened and 71 percent of renters earning between 30% to 50% of AMI were cost-burdened (see Figure 26). • Cost burdening tends to decline as incomes go up because a household has more income to spend on housing. In Auburn, 33 percent of renters earning between 50% and 80% of AMI were cost burdened. • Of the approximate 15,507 renter households in Auburn, more than half (53 • percent) are cost-burdened, and more than one-quarter (27 percent) are severely cost-burdened. In 2020, the average market rent for an apartment in Auburn was $1,393 (Costar and Zillow, 2020). Using 2018 income data from Figure 46, this average rent for a two-bedroom apartment would be affordable to a four-person household earning 50% of the AMI (which would be a relatively tight space), or to a two-person household earning between 50% and 80% of AMI. Figure 41. Median Home Sales Price and Average 2-Bedroom Rent 2010 2020 Average Rent $934 $1,393 Median Sales Price $222,750 $418,300 Source: Costar and Zillow. Not adjusted for inflation • The average rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Auburn increased by 49 percent from 2010 to 2020, reaching $1,393 per month. • Between 2010 and 2020, the average monthly rent in Auburn increased by 49 percent ($459 per month). In this same period, the median sales price for a home increased by 88 percent ($195,550). Page 417 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-37 Overcrowding HUD defines an overcrowded housing unit as one where there is an average of more than 1 person living per room. Figure 49 shows the percentage of rental units that are overcrowded in Auburn, King County, and Pierce County. Figure 42. Percentage of Rental Units that are Overcrowded, 2008-2012 5-Year Average Auburn King County Pierce Occupants per room 12,452 391,756 119,698 0.50 or less 6,637 210,767 70,925 0.51 to 1.00 4,462 153,539 42,364 1.01 to 1.50 855 13,787 3,955 1.51 to 2.00 335 11,535 2,047 2.01 or more 163 2,128 407 Number of Overcrowded Units (>1)1,353 27,450 6,409 Percent of Overcrowded Units (>1)10.9%7.0%5.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2017-2021 American Community Survey. Auburn has a higher percentage of overcrowded rental units (10.9%) than King County overall (7%) and Pierce County overall (5.4%). This is likely somewhat driven by the larger average household size in Auburn. Affordability of Owner-Occupied Housing Homeownership helps create stability in neighborhoods and has historically been a significant driver of personal and household wealth for individuals and families. A key aspect of addressing a community’s housing needs is to ensure there are opportunities for home ownership for moderate-income levels and first-time homebuyers. The exhibits below assess the opportunity in Auburn’s owner-occupied housing market based on housing need category. Auburn’s housing stock primarily consists of ownership units (it has a 56 percent homeownership rate) compared to only about 44 percent of rental units. Due to demand outpacing the supply of homes in Auburn, prices have been rising. Since 2010, home prices in Auburn rose by 88 percent, from a median sales price of $222,750 in 2010 to $418,300 in 2020. Over this time, Auburn has seen somewhat lower median home sales price growth than nearby cities (see Figure 42), and the median sales price in Auburn did not overtake that of another city in the 2010-2020 time period. • For both Auburn and King County, there is owner-occupied housing across all income categories. Given the age and current condition of a significant portion of Auburn’s housing stock, some very low-income households may struggle to maintain their homes. • Generally, Auburn has more households in the moderate and middle-income levels that can own a home compared to King County, suggesting that Auburn offers more affordable homeownership opportunities than available in other parts of King County. Page 418 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-38 Figure 42 provides median sales prices in Auburn over the last nine years by housing type. Figure 43. Auburn Median Sales Prices Area Median Sales Price 2010 Median Sales Price 2020 Median Sales Price 2023 Increase from 2020 to 2023 Price Auburn $222,750 $418,300 $577,641 38% Burien $233,450 $470,300 $619,490 32% Federal Way $211,600 $414,700 $564,448 36% Kent $237,750 $447,700 $611,760 37% Renton $269,950 $516,800 $717,804 39% Tukwila $182,500 $412,000 $536,522 30% Source: Auburn Median Sales Price 2010-2023, Zillow.com • In 2023, Auburn’s median sales price for housing units, was $577,641, a 38% increase since 2020. The Auburn housing market is similar to surrounding areas such as Federal Way and Tukwila. 5 Future Housing and Employment Capacity Buildable Lands Reports Analysis The City is required to provide capacity for its fair share of the population as determined through countywide planning with King and Pierce Counties. King County and Pierce County targets address the year 2044. The city is projected to need 12,112 additional housing units to accommodate growth. Every five years approximately, a buildable lands report (BLR) is prepared by both counties to determine progress towards targets. Figure 34 shows the combined remaining growth target for the years 2035-2044 and the City’s estimated growth capacity. Figure 44. Land Capacity and Growth Target Capacity and Target Number of Dwellings Total Capacity (units), King and Pierce Counties 9,264 King County Housing Growth Target (2020-2044)12,000 Pierce County Housing Growth Target (2020-2044)112 Total Target 12,112 Surplus/Deficit Capacity by 2044 -2,848 Source: King County 2021, Pierce County 2021 The BLR indicates the City can meet its remaining housing targets by the year 2035. If growth is carried forward to the full planning period 2020-2044 the City will be unable to meet its new housing growth target based on available land capacity with a deficit of 2,848 units. Upzoning residential zoning districts to increase density will enable the city to meet new housing unit needs without the need for additional land. • Based on buildable lands report information for the portion of Auburn in King County, about half of the City’s housing capacity is in low-density zones. • Based on buildable lands report information for the portion of Auburn in Pierce County, Auburn’s capacity is for dwellings in the R-5 zoning district, particularly in the Lakeland PUD. Terrace View is at capacity. Page 419 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-39 • The Pierce County portion of the City of Auburn has sufficient capacity to accommodate the 2044 targets and the King County portion does not have sufficient capacity to accommodate 2044 targets. Land Capacity for Affordability and Growth Targets Land Capacity – No Action Alternative Through a land use alternative process, the city underwent a no action alternative analysis to determine the land capacity for housing units without any changes to zoning or land inventory. This analysis was completed at the Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) level. Building capacity within each TAZ relies on a buildable land inventory layer produced in GIS form at the parcel level by King County. That layer included parcels deemed to be either vacant or redevelopable, along with an estimate of the net new housing units of capacity for each parcel. For non-residential building capacity, each parcel in that layer had a lot square footage and expected/typical floor area ratio (FAR), yielding a potential new commercial building square footage. Those square footages were converted into potential future jobs for purposes of the allocation model, using different assumptions for average square footage per job for each neighborhood, to reflect differences in industry mix across Auburn. For the Pierce County portion of Auburn, the methodology included breakouts for Auburn from the Pierce County Buildable Lands Report, Fourth Edition (published in September, 2021). Capacity for both new housing units and new jobs was aggregated to the neighborhood (District) level for purposes of determining future allocations. Neighborhood capacity shares were weighted by recent neighborhood growth shares to determine initial allocations. TAZ level capacity is used again as a basis for distributing growth allocations within each neighborhood to the various TAZs. Capacity estimates at the TAZ level were then revised based on staff comments and inputs from ongoing Auburn Downtown Plan Update efforts. In both cases, it is assumed that those inputs reflected more detailed knowledge of parcel-level zoning and land conditions in downtown, and thus reflected a more accurate picture of real development capacity. Figure 45. Neighborhood (District) No Action Employment and Household Growth Capacity Employment and Household Neighborhood Capacities Jobs HUs DOWNTOWN 1,195 1,948 LAKELAND 0 41 LAKELAND-PIERCE 0 48 LEA HILL 142 983 NORTH DOWNTOWN 308 340 NORTH AUBURN 3,463 504 PLATEAU 100 1,097 SE AUBURN 0 1,428 SOUTH AUBURN 2,220 2,706 WEST HILL 809 477 Total 8,236 9,572 Page 420 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-40 Neighborhood-Level Projected Population and Employment Growth To calculate each neighborhood’s share of recent growth, 2010 to 2020 block-level Census counts of housing units and 2009 to 2019 Census LEHD block-level job counts were used. Because census block boundaries do not match well with neighborhood boundaries or TAZs, those estimates are necessarily approximations based on assigning blocks to TAZs containing their centroids. Neighborhood level growth was considered irrelevant to employment growth allocation decisions, since projected citywide job growth far exceeded total land capacity for employment uses. In other words, if this TAZ allocation is intended to reflect a no-action growth scenario, then regardless of growth momentum, job growth would be limited to what could be built on known vacant and underutilized parcels subject to current zoning – meaning that each TAZ would simply receive as much job growth as their identified capacity can accommodate (with no need to weighting based on prior growth). For housing unit growth allocations, there was excess available capacity to work with (9,572 units of estimated capacity versus 7,774 units of projected growth). So, some weighting was required to determine which neighborhoods should receive that growth. Because Downtown capacity and allocations remain consistent, weighting was only applied to non- downtown neighborhoods to arrive at growth allocation totals. Figure 46. Neighborhood (District) No Action Employment and Household Growth Allocations Employment and Household Neighborhood Allocations Jobs HUs Downtown 1,195 1,948 Lakeland 0 32 Lakeland-Pierce 0 36 Lea Hill 142 740 North Downtown 308 340 North Auburn 3,463 380 Plateau 100 826 SE Auburn 0 1,076 South Auburn 2,220 2,038 West Hill 809 359 Total Allocated (to TAZs within neighborhoods based on revised TAZ capacities 8,236 7,774 Comparisons Predictive Forecast (not capacity-constrained)22,623 7,774 Adopted Growth Targets 19,520 12,112 No-Action Forecasts Compared to Adopted Policy Growth Targets Predicted no-action housing growth is lower than adopted growth targets. According to the King County demographer, the adopted growth target for housing units from 2019 to 2044 was 12,000 units. Adjusting to 2021, this target calls for addition of 10,959 additional units by the 2044 horizon year. In contrast, the baseline, no-action predictive forecast is for 7,774 new units by 2044. Both King and Pierce Counties have since updated their projected housing unit allocations to an additional 12,112 housing units (July-August 2023). For employment, the no-action growth forecast is for 22,623 new jobs by 2044, as compared to an adopted growth target of 19,520 jobs. However, because estimated capacity for new jobs is limited to 8,236 across Auburn’s neighborhoods, the no-action TAZ allocations are constrained to that figure and will necessarily fall well short of the 19,520 target. Page 421 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-41 Draft Preferred Land Use Scenario The future land use map accounts for housing and employment targets, legislative requirements, and growth centers in the city. The Draft Preferred scenario5 is detailed in the Land Use Element. Residential Capacity A residential land capacity analysis evaluates whether jurisdictions have sufficient land capacity available to allow for the types and amount of new housing needed to meet identified housing needs is required as part of HB 1220 requirements. The 2021 Housing Element updates amended RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) of the Growth Management Act to require the Housing Element to include explicit consideration of capacity for the following household needs and building types: • Moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households; • Permanent supportive housing; • Emergency housing and emergency shelters; and • Duplexes, triplexes and townhomes (within an urban growth area boundary The intent of this analysis is to assess the City of Auburn’s current capacity to accommodate different housing income brackets and whether that capacity is sufficient to meet Auburn’s housing targets established by King and Pierce counties. In addition, this analysis considers implementing a preferred land use alternative through zoning changes and provides updated capacity calculations to ensure sufficient capacity of suitable land to meet growth targets. Approach and Methodology The Auburn Residential Land Capacity Analysis completed for the purpose of implementing HB 1220 requirements utilizes King County6 and Pierce County7 Buildable Lands Reports from 2021 as the baseline with minor adjustments based on input from city planning and departmental staff through the alternatives planning and growth allocations process. This analysis completes the following steps as outlined in the HB 1220 “Updating your Housing Element”8 Book 2 guidance developed by the Department of Commerce: Step 1. Summarize developable residential land capacity by zone. The first step is to identify the gross developable land acreage by zoning designation to summarize. This portion of the analysis involves a jurisdiction-wide scan to quantify all land available for residential or commercial/industrial development for the next 20-year planning period. “Land supply” is the phrase used to refer to an inventory of land “suitable for development” (King County). The land supply includes vacant and redevelopable lands with land supply inventories recorded in 2019. For this approach, the land supply acres were drawn from the land inventory layer produced in GIS form at the parcel level by King County. That layer included parcels deemed to be either vacant or redevelopable, along with an estimate of the net new housing units of capacity for each parcel. For non-residential building capacity, each parcel in that layer had a lot square footage and expected/typical floor area ratio (FAR), yielding a potential new commercial building square footage. For the Pierce County portion of Auburn breakouts for Auburn from the Pierce County Buildable Lands Report, Fourth Edition (published in September, 2021). The 2019 data was cross-checked with 2023 King County and Pierce County parcel assessor data which was 5 Draft preferred scenario represents city staff’s intent to comply with all required regulations and serve as basis for modelling and evaluation used in the draft Comprehensive Plan. This scenario will be deemed “Preferred” after EIS process and Planning Commission evaluation and acceptance is complete. 6 https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/executive/governance-leadership/performance-strategy-budget/regional-planning/urban-growth-capacity-report 7 https://www.piercecountywa.gov/923/Buildable-Lands 8 https://www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/growth-management-topics/planning-for-housing/updating-gma-housing- elements/ Page 422 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-42 combined into a singular dataset for the city. This data set was joined with the city’s zoning designation to ensure zoning accuracy. In order to determine “developable” parcels the King County Technical Memo B. Land Capacity Supply for Buildable Lands Report process was followed similarly to the original 2021 process with changes since 2023. This process identified vacant parcels through querying for vacant as the existing land use (PRESUSE_DES) and underutilized parcels with an improvement value of $10,000 or less or existing use surface parking lot (see Technical B memo criteria). To quantify the developable land supply, the process: • Assembled necessary data for the entire jurisdiction, including parcel/assessor data, critical areas, and zoning. • Defined vacant and developable lands using a density and/or value threshold • Exclude lands or parcels unlikely to develop including critical areas, public use, capital infrastructure, and environmentally constrained • Applied vacant and redevelopable land definitions to the parcel data • Reviewed and refine the resulting developable land supply The outcome of this analysis is similar to the original 2021 analysis with reductions in available land due to new building permits. The city estimates 156 single-family units were built between 2019 and 2021 as well as 726 single-family units that were accounted for in the analysis. The baseline data is adjusted from the 2019 Buildable Lands Report with changes since 2019, including the Bridges annexation in 2024 of 13 vacant acres zoned as Residential 5 du/acre. Figure 47. Gross Residential Capacity by Zone Zone Gross developable land (acres) Infrastructure and Land Availability Deduction Net developable land (acres) Assumed Density (unit/ acre) Gross residential capacity (units) Residential Zoning Districts Residential Conservancy (RC)Vacant 715 45%393 400 0.25 100Under-developed 15 55%7 Residential 1 du/acre (R-1)Vacant 159 35%103 167 1 167Under-developed 115 45%63 Residential 5 du/acre (R-5)Vacant 855 35%555 592 4.4 2,603Under-developed 66 45%36 Residential 7 du/acre (R-7)Vacant 241 35%157 172 7 1,207Under-developed 29 45%16 Residential 10 du/acre (R-10)Vacant 22 30%15 15 10 153Under-developed 0 40%0 Residential 16 du/acre (R-16)Vacant 38 30%26 26 16 421Under-developed 0 40%0 Residential 20 du/acre (R-20)Vacant 61 28%44 49 21.1 1,044Under-developed 9 38%5 Non-Residential Zoning Districts Mixed Use Commercial (C-4) Vacant 1 28%1 1 20 12Under-developed 0 38%0 Under-developed 0 21%0 Downtown Urban Center (DUC) Vacant 10 28%8 11 100 1,123Under-developed 6 38%4 Page 423 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-43 Special Purpose Zoning Districts Residential Office District (RO) Vacant 0 28%0 1 18.15 14Under-developed 1 38%1 Under-developed 0 0 Residential Manufactured/ Mobile Home Community (R-MHC) Vacant 37 28%27 27 10 273Under-developed 0 38%0 Under-developed 0 0 Lakeland Hills South PUD Vacant 12 45%7 7 6 40Under-developed 0 45%0 Under-developed 0 0 After determining the gross developable land an infrastructure and development deduction factor was implemented. The market factor deductions were: • Vacant properties: 15% • Under-developed properties: 25% The public purpose and right of way factors for infrastructure were applied from the Urban Growth Report as part of the King County Buildable Analysis and did not differ for vacant and under-developed properties. For residential zones RC through R-7 both deductions were 20% and for R-10, 14% respectively. R-10 and mixed-use zones were 12.5% respectively. The deduction factors reduce the amount of buildable land to determine net developable land in acres. Finally, the total capacity is calculated by multiplying the net developable acreage by the assumed density level expressed in units per acre. The density is based on Auburn Municipal Code. Figure 48. Gross Development Capacity by Zone Zone Net developable land (acres)Assumed density Gross residential capacity (units) Existing units on developable land (units) Net capacity Residential Zoning Districts Units/Acre Residential Units Residential Conservancy (RC)745 0.25 100 75 25 Residential 1 du/acre (R-1)275 1 167 29 138 Residential 5 du/acre (R-5)1230 4.4 2,603 541 2,062 Residential 7 du/acre (R-7)294 7 1,207 146 1,061 Residential 10 du/acre (R-10)22 10 153 26 127 Residential 16 du/acre (R-16)0 16 421 -421 Residential 20 du/acre (R-20)79 21.1 1,044 118 926 Non-Residential Zoning Districts Mixed Use Commercial (C-4)1 20 12 -6 Downtown Urban Center (DUC)11 100 1,123 1 561 Special Purpose Zoning Districts 0 0 - Residential Office District (RO)1 18.15 14 -14 Residential Manufactured/Mobile Home Community (R-MHC)27 10 273 -273 Lakeland Hills South PUD 7 6 40 -40 Total 5,652 Page 424 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-44 Based on current zoning, density, deduction factors, and mixed-use considerations minus existing buildings the city has an estimated capacity for 5,652 additional units. Changes to the housing element in 2021 call for jurisdictions to consider the role of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in meeting housing needs. Changes in 2023 resulting from HB 1337 require jurisdictions to allow up to two ADUs per lot in urban growth areas, with the option for separate sale. Although capacity for ADUs has not typically been measured in a residential land capacity analysis, they are very likely to become important in meeting housing needs. Auburn implemented the optional methodology for potential developed ADUs on residential lots. The city estimates that there are about 14,000 developable residential lots with a participation factor of 10%. This adds another estimated 1,852 units. However, these units are not considered as part of the housing total needed to accommodate the 12,112 housing unit growth target. Figure 49. Potential ADU Capacity Lots available for ADUs Participation factor Potential ADU lots Average ADUs per lot Total ADU capacity 14,818 10%1,482 1.25 1,852 Step 2. Categorize zones by allowed housing types and density levels. This step identifies which housing types are allowed in each zone to facilitate relating each zone category to potential affordability levels. City planning staff implemented assigned zone categories recommended in the Department of Commerce guidance as low density, moderate density, high-density, and high density mixed use. Figure 50. Classifying Zones by Housing Types Allowed Residential Zoning Districts Typical housing types allowed Max density level allowed Assigned zone category Residential Conservancy (R-1)Detached single-family homes, ADUs 0.25 du/1 Low Density Residential 1 du/acre (R-1)Detached single-family homes, ADUs 1 du/1 Low Density Residential 5 du/acre (R-5)Detached single-family homes, ADUs 5 du/1 Low Density Residential 7 du/acre (R-7)Detached single-family homes, ADUs, duplex 7 du/1 Moderate Density Residential 10 du/acre (R-10)Detached single-family homes, duplex, townhomes 10 du/1 Moderate Density Residential 16 du/acre (R-16)Detached single-family homes, duplex, supportive housing, townhomes, multi-family 16 du/1 High Density Residential 20 du/acre (R-20)Duplex, supportive housing, townhomes, multi-family 20 du/1 High Density Light Commercial District (C-1)Live/work unit, work/live unit 20 du/1 Low Density Central Business District (C-2)Live/work unit, work/live unit, multi-family dwellings part of mixed use development 20 du/1 High Density Mixed- use Heavy Commercial District (C-3)Live/work unit, work/live unit, multi-family dwellings part of mixed use development 20 du/1 Low Density Mixed Use Commercial (C-4)Live/work unit, work/live unit, multi-family dwellings part of mixed use development 20 du/1 High Density Mixed- use Light Industrial District (M-1)Live/work unit, work/live unit 20 du/1 Low Density Residential Office District (RO)Duplex, home occupation live/work, work/live, multi- family stand alone, detached single-family 20 du/1 Moderate Density Residential Office District – Hospital (RO-H)Home occupation, live/work, work/live 25 du/1*Moderate Density Institutional Use (I)Home occupation, nursing home 20 du/1*Low Density Page 425 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-45 Residential Manufactured/Mobile Home Community (R-MHC)Manufactured/mobile homes 10 du/1 Moderate Density R-MHC Downtown Urban Center (DUC)Mixed-use, townhomes, multi-family 100 du/1 High Density Mixed- use Lakeland Hills South PUD Single family, condos, townhomes, apartments, accessory uses, home occupations, senior housing 6 du/1 Moderate Density Step 3. Relate zone categories to potential income levels and housing types served. This step relates zone categories to potential income levels and housing types served. This step assumes which income levels are to be served by new market-rate housing production in each zone category as well as new income-qualified affordable housing projects. A detailed market analysis was not completed but the moderate cost default assumed affordability level was implemented with adjustments based on the market analysis completed as part of the City’s Housing Action Plan. Figure 51. Relating Zone Category to Housing Types and Income Levels Zone Category Typical housing types allowed Lowest potential income level served Assumed Affordability level for capacity analysisMarket rate With subsidies and/or incentives Low Density Detached single family homes Higher Income (>120% AMI)Not typically feasible at scale Higher Income (>120% AMI) Moderate Density Townhomes, duplex, triplex, quadplex Moderate income (>80-120% AMI)Not typically feasible at scale Moderate income (>80-120% AMI) High-Density Townhomes, multi-family, walk-up apartments Low income (>50-80% AMI)Extremely low and very low income (0-50%)Low income (>50-80% AMI) High-Density Mixed Use Mixed-use multifamily, townhomes, multifamily Low income (>50-80% AMI)Extremely low and very low income (0-50%) Very Low income (>0-30% AMI) ADUs ADUs Low-Higher Income ( income (50-120% AMI)N/A Low to Higher Income (>50 to >120% AMI) Step 4. Summarize capacity by zone category. This step summarized the land capacity for housing unit production by zone category from the findings of Steps 1-4. The total housing capacity is estimated at 5,652 citywide with the majority of housing accounted for in the low- density zone category excluding ADUs. The total capacity including potential ADUs is 7,504 units. Page 426 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-46 Figure 52. Capacity by Zone Zone Residential Zoning Districts Unit Capacity Assigned Zone Category Capacity in zone category Residential Conservancy (R-C)25 Low Density 2,225 Residential 1 du/acre (R-1)138 Low Density Residential 5 du/acre (R-5)2,062 Low Density Light Commercial District (C-1)-Low Density Light Industrial District (M-1)-Low Density Heavy Commercial District (C-3)-Low Density Residential 7 du/acre (R-7)1,061 Moderate Density 1,241 Residential 10 du/acre (R-127 Moderate Density Central Business District (C-2)-Moderate Density Residential Office District (RO)14 Moderate Density Residential Office District - Hospital (RO-H)-Moderate Density Lakeland Hills South PUD 40 Moderate Density Residential Manufactured/Mobile Home Community (R-MHC)273 High Density R-MHC 273 Residential 16 du/acre (R-16)421 High Density 1,347 Residential 20 du/acre (R-20)926 High Density Mixed Use Commercial (C-4)6 High Density Mixed-Use 566 Downtown Urban Center (DUC)561 High Density Mixed-Use ADUs 1,852 Total Housing Capacity (no ADUs)5,652 Total (with ADUs)7,504 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are assumed to be primarily located in Moderate and Lower Density zones serving the 80-120% AMI income brackets. Step 5. Compare projected housing needs to capacity. The city’s growth target for housing units is 12,112 units citywide. Based on the residential land capacity analysis, the city can expect a capacity deficit of 4,608 total units with current zoning and density regulations. The most significant deficit is providing housing for the 0-30% (supportive housing) and >80-100% income level brackets. The deficit indicates a need to implement actions to increase capacity including density increases and zoning reallocation. In comparison, the 2021 Buildable Land Reports indicates a deficit of 2,800 units. Since this is a summarized high-level process with assumptions, it is likely the true deficit is somewhere between the 2,800 to 4,600 estimated units. However, the city should plan for accommodating the high-end of the deficit to ensure growth targets are met. Page 427 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-47 Figure 53. Capacity Compared to Housing Needs Income Level (% AMI)Projected housing need Zone categories serving these needs Aggregated housing needs Total capacity Capacity surplus or deficit 0-30% PSH 832 High-Density 2,389 1,852 (537)0-30% Other 1557 >30-50%330 High-Density, Mixed Use 962 1,913 951>50-80%632 >80-100%1153 Moderate Density 2,458 1,514 (944)>100-120%1305 >120%6303 Low-Density 6,303 2,225 (4,078) Total 12,112 7,504 (4,608) Summary The residential land capacity analysis is an estimate that projects future capacity for accommodating housing units based on current zoning and indicates there is a shortage in the land capacity availability for housing units needed. The city should plan for the highest capacity deficit to ensure adequate capacity to meet growth targets. The city needs to adjust zoning and density to account for an additional 4,608 units that the current capacity does not accommodate. Implementation actions to increase capacity and projected housing capacity changes are in the Housing and Land Use elements. Assumptions and Limitations The residential land capacity analysis process, as outlined by the Department of Commerce guidance, makes several assumptions regarding truly available developable land. The data is reliant upon accurate assessor data and estimated deduction factors for market, public purpose, and environmental considerations. The city assumes participation factors and markets, but these are variables outside of city control. The data used doesn’t directly translate into specific Market Factor values, housing types, or income levels served. Instead, the process helps define ranges and suggest appropriate assignments. The King County and Pierce County Urban Growth Capacity reports also highlight limitations in conducting land capacity analyses. Step 6. Implement actions to increase capacity to address deficiencies Draft Preferred Alternative Implementation To address the anticipated unit deficit of 4,600 Auburn has consolidated zoning districts, increased densities, and permitting additional housing types. The changes in zoning are based on the preferred alternative completed as part of the land use scenario process where centers and nodes are identified for increased density. The alternative also assumes citywide density increases to accommodate population, housing, and employment growth allocations at the TAZ level projected for 2044. The zoning changes are summarized below. Page 428 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-48 Figure 54. Draft Preferred Zoning Assumptions Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning Typical development Existing Density (du/acre) Proposed New Density (DU/acre)Assumed development RC RC Single-Unit Detached Houses (SUDs), Middle Housing, ADUs 0.25 1 Four units on 4ac R1 R1 Single-Unit Detached Houses, Middle Housing,1 4 Four units on 1ac R-5, R-7 R2 SUD, Townhouse, Duplex, Triplex, Fourplex, Stacked Flats, Courtyard Apartments, Cottage Housing - 4-6 units/lot, ADUs 5, 7 25 Four townhomes on 8,000 sf R-10, R-16 R3 R2 (No SF)+ Fiveplex, Sixplex, Stacked Flats, Apartment Buildings and Mixed-Use up to 20 units, ADUs 10, 16 30 Ten units on 14,500 sf R-20 R4 R3 + Apartment Buildings and Mixed-Use over 20 units, ADUs 20 50 100-unit complex on two acres N/A R-NM R4 and C1 Uses + Mixed-Use (horizontal or vertical) Emphasis N/A 30 Same as R4 but assumes 50% of parcels are non- residential Based on zoning data provided by the city that was provided by the city and understanding of the zoning shifts, particularly the creation of the new Neighborhood Mixed Use and DUC zoning designations, zoning changes were recorded. In summary: • R-1 remains unchanged • R-5 and R-7 become R-2 and 72 acres of R-7 is shifted to R-NM • R-10 and R-16 become R-3 • R-20 shifts one acre to R-NM • R-NM receives zone shifts from R-2, R-20, and Unclassified • C-1 shifts 13 acres to DUC C-1 • C-2 shifts 8 acres to DUC C-2 • DUC is shifted into DUC-55, -75, and -125, and Flex Residential • M-1 shifts 39 acres to DUC M-1 and 2 acres to DUC-75 In addition to the zoning shifts, densities were substantially increased for the zoning districts. With these adjustments the city’s new capacity is estimated to accommodate 45,951 new housing units. Page 429 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-49 Figure 55. Adjusted Residential Capacity by Zone Residential & Mixed-Use Zoning Districts Zone category Developable Acres Net zoning changes (acres) Assumed Density - DU/ Acres Residential Capacity (units)Net New (Units) King County Residential Conservancy (RC)Low Density 745 0 1 745 - R-1 Residential Low Density 275 0 4 1,101 - R2 – Residential Low Moderate Density 294 1158 25 35,799 28,441 R3 – Residential Moderate Moderate Density 0 22 30 660 660 R4 – Residential High High Density 79 -1 50 3,890 -50 Neighborhood Mixed-Use (R-NM)High Density Mixed-Use 0 89 30 2,670 2,670 Manufacture Home/Community (R-MHC)Low Density 27 0 10 273 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 125 High Density Mixed-Use 0 5 100 125 500 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 75 High Density Mixed-Use 0 5 95 119 475 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 55 High Density Mixed-Use 0 4 90 90 360 Total 1,420 1,285 -45,561 33,146 DUC Neighborhood Residential High Density Mixed-Use 0 3 30 90 90 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 55 0 4 90 90 High Density Mixed-Use Total 1,420 1,285 -45,561 33,146 DUC Neighborhood Residential 0 3 30 90 High Density Mixed-Use Pierce County R2 – Residential Low Moderate Density 20 20 25 509 509 Total 20 20 -509 509 Total New (2044) Housing Capacity 46,070 33,655 This analysis finds that there is sufficient residential zoned capacity in the Draft Preferred Alternative zoning map and related updates to accommodate the city’s growth target of 12,112. Page 430 of 435 Imagine Auburn | Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-50 Housing Capacity by Income Band In addition to meeting the residential and employment capacity targets through zoning and policy decisions, the city meets the aggregate King and Pierce County housing needs for income level groups. The only exception is the >120% Average Median Income (AMI) category, which includes primarily low-density housing in the R-1 and RC zones. However, this AMI category is not required to be met under HB 1220 requirements as high-income earners are represented in this group and can also purchase moderate density housing options as well. In Pierce County, the City’s primary residential zone is R-2 Residential Moderate which for purposes of this capacity analysis aligns with the 80-120% AMI range. This zone can adequately accommodate the total housing need of 112, however AMI below 80% is not accounted for in this analysis. As indicated earlier, the housing target for the Pierce County portion of Auburn is only 112 housing units and as a result the city does not intend to rezone small areas of land in order to satisfy AMI requirements since actual development is unpredictable. The R-2 Residential Moderate zone can accommodate middle housing, single unit detached housing, and ADUs that can realistically serve a range of incomes, and the city will continue to provide flexibility in the development types allowed in this part of the city to best accommodate the full range of AMI levels. An estimated 1,852 new Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are accounted for prior to rezoning, as these developments are currently allowed in various zones are expected to occur naturally over the next 20-years. In total, 10% of new ADUs are planned for in the 50-80% AMI range, 80% in the 80-120% AMI range, and 10% in the greater than 120% AMI range. The high-density and moderate-density land uses where ADUs are primarily expected are found in throughout the city. Figure 56. Adjusted Residential Capacity by Affordability Level Income Level (% AMI)Zone categories servicing these needs Aggregated housing needs Capacity prior to zoning adjustment Rezoning capacity adjustments Adjusted capacity surplus or deficit King County 0-30% PSH High Density-Mixed Use 2,389 566 3,004 6150-30% Other >30-50%High-Density, ADU 962 1,532 4,823 3,861>50-80% >80-100%Moderate Density, ADU 2,458 5,058 35,889 33,431>100-120% >120%Low-Density, ADU 6,303 348 1,846 (4,457) Pierce County >80-100%Moderate Density, ADU 112 100 509 397 Aggregated Total -12,112 7,504 46,070 33,958 Page 431 of 435 City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment Update | HNA-51 Employment Capacity The adjusted employment development capacity by zone is calculated by the square footage conversion from acres and then divided by the employment densities determined through the King County Buildable Lands Report process in 2021. Downtown mixed-uses expect a distribution of 75% residential and 25% commercial, whereas the Neighborhood Mixed Use expects a 50-50% split for mixed uses laterally and horizontally. The adjusted employment estimates accommodating 20,701 additional jobs at max buildable capacity. The city’s employment target is 19,520 and these adjustments meet the growth target. Figure 57. Adjusted Employment Capacity by Zone Zone Non-Residential Zoning Districts Zoning changes (developable acres)Net zoning changes (acres)Assumed density Max Buildable Area Residential capacity adjustment (units) Jobs Light Commercial (C-1)32 -13 845,391 2,254 Heavy Commercial District (C-2)8 -8 -- Auburn Gateway District 0 0 653,400 653 Light Industrial (M-1)132 -41 3,945,338 3,945 Heavy Industrial (M-2)81 -9 3,122,925 3,123 Airport Zone 5 0 233,038 233 Mixed-Use Districts Zoning changes (developable acres)Net zoning changes (acres)Max Buildable Area Jobs Downtown Urban Center 11 -11 -- DUC Downtown Urban Center - 125 0 5 163,350 408 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 75 0 5 163,350 408 DUC Downtown Urban Center - 55 0 4 130,680 327 DUC Neighborhood Residential 0 3 98,010 245 DUC Health and Wellness - 125 0 2 87,120 218 DUC C-1 0 13 566,280 1,510 DUC C-2 0 12 522,720 1,394 DUC M-1 0 39 1,698,840 1,699 Neighborhood Mixed-Use (RNM)0 89 1,938,420 5,169 Total Jobs Capacity 21,587 Page 432 of 435 IMAGINE AUBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 Page 433 of 435 MUCKLESHOOT CASINO DOWNTOWN T167 T167 T18 T18 ORD: 5971 ORD: 6691 ORD: 6241 ORD: 6002 ORD: 6176 ORD: 6894 ORD: 6807 ORD: 6430 ORD: 6024 6026 ORD: 6894 ORD: 6894 ORD: 6691 ORD: 3803 ORD: 6894 ORD: 6894 ORD: 4689 ORD: 4410 ORD: 6002 ORD: 4595 5659 ORD: 6691 ORD: 6894 ORD: 6894 ORD: 6002 ORD: 4300 5440 ORD: 6691 Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Map ID: 1016 Printed On: 4/10/2024 Draft 2024 City of Auburn Zoning Map 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 MILES ¬«4 ¬«2 ¬«3¬«3 ¬«3 ¬«3¬«1 ¬«1 ¬«4 ¬«6¬«6 ¬«5 ¬«2 Airport Operations Zone 6 Sideline Safety Zone 5 Outer Safety Zone 4 Inner Turning Zone 3 Inner Safety Zone 2 Runway Overlay Zone 1 Airport Overlays West Hill Overlay (Ordinance: 6122) Bridges Overlay (Ordinance: 6922) Lea Hill Overlay (Ordinance: 5346 & 6121) Urban Separators Overlay Potential Annexation Areas Downtown Urban Center Special Zoning Ordinances & Resolution UNCLASSIFIED USE DISTRICT TERRACE VIEW DISTRICT RF - Residential-Flex RC RESIDENTIAL CONSERVANCY R-NM NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED-USE R-MHC RESIDENTIAL MANUFACTURED/MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY R4 - Residential High R3 - Residential Moderate R2 - Residential Low R1 RESIDENTIAL 1 DU/ ACRE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT P-1 PUBLIC USE OS - OPEN SPACE M-2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL M-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL Lakeland Hills PUD I - INSTITUTIONAL DUC Neighborhood Residential District DUC Light Industrial District DUC Health and Wellness District DUC Flex-Residential District DUC Downtown Urban Center - 55 District DUC Downtown Urban Center - 75 District DUC Downtown Urban Center - 125 District C-2 HEAVY COMMERCIAL C-1 LIGHT COMMERCIAL C-AG - AUBURN GATEWAY LF - Airport Landing Field L A K E T A P P S L A K E T A P P S DOWNTOWN ORD: 6430 ORD: 6894 ORD: 6894 ORD: 6894 ¬«4 ¬«2 Downtown Urban Center Downtown Urban Center Zoning DUC Light Commercial District DUC Heavy Commercial District Page 434 of 435 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Transportation Element Planning Commission Action Date: July 9, 2024 Department: Community Development Attachments: No Attachments Av ailable Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Please see the Public Hearing for the Transportation Element to review the full proposed Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff:Steiner Meeting Date:July 16, 2024 Item Number: Page 435 of 435