# General plan documents — tacoma-washington Assembled by OpenPublica from the documents it serves for this government. Each section below is a separate publication by the government; page anchors (``) refer to pages of that section's own source PDF, linked in its heading. **Contains 5 documents.** OpenPublica has pinned these slots for this government: area_element_downtown, circulation, community_facilities, conservation, container_port, economic_development, general_plan_engagement_and_administration, general_plan_introduction, historic_preservation, housing, land_use, open_space, urban_design. That is what we have looked for, not a statement that the government publishes nothing else — a plan element absent here may simply not have been reviewed yet. Last reviewed 2026-09-06. --- ## Land Use — One Tacoma Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 2: Growth Strategy (adopted June 24, 2025) - Source: https://cms.tacoma.gov/Planning/Comprehensive%20Plan/Tacoma%20Comp%20Plan%2002_GS.pdf - Pages: 126 - Covers: land_use # 02 Growth Strategy **GROWTH STRATEGY GOALS** * **Goal GS-1** Development, growth, and infrastructure investments support Tacoma’s vision for equitable, walkable, connected, and complete communities. * **Goal GS-2** Neighborhoods across the city include a mix of housing types and integrated commercial activity. * **Goal GS-3** The growth strategy and coordinated land use and transportation planning advance the goals of Tacoma’s Climate Action Plan. * **Goal GS-4** Preserve and protect natural systems and open space corridors to ensure a healthy and sustainable environment and to provide opportunities for Tacomans to experience nature close to home. * **Goal GS-5** Tacoma's growth is focused in a citywide network of transit-connected centers that anchor 15-minute neighborhoods providing nodes of activity and access to housing, employment, and services. * **Goal GS-6** Centers serve as the anchors of complete neighborhoods that include concentrations of housing alongside institutions, gathering places, cultural amenities, and green spaces. * **Goal GS-7** Downtown is Tacoma’s largest center with the highest concentrations of housing and employment, transit access, thriving local businesses, and access to arts and culture. * **Goal GS-8** The Tacoma Mall Regional Growth Center thrives as a hub of employment, housing, retail, and public services. * **Goal GS-9** Crossroads Centers are successful places that serve the needs of surrounding neighborhoods and beyond. They are transit-oriented and contain high concentrations of employment, institutions, commercial and community services, and a wide range of housing options. * **Goal GS-10** Neighborhood Centers are thriving activity hubs that serve the daily needs of residents, employees, and surrounding neighborhoods. * **Goal GS-11** Tacoma’s employment centers grow and thrive. * **Goal GS-12** Transit-oriented communities are distributed across Tacoma, supported through equitable transit-oriented development, high quality station areas that are accessible and safe, and multi-modal integration. * **Goal GS-13** Transportation planning and investments are coordinated with the Future Land Use Map and Frequent Transit Network Vision Map. * **Goal GS-14** Annex areas within Tacoma's Urban Growth Area when conditions are appropriate. # Growth Strategy ## 2.1 Introductory Context ### What is this chapter about? The One Tacoma vision is that every Tacoma resident is a safe and short walk, roll, bus, train, or bike ride away from amenities, such as groceries, schools, parks, and healthcare. The goals and policies in this element convey the City’s intent to: * Establish Tacoma as a 15-minute city by fostering a network of centers, equitably distributed across the city, connected along transit-oriented corridors, increasing access to community services and businesses and creating sustainable, climate resilient, complete, healthy, and connected neighborhoods. * Create a vibrant, walkable Tacoma ensuring safe and convenient access to pedestrian, transit, biking, and active transportation networks through a commitment to ongoing improvements to Tacoma’s streets and neighborhoods. * Improve public health and daily access to nature by enhancing Tacoma’s public realm, integrating nature into the city and linking people, places, and wildlife through active transportation facilities, green infrastructure investments, and habitat connections. * Describe the overall development pattern to inform and guide design, development, and future investments. * Define the City’s strategy to accommodate population, housing, and employment growth * Ensure that Tacoma’s development pattern supports a sustainable and resilient future, including a reduction in GHG from transportation and the built environment. * Support growth in housing that increases supply, expands choice, and meets Tacoma’s affordability goals. ### Why is this important? Tacoma’s identity now and in the future is significantly shaped by the design and physical structure of the city and its neighborhoods. How people live and get around is partly determined by the location of services and other destinations and the arrangement and design of buildings, streets and other public spaces. Together these design characteristics help determine whether: (1) a community is walkable and **Book I: Core Policy Elements** 1 Introduction and Vision 2 Growth Strategy 3 Complete Neighborhoods 4 Environment and Watershed Health 5 Housing 6 Transportation 7 Economic Development 8 Parks and Recreation 9 Public Facilities and Services 10 Historic Preservation 11 Engagement and Administration **Contents** 2.1 Introductory Context 2.2 Goals and Policies 2.3 Priority Actions accessible, (2) children have safe places to play, (3) people have places to gather, and (4) businesses are successful and easy to access. Where housing and services are built, where street networks are connected, and how all of this is designed provides a key opportunity to enable people to meet more of their daily needs locally. When residential and commercial areas are better linked, neighborhoods are strengthened, and GHG emissions are reduced. These connections can also improve equitable access to services citywide and support healthy, active lifestyles for community members. This chapter includes policies that support enhancing centers across the city as anchors to complete neighborhoods, providing Tacomans with convenient access to local services. ## What we heard Throughout One Tacoma visioning engagement, the community expressed its overwhelming support for the 15-minute neighborhood concept. Tacomans are aligned with a growth strategy that emphasizes elements such as walkability in neighborhoods, ability to access daily needs without a car, and other factors that influence mobility needs. Engagement efforts revealed that across Tacoma, community members want to be able to easily access jobs, schools, and daily needs and activities within a safe walk, roll, bike, or bus ride. Residents of Northeast Tacoma, Central Tacoma, and South Tacoma shared concerns about the lack of healthy foods, grocery stores, and other daily essentials nearby. They also noted a lack of adequate infrastructure and safety for active transportation, increasing their reliance on cars to access daily needs. Tacomans across the city expressed desire for greater accessibility within their own neighborhoods to their daily essentials, like green and open spaces, parks of all sizes, and community gardens. ## How does this chapter address key themes? This chapter describes the overall blueprint for Tacoma’s growth and development to 2050. The goals and policies reflect the City’s recognition that land use patterns play a significant role in where housing, jobs, and daily essentials are located, and thus, how Tacomans access their daily needs. Laying this pattern determines where housing, jobs, and services are located and how they are connected. **A pattern of land use that clusters destinations in equitably distributed, walkable centers across the city, and along transit-oriented corridors, creates places where people can meet their daily needs within their own neighborhoods and contributes to the ability of each Tacoman to reach their full potential.** This pattern of development also reduces GHG emissions by expanding commute choices, making access by transit, walking, wheelchair, and bicycle more practical, and reducing the overall need for vehicle trips. This pattern supports a more efficient delivery of public services and use of public infrastructure and helps preserve space for parks, open space, green infrastructure, and the community and environmental health benefits they provide. Complete, walkable neighborhoods are an effective way to reduce GHG emissions and improve energy efficiency and promote sustainability. (**Opportunity and Sustainability**) <
> “ FOOD DESERTS ARE BECOMING REALLY NOTICEABLE. [...] THE LACK OF GROCERY STORE COMPETITION IN TACOMA GIVES OFF AN ILLUSION THAT OUR FOOD NEEDS ARE BEING TAKEN CARE OF. BUT WHEN EACH STORE HAS THE EXACT SAME DECREASING VARIETY OF GOODS, THAT'S EFFECTIVELY THE SAME EFFECT.” IDEAS WALL COMMENT <
> OPPORTUNITY SUSTAINABILITY PUBLIC HEALTH EQUITY SAFETY Land use patterns also affect public health. Effective land use policies can enhance social determinants of health (factors of the environment in which you were born, lived, or live) by increasing access to medical care, mitigating the impacts from sources of pollution, and helping to address inequities related to environmental justice. The addition of parks and other green spaces can improve air quality and mitigate the effects of heat. When land use patterns include spaces for people to play, learn, connect, and belong, they can help meet diverse needs. The presence of these spaces can ensure the well-being and resilience of people across the age spectrum and in many communities. Additionally, growth strategies that support sidewalk, trail, and other active transportation infrastructure can create safe, walkable, and bikeable access to daily essentials, facilitating active and healthy lifestyles. **(Public Health)** Finally, the policies in this chapter present opportunities to cultivate unique neighborhood identities through encouraging a vibrant public realm, enabling arts and cultural experiences, and supporting anchor institutions. In turn, these can improve the frequency of social exchange and overall social cohesion. By striking the right balance between consistent land use policies city-wide and the unique assets and opportunities presented by establishing centers as compact and accessible destinations, these policies can advance equity and improve community safety and cohesion. **(Equity and Community Safety)** # What are some baseline conditions and opportunities? Tacoma’s 2023 population is estimated to be 222,906 people. The City of Tacoma includes approximately 31,480 acres of land. Exhibit 3 shows the current distribution of land uses in Tacoma, based on acreage. Single family homes remain the largest land use in the city, at 40% of all acreage. Tacoma’s centers are hubs of commercial activity, multidwelling housing development, and quality public amenities such as parks, plazas, recreation facilities, and entertainment venues. A critical complement to growth and to achieving the 15-minute city vision is ensuring access to green space, clean air, public art, and quality infrastructure. A balance of land uses is needed across the community to ensure that all Tacomans enjoy a high quality of life, including dedicated parks and open space. Today, parks and open space comprise 10% of Tacoma’s acreage. ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy Exhibit 3. Existing Land Use by Acreage, 2024 <
> *Sources: Pierce County Assessor, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024* Tacoma's land use policy framework categorizes urban areas into specific types to guide development and growth effectively. These centers are designed to be compact, walkable, and connected by public transit and active transportation networks. TYPES OF CENTERS IN TACOMA Regional Growth Centers **Downtown Tacoma.** Serves as the city's central business district, offering a mix of commercial, residential, and cultural amenities. **Tacoma Mall Neighborhood.** A commercial hub undergoing transformation to include more residential and mixed-use developments. Mixed-Use Centers These are further divided into: **Neighborhood Centers.** Smaller hubs that provide local services and amenities. Examples include: * Proctor * Lincoln * 6th Ave * South Tacoma Way * McKinley * Narrows **Crossroads Centers.** Larger than Neighborhood Centers, they serve broader areas and are typically located at major intersections. Examples include: * James Center * Westgate * Tacoma Central * Upper Portland * Lower Portland * Upper Pacific * Lower Pacific *** “ I LIVE IN HILLTOP, WHERE THERE ARE VERY FEW BUSINESSES THAT ARE CLOSE ENOUGH TO WALK TO. THE CITY SHOULD CHANGE ZONING TO ALLOW MORE SMALL BUSINESSES TO BE LOCATED NEAR WHERE PEOPLE LIVE.” -IDEAS WALL COMMENT Each center type is designed to focus growth and development, ensuring that residents have access to essential services, employment opportunities, and recreational spaces within a convenient distance. ### Manufacturing Industrial Centers Tacoma's Manufacturing Industrial Centers (MICs) are designated areas that concentrate manufacturing, industrial, and related activities, serving as pivotal areas for economic development and employment. Tacoma's MICs are integral to the city's economy and land use system, providing concentrated areas for industrial growth and employment opportunities. These centers are intended to: **Preserve Industrial Land.** Ensuring that essential industrial operations have dedicated spaces to operate and expand. **Strengthen Existing Businesses.** Supporting the growth and sustainability of current industrial enterprises. **Expand Opportunities.** Attracting new manufacturing, industrial, and maritime businesses to the South Sound region. The centers are strategically located to leverage existing infrastructure, such as transportation networks and proximity to the Port of Tacoma, facilitating efficient operations and contributing to the overall economic vitality of the region. ### PORT OF TACOMA MIC This center encompasses the Port of Tacoma, a significant hub for maritime and industrial activities. It includes facilities for warehousing, transloading, manufacturing, and fabrication, all situated close to marine cargo terminals. The Port of Tacoma handles a diverse range of cargo, including containerized goods, automobiles, and bulk commodities, contributing substantially to the regional economy. ### SOUTH TACOMA MIC Covering approximately 650 acres, Nalley Valley is zoned for industrial uses and is connected to the port industrial area by roadways and rail. The area hosts a variety of businesses, including food processing, metalworking, painting and coating, plastics manufacturing, auto sales, vehicle maintenance and repair, retail, and commercial enterprises associated with rail maintenance and operations. ### Transit-Oriented Development Areas These areas represent areas within walking distance of high frequency transit and the station areas. Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) areas are envisioned to be the focus for higher density housing and access to services and employment. ### Land Use Assets and Hazards Tacoma's environmental assets are beloved by the community and include rivers, lakes, streams, and associated riparian uplands; floodplains; riparian corridors; wetlands and buffers; groundwater; trees and urban forests; bays, estuaries, and marshes; shorelines; open space lands; biodiversity areas and corridors; and priority species (Exhibit 4). These assets provide an array of ecologically, economically, aesthetically, and culturally valuable ecosystem services that Tacomans directly and indirectly experience daily. The maintenance, preservation, and protection of Tacoma's environmental assets are critical for the health and livelihoods of the communities within Tacoma. <
> Tacoma's recent housing production reflects the City's growth strategy of promoting density, particularly in areas that are high-opportunity and transit-oriented. Since 2017, 80% of new housing units are in multidwelling developments, 40% are located Downtown, and 30% are located within the city's other mixed-use centers. Exhibit 4. Environmental Assets <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space Corridors) 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Biodiversity Areas and Corridor), 2024; USDA Forest Service (Tree Canopy Coverage), 2021; Pierce County (Regulated Floodplain), 2017; Seva Workshop, 2024 Tacoma's environmental hazards include landslides, erosion, flooding, sea level rise, and liquefaction (Exhibit 5). These hazards have the potential to threaten the health and safety of communities as well as damage property. They can lead to disruptions to social and economic services. Planning for land use with an understanding of Tacoma's environmental hazards is important for protecting communities and property and limiting the damages and disruptions they may cause. Exhibit 5. Environmental Hazards <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 # Equity Outcomes For the equity assessment that informed this Plan, we looked at equity outcomes that are cross-cutting across chapters and most relevant to the 2050 Comprehensive Plan vision. A baseline analysis of these outcomes helped set direction for policy and prioritize communities and areas for investment. Some outcomes from this analysis related to land use are presented below. The information below highlights differences in race and geography on a few selected priority equity outcomes. Using the Targeted universalism framework, we seek to understand subgroup differences from the overall group outcome. Each table includes a column where the subgroup outcome is compared to the overall Tacoma goal or what would be expected for that subgroup given an equitable distribution. The red and blue color coding varies by the directionality of the outcome (sometimes larger numbers are the desired outcome, sometimes smaller numbers are desired). This disaggregation and comparison to the overall outcome by subgroup is essential for a targeted universalism approach and for understanding progress on equity goals. However, it does create the potential for in- and out-group or exclusionary thinking when City services are for all Tacoma residents. Subgroups are highlighted here to indicate where additional emphasis may be warranted based on differences in outcomes. Policy solutions respond to the nuance of targeting groups with specific needs, without excluding others. Further, this is a snapshot in time that reflects continuously shifting geographic and demographic patterns. The locations of residents are not necessarily they want to be, but are where they can afford to live at this moment in time. Finally, we must acknowledge the limitations and biases that are inherent in relying on public data sets such as these. Community engagement and voice was essential to validate, refine, and address the disparities shown here. Where available, data is presented by geographic subgroups and race/ethnicity subgroups. Depending on the source, geographic subgroups are based by neighborhoods or Council Districts (Exhibit 6). Of course, no single metric can tell the complete picture in a complex and dynamic system like a city. Equity outcomes often need to be considered in both their relevant context and with other outcomes in order to develop the most effective policies. We also know that while the City does have significant influence, policies and programs alone are not sufficient to influence these outcomes. Exhibit 6. Tacoma Neighborhood Council Districts <
> Source: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy ## Land Use and Air Quality Particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5) can be inhaled and cause lung damage. It also affects visibility and quality of life as the primary contributor to haze. In 2024 the Environmental Protection Agency lowered the level of the health-based annual PM2.5 standard to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter (from 12.0). While PM2.5 is not the only air pollutant, we include it as an equity priority for the next planning period because of the recent prevalence of wildfires, which emit smoke that contains PM2.5. The neighborhoods with highest rates of PM2.5 relative to the city average are the East Side and North East. However, on average, all neighborhoods have rates considered safe under the new standard (Exhibit 7). **Exhibit 7. PM2.5 by Neighborhood** | NEIGHBORHOOD | AIR QUALITY (PM2.5) | DIFFERENCE FROM CITY-WIDE AVERAGE | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Central | 8.1 | 0.01 | | Eastside | 8.2 | 0.11 | | New Tacoma | 8.2 | 0.09 | | North East | 8.2 | 0.14 | | North End | 8.0 | (0.05) | | South End | 8.1 | 0.04 | | South Tacoma | 8.0 | (0.05) | | West End | 7.9 | (0.20) | | **Tacoma** | **8.1** | | *Sources: City of Tacoma, Equity Index 2020, 2022 by block group; Environmental Protection Agency EJScreen* ## Land Use and Urban Heat In city environments, more heat from the sun is absorbed and retained by impervious surfaces. This can intensify temperatures locally, creating health impacts and affecting neighborhood livability. In 2018, a campaign with Portland State University and the City of Tacoma was conducted to measure the air temperature across Tacoma during a heat wave in July. The most extreme temperatures were in the afternoon (3 PM). Another important attribute of the Urban Heat Island Effect is the duration of heat. In the actual measured morning (6 AM) temperatures, it is shown that heat islands retains heat from the day before. Central, Eastside, South End, and South Tacoma have more heat than the other parts of the city (Exhibit 8; Exhibit 9). Excessive urban heat events will have a greater impact over the next century as climate change drives heat waves to become more frequent and hotter. Exhibit 8. Urban Heat Island Index by Neighborhood | NEIGHBORHOOD | URBAN HEAT INDEX | DIFFERENCE FROM CITY-WIDE AVERAGE | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Central | 86.9 | 0.52 | | Eastside | 87.2 | 0.81 | | New Tacoma | 86.0 | (0.35) | | North East | 85.8 | (0.59) | | North End | 85.9 | (0.53) | | South End | 86.8 | 0.38 | | South Tacoma | 86.6 | 0.18 | | West End | 85.5 | (0.87) | | **Tacoma** | **86.4** | | *Sources: City of Tacoma, Equity Index 2020, 2022 by block group; Earth Economics* FEWER GREEN SPACES AND MORE IMPERVIOUS SURFACES LIKE ROADS, PARKING LOTS, AND BUILDINGS, ETC. ABSORB AND RETAIN HEAT FROM THE SUN TO CREATE A HEAT ISLAND. BECAUSE OF BUILT INFRASTRUCTURE, MANY URBAN AREAS EXPERIENCE HIGHER TEMPERATURES COMPARED TO THEIR RURAL SURROUNDINGS. THIS DIFFERENCE IN TEMPERATURE IS WHAT DEFINES AN URBAN HEAT ISLAND. ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy Exhibit 9. Urban Heat Islands <
> Urban Heat Islands Average of evening and afternoon temperature Higher Lower Tacoma City Limits Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 # Land Use and Tree Canopy Recent studies have shown that heat island effects are greater, imperviousness is higher, and tree cover lower in areas that were formerly redlined (class D). Urban forestry, tree cover, and building and street design are all key tools to mitigate urban heat, and are important parts of creating a sustainable, healthy, and vibrant city (Exhibit 10). **Exhibit 10. Tree Canopy** <
> STUDIES SHOW THAT REDLINING IS MORE STRONGLY ASSOCIATED WITH MEASURES OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND HARD INFRASTRUCTURE, WITH IMPACTS ON TEMPERATURE, TREE COVER, AND AIR QUALITY. HOWEVER, POLICIES TO REPAIR HARM BY THESE HISTORICAL POLICIES AND REACH PEOPLE MOST IN NEED SHOULD GO BEYOND JUST PREVIOUSLY REDLINED AREAS. POLICIES SHOULD BE BASED ON CURRENT MEASURES OF HOUSING INSTABILITY AND CONSIDER THE FULL SPECTRUM OF POLICIES AND PRACTICES THAT HAVE EXCLUDED PEOPLE FROM HOUSING AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES. SEE THE HOUSING ELEMENT FOR MORE INFORMATION. *Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024* # Walkable Neighborhoods Ensuring equitable distribution of public services and amenities is a focus for the Comprehensive Plan update. The Comprehensive Plan’s overarching vision is for a city in which daily essentials are not more than 15 minutes away from the average resident by foot, public transportation, or non-motorized transportation. There are many ways this concept can be measured and disaggregated, such as by transportation method or varying sets of amenities for example. The City of Tacoma produced an analysis in 2021 dubbed the 20-minute neighborhood that is focused on walking access, and integrates several walkability inputs, including distance to schools, parks, trails, commercial businesses, and transit stops. Exhibit 11 describes the results by neighborhood. The percent of each neighborhood area classified as highly walkable varies by 30% points in either direction. Central Tacoma is the most walkable, with nearly one-third of the total area classified as highly walkable. The North East is the least walkable area, with only 2% of the area classified as highly walkable. Overall, 17% of Tacoma’s total land area is considered highly walkable by this measure. Areas such as South Tacoma and the West End also lag the city-wide average for walkability. Exhibit 11. Walkability Scores by Neighborhood | NEIGHBORHOOD | LOW (SCORE OF 1-2) | MEDIUM (SCORE OF 3-9) | HIGH (SCORE OF 10AND) | HIGH WALKABILITY DIFFERENCE FROM CITY-WIDE AVERAGE | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Central | 4% | 64% | 32% | 15% | | Eastside | 5% | 72% | 23% | 6% | | New Tacoma | 38% | 27% | 18% | 1% | | North East | 22% | 69% | 2% | -15% | | North End | 0% | 75% | 24% | 7% | | South End | 1% | 78% | 21% | 4% | | South Tacoma | 10% | 76% | 12% | -5% | | West End | 18% | 69% | 11% | -6% | | **Tacoma** | **14%** | **65%** | **17%** | | *Source: City of Tacoma, 2022.* # Housing Tacoma is working to undo the effects of years of exclusionary housing policy, dispossession, and displacement. At the same time, it is facing very high housing market pressure. In alignment with this work, the Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Plan seek to create more equity on the following measures: * First-time buyers of single dwelling structures * Renter-occupied housing cost burden greater than 50% * Percent of residents living in the same house one year ago This work is articulated in land use policies and in more detail in the Housing chapter of this plan, Anti-Displacement Strategy, Affordable Housing Action Strategy, and Home in Tacoma initiatives. # Life Expectancy at Birth Life expectancy is an overall measure of health that can be affected by a multitude of factors – personal, social, and environmental. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control produces tract-level estimates of life expectancy for births between 2010 and 2015. Their model suggests a nearly 8-year range in life expectancy within Tacoma based on neighborhood as described in the following table (Exhibit 12). Land use policies in this chapter and across other elements articulate a cross-sector framework for more equitable outcomes for life expectancy that result in less variation by neighborhood. **Exhibit 12. Life Expectancy at Birth by Neighborhood** | NEIGHBORHOOD | LIFE EXPECTANCY | DIFFERENCE FROM CITY-WIDE AVERAGE | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Central | 76.8 | (0.52) | | Eastside | 75.8 | (1.51) | | New Tacoma | 75.2 | (2.04) | | North East | 82.6 | 5.30 | | North End | 80.3 | 3.03 | | South End | 75.1 | (2.15) | | South Tacoma | 74.7 | (2.57) | | West End | 79.8 | 2.54 | | **Tacoma** | **77.3** | | *Source: CDC, U.S. Small-Area Life Expectancy Estimates Project (USALEEP), 2010-2015 by tract* Access to Healthy Food Access to healthy food is a key component of health equity. City policies, especially on land use, can create the conditions for healthy food stores and temporary food markets to open in neighborhoods, as well as support mobile food options, food affordability, and food distribution. The Tacoma Equity Index uses the modified Retail Food Environment Index (mRFEI) to measure access to healthy food. The mRFEI is the percentage of all food retailers in an area that are considered healthy. This measure captures areas with no food options (“food deserts”; correspond to a score of zero) as well as areas that have food outlets that are dominated by large relative amounts of unhealthy snack foods (“food swamps”; correspond to lower scores). Tacoma overall has an mRFEI score of 0.7 (Exhibit 13). The South End and New Tacoma stand out as areas with relatively healthy food options. The North East, South Tacoma, and West End have relatively unhealthy options. Exhibit 13. Access to Healthy Food by Neighborhood | NEIGHBORHOOD | HEALTHY FOOD AVAILABILITY | DIFFERENCE FROM CITY-WIDE AVERAGE | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Central | 0.9 | 0.20 | | Eastside | 0.5 | (0.16) | | New Tacoma | 1.3 | 0.63 | | North East | 0.1 | (0.62) | | North End | 0.5 | (0.23) | | South End | 1.4 | 0.67 | | South Tacoma | 0.3 | (0.35) | | West End | 0.3 | (0.38) | | **Tacoma** | **0.7** | | *Sources: City of Tacoma, Equity Index 2022 by block group; ESRI Business Analyst* The distribution of grocery stores by neighborhood largely reflects similar patterns as the mRFEI. However, contrasting figures for South Tacoma and West End suggest that while there are relatively more food outlets available, they are not necessarily healthy options. More equitable distribution of healthy food access would result in less variation in this index across the city. Tacoma’s future vision is also for daily essentials, including grocery, to be within a 15-minute walk of all residences. In the North East, where a single grocery serves many people in a large area, many residents are likely to drive to a neighboring city or to other parts of Tacoma for grocery access. # Good and Promising Job Availability Over 100,000 jobs are located in Tacoma. Health care, retail, government, and administration are some of the sectors that comprise the largest shares of Tacoma-based jobs. The Brookings Institute *Opportunity Industries* report examined industries for their ability to provide pathways and quality employment to workers without college degrees. They also produced metropolitan area level estimates by industry about the availability of good and promising jobs according to the following definitions: * **Good jobs** provide stable employment, middle-class wages, and benefits. * **Promising jobs** are entry-level positions from which most workers can reach a good job within 10 years. * **High-skill jobs** are good and promising jobs held by workers with a bachelor's degree. The bachelor’s degree represents a barrier to entry. * **Other jobs** do not provide decent pay, benefits, or pathways to good jobs. About 17% of jobs located in Tacoma are considered good or promising by the Brookings Institute definition (Exhibit 14). Another 24% are high-skill good or promising jobs. The North East has the highest share of good jobs, driven largely by the number of logistics jobs located there. Many Tacomans have work locations outside of the city, but may choose to work closer to home if the opportunity is available. **Exhibit 14. Good and Promising Jobs by Neighborhood** | NEIGHBORHOOD | PROMISING JOBS | GOOD JOBS | HIGH-SKILL JOBS | OTHER JOBS | DIFFERENCE FROM CITY-WIDE GOOD AND PROMISING JOBS RATE | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Central | 8% | 7% | 25% | 60% | -1% | | Eastside | 8% | 9% | 23% | 60% | 1% | | New Tacoma | 8% | 9% | 27% | 57% | 0% | | North East | 9% | 18% | 18% | 55% | 10% | | North End | 9% | 5% | 23% | 63% | -3% | | South End | 10% | 5% | 17% | 68% | -1% | | South Tacoma | 10% | 7% | 18% | 64% | 1% | | West End | 9% | 5% | 20% | 66% | -2% | | **Tacoma** | **9%** | **8%** | **24%** | **60%** | | *Sources: U.S. Census, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) LODES 8.1 Workplace Area Characteristic (WAC), All jobs (JT00), 2021 by block; Brookings Institute, Opportunity Industries for Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 2018* FUTURE NEEDS ## Growth Targets Tacoma’s growth target is to add 60,000 housing units and 94,000 jobs from 2017-2050. Growth trends 2017-2022 lag behind growth rates needed to achieve these targets. The Buildable Lands Report from 2022 identifies citywide housing capacity of 68,049 housing units and 84,436 jobs. Legislation passed after this analysis related to housing policy, Home in Tacoma, has further expanded the city’s housing capacity since the 2022 capacity analysis. One policy need identified as part of this planning effort is to identify more capacity for employment. This is consistent with the vision for a 15-minute city, where more commercial activity and jobs are located across Tacoma, rather than concentrated in only one or two districts. Exhibit 15. Tacoma Growth Targets for Housing and Jobs, 2017-2050. <
> | | Employment Growth | | Population Growth | | Housing Production | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | 2044 | 2050 | 2044 | 2050 | 2044 | 2050 | | **Downtown Regional Growth Center** | 35,400 | 47,000 | 37.092 | 47,950 | 14,837 | 21,000 | | **Tacoma Mall Regional Growth Center** | 5,664 | 7,520 | 5,299 | 6,850 | 2,120 | 3,000 | | **Tideflats MIC** | 5,664 | 7,520 | | | | | | **South Tacoma MIC** | 5,664 | 7,520 | | | | | | **Mixed Use Centers** | 10,620 | 14,100 | 31,793 | 41,100 | 12,717 | 18,000 | | **Outside Centers** | 7,788 | 10,340 | 31,793 | 41,100 | 12,717 | 18,000 | | **Citywide Total** | 70,800 | 94,000 | 105,977 | 137,000 | 42,390 | 60,000 | Sources: Housing estimates from OFM, 2022; PSRC Jobs Estimates, 2022; PSRC Growth Targets, Vision 2050 Consistent; Seva Workshop, 2024. ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy # PLAN VISION ## 15-Minute Cities Central to the One Tacoma vision is the concept of a 15-minute city, composed of 15-minute neighborhoods where residents can access daily essentials—work, education, healthcare, groceries, recreation, etc.—within a short walk, bike ride, or transit trip. This framework integrates land use and transportation planning to create resilient neighborhoods across the city. Tacoma’s vision ensures that all residents, regardless of location, can enjoy a high quality of life without relying on cars (or other single-occupancy vehicles) for every trip. By promoting mixed-use development, connected pedestrian and bike networks, and accessible, inviting, and vibrant public spaces, Tacoma is advancing sustainable urban living that prioritizes the well-being of its residents while reducing vehicle miles traveled and GHG emissions. The 15-Minute Neighborhoodsmap in Exhibit 16 shows the relative level of attainment toward a 15-minute neighborhood across Tacoma, providing a snapshot of neighborhoods that are lacking (or robust) in their access to a wide array of daily essentials. The composite score also includes elements related to infrastructure investments and pedestrian safety, such as intersection density and sidewalk to road ratio. This information is critical to a range of key decision-making processes regarding land use and investments in facilities, services, and infrastructure, among others, to achieve more equitable outcomes in access to daily essentials. Furthermore, the tool can be used to track progress (or regression) over time as Tacoma continues to grow and evolve. The Stadium to Dome corridor through the Downtown core, Hilltop in Central Tacoma, Oakland/Madrona in South Tacoma, and the Proctor District in the North End score highly on the composite walkability score. Most of the rest of Tacoma rates as areas where walking to meet daily needs would be challenging using these criteria. ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy Exhibit 16. Tacoma 15-Minute Neighborhoods, 2024 <
> 15 Minute Neighborhoods Composite Walkability Score * Areas where walking to meet daily needs would be challenging * The most walkable areas [ ] MUCs [--] Tacoma City Limits [..] Parks Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. <
> # What the 15-minute city is........ The 15-minute city concept envisions cities where residents can meet their essential needs—work, education, healthcare, shopping, and leisure—within a 15-minute walk or bike ride from their homes. The concept is rooted in sustainable urban design, fostering community well-being, and reducing environmental impact. The main ideas and goals of the 15-minute city model are: 1. LOCAL ACCESSIBILITY: Focus on decentralizing urban services, so each neighborhood has its own set of amenities. 2. SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE ACTION: Encourage walking, biking, and public transport to reduce GHG emissions and combat climate change. 3. COMMUNITY BUILDING: Design public spaces to promote social interaction and community cohesion. 4. HEALTH AND WELL-BEING: Reduce commute times and traffic stress, encourage physical activity and better quality of life. 5. ECONOMIC RESILIENCE: Support local businesses by encouraging people to shop and engage in their neighborhoods. 6. HUMAN-CENTRIC URBAN DESIGN: Reallocate urban space for pedestrians, green areas, and community gathering spots rather than car-dependent infrastructure. Emphasize mixed-use development where residential, commercial, and recreational spaces coexist, enhancing community life. <
> <
> # and what it is not..... The 15-minute city concept has been the target of various conspiracy theories. These misconceptions typically arise from misinterpretations or deliberate misinformation. Here's a look at some common myths: ### 1. "IT'S A PLAN TO RESTRICT MOVEMENT OR TRAP PEOPLE IN ZONES": The 15-minute city does not limit people's ability to travel. Instead, it aims to reduce the need for long commutes by making essential services more accessible. People remain free to move outside their neighborhoods. ### 2. "YOU'LL BE CONFINED TO YOUR 15-MINUTE RADIUS": No aspect of the 15-minute city suggests restricting movement. The goal is to enhance access within neighborhoods, not impose limitations. ### 3. "IT'S A PLOY TO BAN CARS": The goal is not to ban cars but to reduce car dependency. This is achieved by improving public transport, biking, and walking infrastructure, making cars less necessary for daily life. ### 4. "IT'S ABOUT PROPERTY DEVALUATION OR WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION": The 15-minute city idea enhances neighborhood livability and often increases property values by creating desirable, accessible, and greener communities. It focuses on improving urban living for everyone, not redistributing wealth. ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy Exhibit 17. Future Land Use Map <
> Land Use Designations * Low-Scale Residential * Mid-Scale Residential * Multi-Family (High Density) * Neighborhood MUCs * General Commercial * Neighborhood Commercial * Crossroads Mixed-Use Center * Downtown Regional Growth Center * Tacoma Mall Regional Growth Center * Major Institutional Campus * Light Industrial * Heavy Industrial * Parks and Open Space * Airport Compatibility Residential * Shoreline * Tacoma City Limits Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 ## Land Use Designations The Future Land Use Map in Exhibit 17 illustrates the City’s intended future land use pattern through the geographic distribution of residential and commercial areas, the designation of MUCs and MICs, as well as shoreline designations. This land use distribution was a result of analysis of the Growth Strategy element policies, existing land use and zoning, development trends, anticipated land use needs, and desirable growth and development goals. Various types of zoning and land use may be permitted within each of the designations. The map is to be used in conjunction with the adopted policies of the Comprehensive Plan for any land use decision. The land use designations are established by adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and amendments thereof. The Future Land Use Map is the official land use map of the City, and is maintained by the Planning and Development Services Department in an electronic format to facilitate its accurate use and implementation. The Future Land Use Map and the designations in Exhibit 18 provide a basis for applying zoning districts and for making land use decisions. Policies should be considered and interpreted in accordance with the geographic characteristics of the mapped areas. ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy Exhibit 18. Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Designations and Corresponding Zoning | GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS | GROWTH SHARE | ZONING DISTRICTS | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Low-Scale Residential** | | | | Low-scale residential designations are generally located in quieter settings of complete neighborhoods that are a short to moderate walking distance from parks, schools, shopping, transit and other neighborhood amenities. | Citywide Growth Share: Housing: 12.5% | UR1 Urban Residential 1 UR2 Urban Residential 2 | | | Employment: 1% | | | Qualities associated with low-scale residential areas include: Diverse housing types and prices, lower noise levels, limited vehicular traffic, moderate setbacks, private and shared open space and yards, street trees, green features, and complete streets with alleys. Infill in historic districts is supported to expand housing options consistent with the low-scale designation, but must be consistent with the neighborhood scale, defining features, and policies discouraging demolition. | Target Development Density: 10-25 dwelling units/net acre | | | Primary housing types supported include detached houses, houses with attached and/or detached accessory dwelling units, duplexes, triplexes, townhouses up to three units, cottage housing, and cohousing. Existing houses shall not be considered non-conforming. Secondary housing types may be permitted, including fourplexes and small-scale multidwelling, where they can fit harmoniously with the overall scale of the neighborhood, such as at corner lots, large sites, or transitions to more intensive designations. Such secondary housing types are subject to appropriate design, location, and other standards. Community facilities, including parks, schools and religious facilities, are also desirable to enhance neighborhood vitality. | | | | Low-scale residential designations provide a range of housing choices built at the general scale and height of detached houses and up to three stories (above grade) in height. Standards for low-scale housing types provide flexibility within the range of building width, depth, and site coverage consistent with detached houses and backyard accessory structures, pedestrian orientation, and a range of typical lot sizes from 2,500 square feet up to 7,500 square feet. | | | ONE TACOMA TACOMA 2050 2-66 GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS | GROWTH SHARE | ZONING DISTRICTS --- | --- | --- **Mid-Scale Residential** | | Mid-scale residential designations are generally located in close proximity to centers, corridors, and transit, and provide walkable, urban housing choices in buildings of a size and scale that is between low-scale residential and the higher scale of centers and corridors. | Citywide Growth Share: Housing: 12.5% | UR3 Urban Residential 3 Qualities associated with mid-scale residential areas include: Diverse housing types and prices, a range of building heights and scales, walkability, transportation choices, moderate noise and activity levels, generally shared open space and yards, street trees, green features, and complete streets with alleys. Infill in historic districts is supported to expand housing options consistent with the mid-scale designation, but must be consistent with neighborhood scale and defining features, and with policies discouraging demolition. | Employment: 2% | Housing types supported include small-lot houses, accessory dwelling units, duplexes, triplexes, townhouses, cottage housing, cohousing, fourplexes, and multidwelling. Existing houses shall not be considered non-conforming. | Target Development Density: 15-45 dwelling units/net acre | Community facilities, including parks, schools and religious facilities, are also desirable and some nonresidential uses such as small childcare, cafes or live-work may be appropriate in limited circumstances. | | Standards for mid-scale housing support heights up to three stories (above grade) and four stories in limited circumstances along corridors. Standards shall ensure that development is harmonious with the scale and residential patterns of the neighborhood through building height, scale, width, depth, bulk, and setbacks that prevent overly massive structures, provide visual variety from the street, and ensure a strong pedestrian orientation. Development shall be subject to design standards that provide for smooth scale transitions by methods such as matching low-scale building height maximums where mid-scale residential abuts or is across the street from low-scale areas. | | | GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS | GROWTH SHARE | ZONING DISTRICTS | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Multi-Family High Density** | | | | This designation allows for a wide range of residential housing types at medium and higher density levels, along with community facilities and institutions, and some limited commercial uses and mixed-use buildings. It is characterized by taller buildings, higher traffic volumes, reduced setbacks, limited private yard space, and greater noise levels. These areas are generally found in the central city and along major transportation corridors where there is increased access to public transportation and to employment centers.

Housing types supported include small-lot houses, accessory dwelling units, duplexes, triplexes, townhouses, cottage housing, cohousing, fourplexes, and multidwelling.

Community facilities, including parks, schools, and religious facilities, are desirable and some nonresidential uses, such as small childcare, cafes, or live-work, are appropriate in limited circumstances.

Standards for multi-family high density support building heights from the mid-rise (four to six stories) to high-rise (up to 15 stories) range. | Citywide Growth Share
Housing: 2%

Employment: 1%

Target Development Density: 45–75
dwelling units/net acre | R-4 Multiple-Family Dwelling
District
R-5 Multiple-Family Dwelling
District | | **Neighborhood Commercial** | | | | This designation is characterized primarily by small-scale neighborhood businesses with some residential and institutional uses. Uses within these areas have low to moderate traffic generation, shorter operating hours, smaller buildings and sites, and less signage than general commercial or mixed-use areas. There is a greater emphasis on small businesses and development that is compatible with nearby, lower intensity residential areas.

Non-residential uses typically occupy the street frontage. Low to mid-scale housing types are generally supported. Parking is generally located on-street or within a structure, or to the side or rear of the structure. Building height typically ranges from single story to three stories. | Citywide Growth Share:
Housing: 2%

Employment: 4%

Target Development Density: 14–36
dwelling units/net acre | C-1 General Neighborhood
Commercial District
T Transitional District | | GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS | GROWTH SHARE | ZONING DISTRICTS | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **General Commercial** | | | | This designation encompasses areas for medium to high intensity commercial uses, which serves a large community base with a broad range of larger scale uses. These areas also allow for a wide variety of residential development, community facilities, institutional uses, and some limited production and storage uses. These areas are generally located along major transportation corridors, often with reasonably direct access to a highway or high frequency transit. This designation is characterized by larger-scale buildings, longer operating hours, and moderate to high trip generation. | Citywide Growth Share: Housing: 1%

Employment: 3%

Target Development Density: 45-75 dwelling units/net acre | PDB Planned Development Business District
C-2 General Community Commercial District | | Single purpose commercial structures include office building, multi-story mixed-use, and residential structures. Nonresidential uses typically occupy the street frontage, but stand-alone residential uses are allowed in some cases. | | | | Low to mid-scale housing types are generally supported. | | | | Building height typically ranges from single story to four stories. | | | | **Neighborhood Center** | | | | Neighborhood Centers are compact, walkable, and transit-oriented mixed-use areas that serve as central focal points for daily needs, public events, community discourse and programming. Many such centers were rooted in Tacoma’s historic streetcar era (1888-1938), see Chapter 3 – Complete Neighborhoods. These centers prioritize pedestrian and bicycle access and are well-served by local and regional transit. Development focuses on a mix of residential and commercial uses, with a strong emphasis on space-efficient transportation solutions. Unlike some commercial areas, neighborhood centers minimize off-street surface parking, relying on sustainable modes of transportation, managed on-street parking, and structured parking to support compact economic development. Buildings are generally up to six stories along commercial corridors, transitioning to up to three stories at the periphery near low-scale residential districts, and up to four stories in areas between the core and the periphery. | Citywide Growth Share: Housing: 15%

Employment: 2.5%

Minimum Allowable Development Density: 25 dwelling units/net acre | CCX Community Commercial Mixed-Use District
RCX Residential Commercial Mixed-Use District
HMX Hospital Medical Mixed-Use District
URX Urban Residential Mixed-Use District | | GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS | GROWTH SHARE | ZONING DISTRICTS | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Crossroads Center** | | | | The Crossroads Center is a concentration of commercial and/or institutional development that serves many nearby neighborhoods and generally includes a unique attraction that draws people from throughout the city. Some residential development may already be present, and there is a goal to have more residential development. It is directly accessible by arterials and local transit.

Development contains a mix of residential and commercial uses, and the majority of parking is provided within structures. | Citywide Growth Share:
Housing: 15%

Employment: 12.5%

Minimum Allowable Development
Density: 25 dwelling units/net acre | CCX Community Commercial
Mixed-Use District
RCX Residential Commercial
Mixed-Use District
HMX Hospital Medical Mixed-
Use District
URX Urban Residential Mixed-
Use District | | **Tacoma Mall Regional Growth Center** | | | | The Urban Center is a highly dense, self-sufficient concentration of urban development. It is an area of regional attraction and a focus for both the local and regional transit systems. Many major city arterials connect to the Urban Center and nearby freeway access is present. Parking is provided both in surface lots and within structures. Internal streets and pathways provide connections among the developments within the Center. | Citywide Growth Share:
Housing: 5%

Employment: 8%

Minimum Allowable Site Density: 25
dwelling units/net acre | UCX Urban Center Mixed-Use
District
RCX Residential Commercial
Mixed-Use District
URX Urban Residential
MixedUse District | | **Downtown Regional Growth Center** | | | | The Downtown Center is the highest concentration of urban growth found anywhere in the city. It is the focal point for the city, the center of government, cultural, office, financial, transportation, and other activities. This variety of day and night activities attracts visitors from throughout the city and region. The interstate freeway and major arterials provide access, and the Center has both local and regional transit connections. Larger, often historic buildings fronting on the sidewalk characterize the area. Pedestrian orientation is high. Parking is found along the street and within structures. | Citywide Growth Share:
Housing: 35%

Employment: 50%

Minimum Allowable Site Density: 25
dwelling units/net acre | DR Downtown Residential
District
DMU Downtown Mixed-Use
District
WR Warehouse/Residential
District
DCC Downtown Commercial
Core District UCX-TD
Downtown Mixed-Use District | | **Light Industrial** | | | | This designation allows for a variety of industrial uses that are moderate in scale and impact, with lower noise, odors, and traffic generation than heavy industrial uses. This designation may include various types of light manufacturing, warehousing, and newer, clean, high-tech industries, along with commercial and some limited residential uses. These areas are often utilized as a buffer or transition between heavy industrial areas and less intensive commercial and/or residential areas. | Citywide Growth Share:
Housing: 0%

Employment: 8% | M-1 Light Industrial District | | GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS | GROWTH SHARE | ZONING DISTRICTS | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Heavy Industrial** | | | | This designation is characterized by higher levels of noise and odors, large-scale production, large buildings and sites, extended operating hours, and heavy truck traffic. This designation requires access to major transportation corridors, often including heavy haul truck routes and rail facilities. Commercial and institutional uses are limited and residential uses are generally prohibited. | Citywide Growth Share: Housing: 0%

Employment: 8% | M-2 Heavy Industrial District
PMI Port Maritime and
Industrial District | | **Major Institutional Campus** | | | | This designation is intended for large institutional campuses that are centers of employment and that service a broader population than that of the neighborhood in which it is located. This designation includes hospitals, medical centers, colleges, universities, and high schools typically greater than 10 acres in size. The designation recognizes the unique characteristics of these institutions and is intended to accommodate the changing needs of the institution while enhancing the livability of surrounding residential neighborhoods and the viability of nearby business areas.

Buildings in this designation may range in scale from single story to high rise. | | This designation is appropriate in all zoning classifications. | GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS | GROWTH SHARE | ZONING DISTRICTS --- | --- | --- **Parks and Open Space** | | This designation is intended to conserve and enhance open, natural, and improved areas valuable for their environmental, recreational, and green infrastructure, scenic character, and the benefits they provide. The designation encompasses public and private parks and open space lands, with lands set aside for these purposes by the City of Tacoma and the Metropolitan Parks District forming the core of the designation. As more land is placed in conservation status by these agencies, as well as other public and private entities, the extent of the designation will be expanded to include them. | | This designation is appropriate in all zoning classifications. The designation supports Tacoma’s vision of an integrated parks and open space system that defines and enhances the built and natural environment, supports and nurtures plant and wildlife habitat, enhances and protects trees and the urban forest, preserves the capacity and water quality of the stormwater drainage system, offers recreational opportunities, and provides pedestrian and bicycle connections. | | Lands within this designation include both natural open space areas and active use parks and recreational areas. | | Parks and recreation lands are intended to provide opportunities for active recreation, such as playfields and sports facilities; urban amenities, such as plazas, pocket parks, and community gardens; and other complementary land uses, such as cultural or educational facilities or community event spaces that enhance the park and recreational experience. This designation is intended to support flexibility in building scale to meet community demand for park and recreation programs and facilities. | | **Airport Compatible Residential** | | This designation is intended to increase safety in residential areas within the approximately 200-acre area of South Tacoma corresponding with the Joint Base Lewis-McChord (JBLM Airport Protection Zone II. Preventing the development of conditions that could interfere with airport operations or increase the likelihood of an accident will increase safety, as will reducing risk to life and property in the incidence of a crash. Key strategies are to prevent development with explosive or flammable characteristics, and to allow reasonable use and expansion of existing uses while discouraging increases in residential density or in public gathering capacity. | Citywide Growth Share: There are no specific housing or employment targets associated with this designation. | This designation is implemented through the JBLM Airport Compatibility Overlay District, and through the future establishment of an appropriate base residential zoning district. ### GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS **Shorelines** The city’s shoreline areas provide great social, ecological, recreational, cultural, economic, and aesthetic value, both at the local and regional level. It is the community’s intent to use the full potential of these areas in a manner that is both ordered and diversified, supports the community’s ability to enjoy the water and the unique setting it creates, and which integrates water and shoreline uses while achieving a net gain of ecological functions. Recognizing the limited nature of this important resource, use and development of the shoreline areas must be carefully planned and regulated to ensure that these values are maintained over time. The SMP has been developed to provide additional and more detailed policy direction regarding the city’s shoreline areas, along with specific zoning and development standards. The Shoreline Master Program utilizes a system of environment designations which further guide the character, intensity, and use of individual shoreline segments. These classifications include Natural, Shoreline Residential, Urban Conservancy, High Intensity, Aquatic, and Downtown Waterfront and are based on the existing development patterns, capabilities, goals, and aspirations of the community for its shoreline areas. These areas are intended to balance the overarching goals outlined in the State Shoreline Management Act: * To ensure an adequate land supply for water-dependent uses; * To promote and enhance the public’s opportunities to access and enjoy the water; and * To protect and preserve natural resources. This designation includes areas that support deepwater port and industrial sites, habitat for a variety of fish and wildlife, archaeological and historical sites, open space, recreation and community activities, and some commercial and residential development. Typical uses and building scale are based on the specific Shoreline Environment Designation and Zoning District, but range from single story to three stories in most districts, to mid and high rise residential on the Thea Foss Waterway. Industrial areas support height and scale standards to support the long-term viability of Port container operations. ### GROWTH SHARE Citywide Growth Share: Housing and employment growth within shoreline environments are based on the Shoreline Environment Designations of the SMP (Title 19 of the Tacoma Municipal Code) ### ZONING DISTRICTS S1–S14 Shoreline Zoning Districts Coordination between land use changes, infrastructure investments, and transportation network improvements are needed to achieve the vision of this Plan. Recent updates to the land use code through the Home in Tacoma legislation will enable higher housing densities in areas previously restricted to single family homes. Home in Tacoma replaces single-family zoning with two new zoning categories – low-scale residential and mid-scale residential. Mid-scale residential zoning is concentrated around transit corridors and Commercial Centers to promote walkability, reduce car dependence, and support more sustainable urban growth. More neighborhood-serving commercial spaces such as cafes, live-work spaces, and other daily services will be accommodated throughout these zones. Commercial spaces are anticipated to be both embedded within neighborhoods as well as within centers. These zoning updates add diverse housing types and supportive commercial uses across Tacoma’s neighborhoods to implement Tacoma’s Growth Strategy to allow as many people as possible to experience 15-minute neighborhood living. An important element of this strategy is to support a network of centers, equitably distributed across the city, connected along transit-oriented corridors. Transit station areas and the neighborhoods will also accommodate a range of housing types and commercial uses to achieve the vision of the 15-minute city. The proposed zoning, overlaid with identified centers and 15-minute walksheds from the centers, is shown in Exhibit 19. ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy Exhibit 19. Zoning and Centers, 2024 <
> Zoning Districts Citywide | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | UR1-Urban Residential 1 | C2-Commercial | CIX-Commercial Industrial Mixed Use | M1-Light Industrial | | UR2-Urban Residential 2 | PDB-Planned Development Business | UCX-Urban Center Mixed Use | M2-Heavy Industrial | | UR3-Urban Residential 3 | NRX-Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use | HMX-Hospital Medical Mixed Use | PMI-Port Maritime Industrial | | R4-Multiple Family Dwelling | URX-Urban Residential Mixed Use | DR-Downtown Residential | RUS-Ruston | | R5-Multiple Family Dwelling | RCX-Residential Commercial Mixed Use | DMU-Downtown Mixed Use | Shoreline Districts | | T-Transitional | NCX-Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use | WR-Warehouse Residential | MUCs | | C1-Commercial | CCX-Community Commercial Mixed Use | DCC-Downtown Commercial Core | MUC 15-Minute Walkshed | Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. ONE TACOMA TACOMA 2050 2-75 ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy **Exhibit 20. Proposed Zoning by Acreage, 2024** | PROPOSED ZONING | ACRES | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | UR1-Urban Residential 1 | 10,245 | 25% | | UR2-Urban Residential 2 | 7,885 | 19% | | UR3-Urban Residential 3 | 3,021 | 7.4% | | R4-Multiple Family Dwelling | 359 | 0.9% | | R5-Multiple Family Dwelling | 16 | 0.0% | | T-Transitional | 163 | 0.4% | | C1-Commercial | 252 | 0.6% | | C2-Commercial | 819 | 2.0% | | PDB-Planned Development Business | 35 | 0.1% | | NRX-Neighborhood Residential Mixed-Use | 11 | 0.0% | | URX-Urban Residential Mixed-Use | 271 | 0.7% | | RCX-Residential Commercial Mixed-Use | 427 | 1.1% | | NCX-Neighborhood Commercial Mixed-Use | 283 | 0.7% | | CCX-Community Commercial Mixed-Use | 637 | 1.6% | | CIX-Commercial Industrial Mixed-Use | 96 | 0.2% | | UCX-Urban Center Mixed-Use | 396 | 1.0% | | HMX-Hospital Medical Mixed-Use | 118 | 0.3% | | DR-Downtown Residential | 246 | 0.6% | | DMU-Downtown Mixed-Use | 231 | 0.6% | | WR-Warehouse Residential | 171 | 0.4% | | DCC-Downtown Commercial Core | 162 | 0.4% | | M1-Light Industrial | 639 | 1.6% | | M2-Heavy Industrial | 1,223 | 3.0% | | PMI-Port Maritime Industrial | 2,898 | 7.1% | | RUS-Ruston | 170 | 0.4% | | Shoreline Districts | 9,816 | 24% | *Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024.* <
> ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy ## 2.2 Goals and Policies GOAL GS-1: Development, growth, and infrastructure investments support Tacoma’s vision for equitable, walkable, connected, and complete communities. Policy GS-1.1: Establish future land use and zoning designations that can accommodate planned housing and employment growth and ensure land use compatibility. See Exhibit 17: Future Land Use Map. Policy GS-1.2: Implement the Comprehensive Plan land use designations and update the zoning code, as needed, to ensure consistency. See Exhibit 18: Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Designations and Corresponding Zoning. Policy GS-1.3: Promote the development of complete, walkable, and accessible neighborhoods where residents have safe and convenient access to daily essentials and services including employment, grocery stores, restaurants, schools, and parks, that support a variety of transportation choices and encourage walking, rolling, biking, and transit as attractive options. Policy GS-1.4: Encourage development that creates or maintains 15-minute neighborhoods throughout existing neighborhoods with middle housing types, neighborhood businesses and smaller commercial nodes. Policy GS-1.5: Ensure quality, context-sensitive urban infill throughout the city’s neighborhoods with design standards, project review procedures, and zoning requirements. Policy GS-1.6: Integrate and preserve nature and prioritize the use of green infrastructure throughout Tacoma as the first option, when feasible. Policy GS-1.7: Recognize the importance of preserving and enhancing the city’s regularized and predictable street grid, block sizes, and intersection density for supporting safe multi-modal transportation choices, quality neighborhood design, and the City’s growth strategies, including 15-minute neighborhoods. Whenever practicable, create or restore connections in areas lacking safe intersection crossings, such as superblocks. Policy GS-1.8: Encourage high quality neighborhood design that demonstrates Tacoma’s dedication to the human-centric design of its built environment, commitment to equity, and culture of generating innovative design solutions. Policy GS-1.9: Leverage Tacoma’s unique assets, diverse community, and culture of art and creativity to complement growth in a way that showcases its distinctive character and quality of place. Policy GS-1.10: Implement strategies to address commercial and residential displacement due to land use decisions. Policy GS-1.11: Acknowledge the historical disparity of investment, infrastructure, and services across Tacoma's neighborhoods and prioritize investments to address these gaps, reduce disparities, and increase equity, especially where growth and change are anticipated. Policy GS-1.12: Consider parks, schools, and institutional campuses as uses that might need special permits or zones to preserve. Policy GS-1.13: As part of a future urban forest code update, the City should consider a full suite of tools to protect and enhance the City’s tree canopy, including tree preservation standards, resources for tree planting and maintenance, and non-regulatory tools for tree preservation and enhancement. <
> TACOMA'S GROWTH TARGET IS FOR 42,865 NEW HOUSING UNITS AND 70,800 NEW JOBS BY 2044. # Citywide **GOAL GS-2:** Neighborhoods across the city include a mix of housing types and integrated commercial activity. **Policy GS-2.1:** Implement actions in Tacoma’s Anti-Displacement Strategy to create more homes and neighborhood business opportunities for more people to keep housing affordable and in good repair, help people stay and work in their homes and their communities, and reduce barriers for people who often or historically have encountered them. **Policy GS-2.2:** Support existing businesses to avoid unnecessary commercial displacement, especially for locally-owned, smaller scale enterprises that add to community identity and cultural placemaking in neighborhoods. When unavoidable, such as times of construction or creation of institutional sites, support these businesses for successful relocation. **Policy GS-2.3:** Foster neighborhood businesses and commercial districts that offer a range of everyday services and retail goods, that are responsive to cultural needs and income levels of the community, and that reduce nearby residents’ needs to travel long distances to meet daily needs. Engage, encourage and support community members to create small stores and shops dispersed through neighborhoods. **Policy GS-2.4:** Devise strategies to address shortcomings in the achievement of 15-minute neighborhoods and promote equity, focusing efforts first in and around centers, in areas with lower incomes and higher concentrations of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) communities, and in neighborhoods farthest from success. **Policy GS-2.5:** Encourage regulatory changes like parking quantity reductions or incentives to reduce parking to make smaller scale retail viable. **GOAL GS-3:** The growth strategy and coordinated land use and transportation planning advance the goals of Tacoma’s Climate Action Plan. **Policy GS-3.1:** Direct the majority of growth and change to centers, transit-oriented corridors with current or planned frequent transit service, and high-capacity transit station areas. **Policy GS-3.2:** Explore innovative concepts for developing public spaces that prioritize people walking and rolling; design a public realm that is people-first rather than auto-oriented, especially in centers and transit-oriented areas. **Policy GS-3.3:** Encourage the renovation and reuse of existing structures to reduce demolition waste and new construction emissions. **Policy GS-3.4:** Encourage electric vehicle charging infrastructure in residential, commercial, and public spaces. **Policy GS-3.5:** Explore areas with targeted policies for emissions reductions, such as zero-emission neighborhoods. **Policy GS-3.6:** Surface parking lots represent significant potential for redevelopment or reintroduction of green space and permeable surface and are considered “underutilized land” for the purposes of zoning regulations, density bonuses, and economic development incentives. Care should be taken to not affect parking areas required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. # Growth Strategy as Climate Action By fostering equitable transit-oriented communities, Tacoma aims to reduce dependency on single-occupancy vehicles while enhancing walkability and access to daily essentials. Tacoma’s commitment to addressing climate change is reflected in the 2030 Tacoma CAP, which sets a goal to achieve net-zero GHG emissions by 2050. This ambitious goal requires a series of actions aimed at reducing emissions across various sectors, including transportation, industry, and buildings. The plan emphasizes the importance of transitioning to renewable energy sources, enhancing energy efficiency, and promoting sustainable urban development to create a resilient and equitable low-carbon future for the community. Fortunately, Tacoma’s growth strategies and policies in the 2015 One Tacoma Comprehensive Plan were already producing positive outcomes toward achieving Tacoma’s GHG goals. That plan focused growth within centers, with the majority of growth occurring in Downtown, the area of the city best served by local and regional transit. These policies were used as inputs for Section 1 of the CAP, which contains an analysis of energy and emissions modeling, providing insight into the impacts of Tacoma's growth strategy on achieving net-zero GHGs by 2050, among other programs and policies. The chart below show the promise of these strategies and the additional gap that needs to be bridged. Under the 2015 growth strategy, per capita emissions were nearly cut in half between 2019 and 2049. Furthermore, despite significant population and employment growth, the analysis showed a nearly 20% reduction in total cumulative emissions between 2020 and 2050. Through integrated planning, One Tacoma is building a resilient and sustainable future for all its residents. In coordination with transit agency partners and coupled with investments in multi-model infrastructure, the City's land use strategies increase density along higher-frequency transit networks and create neighborhoods where walking, biking and public transit are safe, reliable, convenient, and appealing modes of travel. By focusing on dense, transit-rich environments and promoting active transportation, Tacoma is encouraging a shift away from single-occupancy vehicles, producing critical reductions in GHG emissions from the transportation sector. Tacoma’s growth and development strategies also leverage efficiencies gained by newer and multi-unit building typologies along with more compact infrastructure that serves more people with less materials and space, for additional GHG reductions. These efforts not only support Tacoma’s climate goals, but also contribute to cleaner air, quieter streets, and healthier, more livable neighborhoods. <
> A steep decline in emissions until 2030 (see figure) is a key component of the net-zero scenario. This is needed in order for Tacoma to maximize cost savings from energy and emissions reductions, put itself on track to achieve its target, avoid the need for even more drastic measures to reduce emissions in the future, and decrease the risk of catastrophic climate change. **Policy GS–3.7:** Protect the viability of existing airports as essential public facilities by encouraging compatible land uses and reducing hazards that may endanger the lives and property of the public and aviation users. # Natural Systems and Open Space Corridors **GOAL GS–4:** Preserve and protect natural systems and open space corridors to ensure a healthy and sustainable environment and to provide opportunities for Tacomans to experience nature close to home. **Policy GS–4.1:** Maintain and enhance a network of open space corridors that supports recreation, wildlife habitat, trails, and connection of critical areas, and enriches the lives of Tacoma’s current and future residents. See Exhibit 21: Open Space Corridors for the existing network. **Policy GS–4.2:** Protect natural systems and discourage development and land use decisions that adversely impact the natural environment. **Policy GS–4.3:** Manage flood prone areas and storm and flood waters of the city in accordance with the Critical Areas Ordinance, the City Shorelines Master Program, the City of Tacoma Stormwater management Program Plan, standards as enacted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. **Policy GS–4.4:** Use land use designations and separation or mitigation measures, such as vegetation buffers, habitat restoration, and native vegetation restoration, to avoid conflicts between land uses and the natural environment. **Policy GS–4.5:** Improve open space corridors using a mix of tools including natural resource protection, property acquisition, natural resource restoration, tree planting and landscaping with native plants, and ecological design integrated with new development. **Policy GS–4.6:** Ensure that connections between open space corridors, streets, and trail systems are located and designed to support each element's function and create positive interrelationships between the elements, while also protecting habitat functions, fish, and wildlife. **Policy GS–4.7:** Recognize and promote the benefits that open space corridor preservation and restoration provides to the city, including greater development, sense of civic pride, and identity. Whenever feasible, partner with developers to improve connections between new development sites and parks, trails, and open space. **Policy GS–4.8:** Promote the beautification and re-vegetation of open space areas along state highways, including I5, SR 16, SR 7 and Pearl. **Policy GS–4.9:** Ensure access to open spaces within neighborhoods to strengthen resilience against rising temperatures, support programming and events, increase access to fresh food through gardening programs, and diversify community leadership. Exhibit 21. Open Space Corridors, 2024 <
> **Open Space Corridors** * Open Space * Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways * Biodiversity Areas and Corridor * Watersheds * Tacoma City Limits *Open space corridors are lands that are useful for recreation, wildlife habitat, trails and connection of critical areas; these include active and passive open spaces, which are both sites formally developed for community recreation like parks, and properties that are underdeveloped, in their natural state, and vegetated, like wetlands, streams, and forests.* *Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024.* # Centers **GOAL GS-5:** Tacoma's growth is focused in a citywide network of transit-connected centers that anchor 15-minute neighborhoods providing nodes of activity and access to housing, employment, and services. **Policy GS-5.1:** Plan for an equitable distribution of centers across the city to enhance equitable access to services, employment, and housing opportunities. See Exhibit 22: Centers Map for existing designations. **Policy GS-5.2:** Connect centers to each other and to other key destinations, such as schools and parks, by frequent, safe, and convenient transit, bicycle routes, a complete and accessible pedestrian network, and electric vehicle charging stations. **Policy GS-5.3:** When planning capital and transportation improvements in centers, emphasize equitable outcomes and co-benefits. Consider the priorities outlined in the TMP and Public Facilities and Services elements, which should reflect these priorities. **Policy GS-5.4:** Expand the boundary of a center if the change can better implement the vision of a city of 15-minute neighborhoods. Examples include: a. Support boundary expansion where the demand for additional growth exists and where the capacity for additional growth is limited. b. Support boundary expansion to establish mid-scale transition areas near centers that provide a scale and intensity transition down to low-scale neighborhoods while supporting well-designed, context-sensitive, pedestrian-oriented housing in walkable, transit-supportive urban locations. | | Employment Growth | | Population Growth | | Housing Production | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | 2044 | 2050 | 2044 | 2050 | 2044 | 2050 | | Downtown Regional Growth Center | 35,400 | 47,000 | 37.092 | 47,950 | 14,837 | 21,000 | | Tacoma Mall Regional Growth Center | 5,664 | 7,520 | 5,299 | 6,850 | 2,120 | 3,000 | | Tideflats MIC | 5,664 | 7,520 | | | | | | South Tacoma MIC | 5,664 | 7,520 | | | | | | Mixed Use Centers | 10,620 | 14,100 | 31,793 | 41,100 | 12,717 | 18,000 | | Outside Centers | 7,788 | 10,340 | 31,793 | 41,100 | 12,717 | 18,000 | | **Citywide Total** | **70,800** | **94,000** | **105,977** | **137,000** | **42,390** | **60,000** | Exhibit 22. Centers Map <
> Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. **GOAL GS-6:** Centers serve as the anchors of complete neighborhoods that include concentrations of housing alongside institutions, gathering places, cultural amenities, and green spaces. **Policy GS-6.1:** Design centers to be accessible places where the street environment makes access safe and convenient for people of all ages and abilities, whether by transit, walking, biking, or mobility devices, such as wheelchairs. **Policy GS-6.2:** Encourage the placement of services in centers, including schools and colleges, health services, community centers, daycare, parks and plazas, library services, and justice services. **Policy GS-6.3:** Ensure that land use plans and infrastructure investments allow for and incorporate arts, culture, and local history as central components of centers and as identity-forming creative processes. **Policy GS-6.4:** Partner with Pierce Transit and Sound Transit to better connect Tacoma neighborhoods, improve transit stations, and provide development incentives and programs to improve transit-orientation in all centers. **Policy GS-6.5:** Expand tree canopy and integrate more greenery into the public realm. **Policy GS-6.6:** Integrate nature, parks, and trail networks into centers. Utilize green infrastructure to reduce urban heat island effects and improve climate adaptation in these denser communities. **Policy GS-6.7:** Provide housing capacity for diverse housing types and price points in and near centers, aligned with proportional allocations by income group as identified in the Housing element, concentrating enough density and population to support a broad range of commercial services. **Policy GS-6.8:** Encourage public and private investment in infrastructure, economic development, and community services within centers to ensure that all centers support the populations they serve as anchors of 15-minute neighborhoods. **Policy GS-6.9:** Partner with employers within centers to reduce dependence on automobile use and increase the use of transit, ridesharing, and active transportation modes through implementation of transportation demand management, including Commute Trip Reduction programs, Reduced Parking Areas, and other strategies. **Policy GS-6.10:** Develop or update neighborhood and subarea plans for Tacoma's largest centers—Downtown, Tacoma Mall, and Crossroads Centers—to develop a set of prioritized investments to implement a community-informed vision for these areas. # Downtown Tacoma Regional Growth Center **GOAL GS–7:** Downtown is Tacoma’s largest center with the highest concentrations of housing and employment, transit access, thriving local businesses, and access to arts and culture. **Policy GS–7.1:** Achieve Downtown Tacoma’s regional targets for employment and housing, including both quantity and income levels for housing. Continue its growth as a regional center for innovation and exchange through diverse transit-oriented housing and employment. **Policy GS–7.2:** Enhance public places and the Thea Foss Waterway in Downtown Tacoma as places of business and social activity for the people of its districts and the broader region. Integrate public art and cultural programming wherever possible and improve access to Thea Foss Waterway. **Policy GS–7.3:** Transform Downtown Tacoma into a central destination for regional travel by collaborating with State plans for high-speed rail service and developing a vibrant, mixed-use TOD hub inside and around the future Tacoma Dome regional light rail station. **Policy GS–7.4:** Develop Downtown Tacoma is a regional destination attracting people to come work, shop, and experience cultural life. **Policy GS–7.5:** Establish Downtown as a series of interconnected neighborhoods and encourage development that recognizes and responds to the context of these unique subareas: Stadium, St. Helens, Hilltop, Commercial Core, UWT/Museum District, Old Brewery District, Foss Waterway, and Dome District, as shown in Exhibit 23. Exhibit 23. Downtown Character Areas <
> Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 # Tacoma Mall Regional Growth Center **GOAL GS-8:** The Tacoma Mall Regional Growth Center thrives as a hub of employment, housing, retail, and public services. **Policy GS-8.1:** Achieve the Tacoma Mall Regional Growth Center’s targets for employment and population growth. Continue its role as a retail destination while expanding economic opportunities and services. **Policy GS-8.2:** Increase housing density so that the center has the largest concentration of housing in South Tacoma. **Policy GS-8.3:** Improve internal pedestrian connectivity and connectivity to Downtown and regional transportation facilities to promote cohesion of the Center and to optimize access to the shopping and employment opportunities. **Policy GS-8.4:** Collaborate with Sound Transit and Pierce Transit to connect Tacoma Mall to regional transit services (express bus and bus rapid transit) ahead of future potential expansion of the ight rail. **Policy GS-8.5:** Enhance the public realm to provide a better setting for business and social activity that serve South Tacoma and the region. # Crossroads Centers **GOAL GS-9:** Crossroads Centers are successful places that serve the needs of surrounding neighborhoods and beyond. They are transit-oriented and contain high concentrations of employment, institutions, commercial and community services, and a wide range of housing options. **Policy GS-9.1:** Allow and encourage a wide range of housing types in Crossroads Centers, which are intended to generally be larger in scale than the surrounding residential areas. Housing types should be accessible to a wide range of income levels and include income-restricted affordable housing. The combined area of a Crossroads Center and the area within a half-mile walking distance of the Center should be able to accommodate a minimum of 5,000 households. **Policy GS-9.2:** Improve Crossroads Centers as multimodal transportation hubs with ample and prominent public spaces through design standards, which optimize access to areas they serve and are linked to the region’s transportation network. While connection to the region’s high-capacity transit system is encouraged where feasible, it is recognized that not all Crossroads Centers can or will benefit from, or require such a connection. **Policy GS-9.3:** Provide parks and/or public squares within or near Crossroads Centers to support their roles as places of focused business and social activity. **Policy GS-9.4:** Complete any gaps in pedestrian and bike networks. Improve safety for nonmotorized modes of travel across these centers to connect destinations and reduce reliance of automobiles for everyday trips. # Neighborhood Centers **GOAL GS-10:** Neighborhood Centers are thriving activity hubs that serve the daily needs of residents, employees, and surrounding neighborhoods. **Policy GS-10.1:** Neighborhood Centers are characterized by middle density housing and small to mid-scale commercial developments. Design a core commercial area, with integrated transit access, that provides jobs, retail, and services for the Center and its surrounding residential neighborhoods. Integrate commercial uses and a range of housing types in residential streets. **Policy GS-10.2:** Ensure sufficient zoning within a half-mile walking distance of a Neighborhood Center to accommodate a minimum of 3,000 households in a variety of housing types. **Policy GS-10.3:** Design Neighborhood Centers as transit-oriented communities that optimize pedestrian and bicycle access from adjacent neighborhoods and are served by frequent, safe, and easily accessible transit service. **Policy GS-10.4:** Provide small parks, gardens, or plazas within or near Neighborhood Centers to support their roles as places of local activity and gathering. Develop bicycle and pedestrian networks throughout these areas to promote a high quality of life for residents and connect all ages and abilities. **Policy GS-10.5:** Prioritize frequent and accessible local transit service to Neighborhood Centers, recognizing their historical role as transit-oriented communities. Explore potential connections to the regional high-capacity transit system with Sound Transit and Pierce Transit, including the siting of maintenance and operations facilities for light rail in centers on Tier-1 corridors on the Frequent Transit Network to enhance access and connectivity to compact, walkable Tacoma neighborhoods from the regional transit system and to advance the goals and policies of the Transit Element. # Employment Areas **GOAL GS-11:** Tacoma’s employment centers grow and thrive. **Policy GS-11.1:** Ensure that there is sufficient zoning and development capacity to accommodate the 2050 employment growth allocations. **Policy GS-11.2:** Encourage an equitable distribution of employment throughout the city. **Policy GS-11.3:** Consider the land development and transportation needs of Tacoma’s job centers when creating and amending land use plans and making infrastructure investments. **Policy GS-11.4:** Concentrate employment centers and MICs in close proximity to transit and other public services and amenities. **Policy GS-11.5:** Continue to support the city’s MICs as locations for industrial and manufacturing employment. **Policy GS-11.6:** Ensure existing infrastructure and utilities can support growth and existing activity in the MICs. **Policy GS-11.7:** Support more neighborhood commercial opportunities and small, local businesses in and around Centers as residential density increases. ONE TACOMA Chapter 02: Growth Strategy Exhibit 24. Frequent Transit Network Vision Map <
> Frequent Transit Network Vision * 10 Minutes * 15 Minutes * 20 Minutes * 5-Minute Walkshed from Transit * T Transit Centers Link Light Rail * Active * Planned * Parks * Tacoma City Limits Sources: Nelson Nygaard, 2024; City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 ONE TACOMA TACOMA 2050 2-90 # Transit-Oriented Development Areas **GOAL GS-12:** Transit-oriented communities are distributed across Tacoma, supported through equitable transit-oriented development, high quality station areas that are accessible and safe, and multi-modal integration. **Policy GS-12.1:** Ensure planned land use and zoning maximize activity units (jobs and population) within the five- and ten-minute walk or transit walksheds of frequent transit and bus stops. Planned land use and zoning designations should allow transit-supportive densities across as much of the corresponding transit walkshed as possible and investments in connectivity should be made to expand station area walksheds where feasible. **Policy GS-12.2:** Promote land use strategies that complement place-based economic development and support employment growth within the ten-minute walkshed of key transit nodes. **Policy GS-12.3:** Integrate transit stations into surrounding communities with accessibility features, thoughtful design elements, site-specific station art, and seamless connectivity with local transportation grids. Create areas near and connected to transit that are safe, comfortable, beautiful, and foster a sense of community. Ensure: a. adequate lighting b. seating and shade c. tree canopy d. public art e. well-maintained sidewalks with adequate widths f. protected bicycle lanes g. pedestrian-scale lighting at transit waiting areas h. safe and accessible crossings to support access to transit **Policy GS-12.4:** Design transit areas to improve pedestrian, bicycle, and personal safety en route to accessing transit, within the station, and in the station area. **Policy GS-12.5:** Encourage transit stations to provide high density concentrations of housing across a range of affordability levels, including income-restricted affordable units and commercial uses that maximize the ability of residents to live in high-quality mixed-use and mixed-income neighborhoods. Use incentives for encouraging desired types of development and promote development in underutilized urban tracts. Establish floor area ratio (FAR) minimums and transit-oriented standards and guidelines for new development along the Frequent Transit Network. **Policy GS-12.6:** Enhance connections between major destinations and transit facilities to strengthen the role of these stations as places of focused activity. When siting new stations, collocate with existing activity hubs to build momentum for adjacent development. **Policy GS-12.7:** Encourage middle housing types and transit-supportive levels of density in areas outside of centers but within walking distance of transit stations (Puget Sound Regional Council, 2015). **Policy GS-12.8:** Create design standards for transit-supportive development, considering factors such as block size, zero lot line construction, public spaces like parks and plazas, and frontages that incorporate protection from inclement weather and enhance the public realm and pedestrian experience. EQUITY IS A FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLE OF THE ONE TACOMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, GUIDING EFFORTS TO PROVIDE ALL RESIDENTS—PARTICULARLY THOSE IN HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED (LOWER OPPORTUNITY) NEIGHBORHOODS—WITH EQUITABLE ACCESS TO DAILY ESSENTIALS AND OPPORTUNITIES. BY PRIORITIZING TOD NEAR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ENHANCING PUBLIC AMENITIES IN AREAS OF NEED, TACOMA ENSURES THAT THE BENEFITS OF GROWTH ARE DISTRIBUTED FAIRLY ACROSS THE CITY. EXPANDED TRANSIT OPTIONS, WHEN COMBINED WITH SAFE, WELCOMING PUBLIC SPACES AND APPROPRIATE POLICIES AND PROGRAMS, EXPANDED TRANSIT OPTIONS EMPOWER COMMUNITIES, MITIGATE DISPLACEMENT RISKS, AND ADDRESS LONG-STANDING DISPARITIES. THROUGH INCLUSIVE PLANNING, ONE TACOMA FOSTERS A CITY WHERE EVERYONE, REGARDLESS OF INCOME OR BACKGROUND, CAN ACCESS DAILYWHEN COMBINED WITH SAFE, WELCOMING PUBLIC SPACES AND APPROPRIATE POLICIES AND PROGRAMS, EXPANDED TRANSIT OPTIONS EMPOWER. **Policy GS-12.9:** Attract businesses needed by transit riders, and incorporate food and beverage vendors, restrooms, landscaping, and other daily essentials at transit centers. **Policy GS-12.10:** Within walking distance of major transit stops as defined in municipal code, limit new or expanded surface parking lots, encourage the redevelopment of existing surface parking lots into housing and mixed uses through zoning regulations, density bonuses, economic development incentives and assessments allowed by State law. Develop parking maximums in transit-oriented areas to prevent oversaturation of parking as a land use. ## Integrated Transportation and Land Use **GOAL GS-13:** Transportation planning and investments are coordinated with the Future Land Use Map and Frequent Transit Network Vision Map. **Policy GS-13.1:** Ensure street patterns support multi-modal transportation choices for Tacomans with interventions such as establishing regularized grids, installing adequate multi-modal and accessibility infrastructure, and prioritizing the safety of vulnerable users over vehicular speeds. **Policy GS-13.2:** Implement anti-displacement measures in tandem with transportation investments to foster inclusive development and stabilize communities, especially residents most vulnerable to displacement. **Policy GS-13.3:** Consider the land use context for transportation investments, and vice versa, to ensure transportation choices and land uses are working in concert with each other. Ensure adequate zoning capacity, standards, and guidelines to establish transit-supportive densities in centers and along transit-oriented corridors. **Policy GS-13.4:** Conduct inclusive planning studies that engage communities and stakeholders in shaping desired development outcomes in anticipation of frequent or high-capacity transit projects. **Policy GS-13.5:** Establish interconnected street networks that connect activity centers identified in the Future Land Use Map and support the Frequent Transit Network Vision Map. **Policy GS-13.6:** Invest in comprehensive multi-modal infrastructure prioritizing pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users. This includes sidewalks, protected bike lanes, frequent and reliable transit service aligned with the Frequent Transit Network Map, and universally accessible crossings connecting to key destinations outlined in the Future Land Use Map. This may require re-allocating space currently dedicated to unrestricted vehicle travel, reducing speeds, and implementing other strategies that prioritize movement for people over vehicles. **Policy GS-13.7:** Recognize streets as vital public spaces. Design and manage them to simultaneously fulfill transportation needs and foster social interaction, connection to nature, habitat health, recreation, and other community purposes. **Policy GS-13.8:** Support an enhanced pedestrian environment across all Tacoma neighborhoods, including complete and accessible sidewalks, trees, seating, and public art, with a particular emphasis on safe access to transit. *** TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE DENSITIES RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES EXCEEDING 15 TO 20 HOMES PER ACRE, AS WELL AS EMPLOYMENT AREAS WITH DENSITIES OF 50 JOBS PER ACRE AND HIGHER, ARE PREFERRED TARGETS FOR THE HIGHER FREQUENCY AND HIGH-VOLUME SERVICE PROVIDED BY HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT. REGIONAL GROWTH CENTERS ARE EXPECTED TO PLAN FOR LAND USE THAT ACCOMMODATES AT LEAST 45 ACTIVITY UNITS (POPULATION AND JOBS) PER GROSS ACRE. **Policy GS–13.9:** Public investment will prioritize pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure over new parking garage construction, requiring demonstrated need and alternative analysis for any new proposed publicly-funded parking facility. **Policy GS–13.10:** Expand the City’s capacity to deliver and maintain sidewalk infrastructure in the right-of-way by increasing funding for construction and repair, prioritizing historically under-resourced neighborhoods, and supporting financial assistance programs for low-income homeowners. <
> ### Coordination and Transit-Supportive Densities Supporting and promoting Tacoma’s vision for a high-quality,frequent transit network (Exhibit 24) requires a high level of coordination across City of Tacoma departments, commissions, and City Council, as well as external agencies, such as the transit agencies operating within Tacoma, Pierce Transit and Sound Transit. In April 2019, the Tacoma City Council formed the Transit-Oriented Development Advisory Group (TODAG) to help inform the design and development of significant transit projects throughout the city. The TODAG developed several issue papers and provided both formal and informal comment on transit investments; most notably, those within the Dome District. Additionally, the TODAG worked with a consultant to develop the Tacoma TOD Toolkit, serving as a foundational document for the City’s upcoming efforts related to TOD. Upon the recommendation of the TODAG, a resolution passed in May 2023 to sunset the TODAG and form the TOD Taskforce, a Joint Subcommittee of the Planning and Transportation Commissions. During the development of this Comprehensive Plan and updates to the City’s TMP, the City of Tacoma and its transit agency partners Pierce Transit and Sound Transit met with the TOD Taskforce regularly, typically once per month. These meetings became a venue to coordinate and align plans, including an update to Pierce Transit's long-range Destination 2045 plan, as well as provide input and collaborate on critical transit station and station access investments forthcoming from Sound Transit. The Taskforce became a working group to help align City staff, its consultants, transit agency partners, and City commissioners during the development of both the Comprehensive Plan and TMP. The Taskforce focused on the integration between land use and transportation, and provided critical input and recommendations on both the transit modal element of the TMP and the Growth Strategy Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Notably, the Taskforce urged the City to remain proactive in its advocacy for high quality transit service and to temporally align transit-supportive land use densities and coordinated capital investments along planned high frequency transit improvements. # Annexation Tacoma’s UGA is an area surrounding the city that has been identified for future expansion. The city has four designated UGAs, also referred to as the Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs); namely, Fife Heights, Browns Point/Dash Point, and Parkland/Spanaway. The GMA states that cities should be the primary providers of urban services within UGAs and Tacoma does intend to meet this provision through close collaboration with other jurisdictions and strategic planning. Tacoma already provides some facilities and services in its UGAs and also encourages other service providers within the UGAs to provide similar LOS standards as the City. The City intends to jointly plan for the provision of public facilities and services with Pierce County, other neighboring jurisdictions, and regional service providers. **GOAL GS-14: Annex areas within Tacoma's Urban Growth Area when conditions are appropriate.** **Policy GS-14.1:** Plan for future annexation of the city’s PAAs in a collaborative manner with affected jurisdictions and residents (Exhibit 25). **Policy GS-14.2:** Anticipate public facility and service needs of PAAs through long-range planning, and when feasible, develop facility capacities within the city to meet these needs prior to or after annexation. **Policy GS-14.3:** Conduct joint planning efforts or studies with Pierce County and other adjacent jurisdictions for land use development, transportation, and services within UGAs to ensure development is orderly, compatible, sufficiently served, and consistent with City plans. **Policy GS-14.4:** Ensure, through interlocal agreement or other mechanism, that development of land is consistent with the adopted policies and standards of the City, including the rate, amount, type and location of growth, and the provision and phasing of services within Tacoma's UGA. **Policy GS-14.5:** Extend utility services within Tacoma's UGAs only upon annexation or if a commitment for annexation is in place. **Policy GS-14.6:** Provide for active participation by affected residents and property owners in the joint planning, annexation proposals, or agreements for service within Tacoma’s UGA. **Policy GS-14.7:** Expand the city’s boundaries within established UGAs in a manner that will benefit both the residents of Tacoma and the residents of the area to be annexed. Exhibit 25. Potential Annexation Areas <
> # 2.3 Priority Actions | ACTION STEP | LEAD DEPARTMENT | | :--- | :--- | | Update Zoning and Development Regulations to implement policies in this element. | PDS | | Conduct commercial zoning update, including the following:
  • Update design and development standards for General and Neighborhood Commercial Zones to implement the goals and policies of the One Tacoma Plan.
  • Identify commercial areas appropriate for consideration as new MUCs or for incorporation into existing centers.
  • Consider minimum height, lot coverage, FAR, or other density standards for new development.
  • Identify commercial (and adjacent residential) areas appropriate for consideration as new Mixed-Use Centers. Develop criteria for the location and establishment of new centers to address gaps in retail and commercial service, to support transit ridership, and to expand 15-minute neighborhood access. Special consideration should be given to Neighborhood Council Districts that do not currently contain a MUC.
  • Consider expansion of existing centers to ensure consistent and logical boundaries, provide for adequate zoning and land use transitions, and to ensure an adequate residential zoning capacity within walking distance of the commercial core for commercial activation. Expanded centers should prioritize alignment with designated pedestrian streets and the Frequent Transit Network, and encourage complementary uses with nearby centers.
| PDS | | Explore financial incentives and tools that could be effectively utilized to stimulate private investment in the centers. | PDS | | Develop neighborhood plans for MUCs and Subarea Plans for Regional Growth Centers and Transit Investment Corridors. | PDS | | Update the land use designation typologies for General Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial Areas on the Future Land Use Map. | PDS | | Consider zoning districts or permit requirements to encourage major institutions to do master planning. | PDS | | ACTION STEP | LEAD DEPARTMENT | | :--- | :--- | | Consider zoning or development standards to fully implement the policy intent of the parks and open space Future Land Use Map designation. Consider designation of an overlay zone. | PDS | | Conduct area-wide rezones to bring the zoning districts into consistency with the Future Land Use Map. | PDS | | Consider overlay zone that limits residential uses or sensitive uses adjacent to freeways and puts in place regulatory standards for indoor air quality. | PDS | | Update incentives and height bonuses for the MUCs and regional growth centers. | PDS | | Update Regional Growth Center subarea plans. Consider affordable housing requirements for those centers based on state law. | PDS | | Update the Land Use Designation table to more consistently address the following characteristics for each designation:
• Location criteria – where is the designation appropriately applied.
• Intent of the designation.
• Typical characteristics, to include aspects such as parking and tree canopy.
• Typical preferred and complementary land uses.
• Typical range of building types and scale. | PDS | # Technical # Report City of Tacoma, Washington # ONE TACOMA ## A Comprehensive Plan for a Vibrant, Connected, and Sustainable City Community Profile | July 2024 # CONTENTS Contents | i --- | --- **Exhibits** | **ii** **1 Executive Summary** | **1** **2 Background and Objectives** | **2** Document Organization | 2 Other Reference Documents | 2 **3 Geography** | **4** 3.1 20-Minute Neighborhoods | 6 3.2 Access to Parks and Open Space | 8 3.3 Tree Cover | 9 3.4 Access to Transportation and Complete Streets | 11 3.5 Access to Healthy Food | 14 3.6 Access to Childcare | 15 **4 Demographics** | **17** 4.1 Population | 17 4.2 Household Composition | 22 4.3 Race and Ethnicity | 25 4.4 Linguistic and Cultural Groups | 30 4.5 Immigration | 33 4.6 Disability | 35 **5 Individual and Household Outcomes** | **37** 5.1 Education | 37 5.2 Income and Employment | 38 5.3 Commuting Characteristics | 40 5.4 Housing | 42 5.5 Vehicle Access | 48 5.6 Homelessness | 50 **References** | **51** # EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 | City of Tacoma Neighborhood Council Districts, 2023 | 5 --- | --- | --- Exhibit 2 | City of Tacoma Land Use Designations, 2023 | 6 Exhibit 3 | 20-minute Neighborhoods Based on 2015 Vision | 7 Exhibit 4 | Parks in Tacoma, with 10-minute walksheds | 9 Exhibit 5 | Tree Canopy in Tacoma, 2017 | 11 Exhibit 6 | Vision for Multimodal Transportation Networks in Tacoma, 2015 | 13 Exhibit 7 | Food Access Map of Tacoma | 15 Exhibit 8 | Childcare Supply Relative to Demand | 16 Exhibit 9 | Tacoma Population Density, 2021 | 18 Exhibit 10 | Total Population and Components of Population Change 1960-2023, Pierce County | 19 Exhibit 11 | City of Tacoma Population by Age, 2011 and 2021 | 20 Exhibit 12 | Tacoma and Pierce County Percent Population Change (%) by Age Cohort, 2011-2021 | 20 Exhibit 13 | Tacoma Geographic Mobility by Age, 2021 | 21 Exhibit 14 | City of Tacoma Population Age 65 and Older, 2023 | 22 Figure 15 | Household Composition in Tacoma, 2021 | 23 Exhibit 16 | Change in Household Composition in Tacoma & Pierce County, 2011 & 2021 | 23 Exhibit 17 | Tacoma Density Map for Households with Children, 2021 | 24 Exhibit 18 | Race and Ethnicity in Tacoma, White and People of Color 2011 & 2021 | 25 Exhibit 19 | Race and Ethnicity in Tacoma, People of Color Detail 2011 & 2021 | 26 Exhibit 20 | Tacoma and Pierce County Populations by Race and Ethnicity, 2021 | 27 Exhibit 21 | People of Color as a Proportion of the Population in Tacoma by Block Group, 2021 | 28 Exhibit 22 | Location Quotient, Asian, Black, Hispanic Latino, White Alone | 30 Exhibit 23 | Language Spoken at Home among Population aged 5 and older, 2021 | 31 Exhibit 24 | English Proficiency for Households that Speak Additional Languages | 32 Exhibit 25 | Persons with Limited English Proficiency as a Proportion of the Population in Tacoma by Block Group, 2021 | 33 Exhibit 26 | Foreign-Born Place of Birth for Tacoma and Pierce County Population, 2021 | 34 Exhibit 27 | Tacoma Foreign-Born Population by Year of Entry, 2021 | 34 Exhibit 28 | Persons with a Disability as a Proportion of the Population in Tacoma by Block Group, 2021 | 36 Exhibit 29 | Population by Highest Level of Education Attained, 2011 & 2021 | 37 Exhibit 30 | Household income by race and ethnicity, compared to Tacoma’s median in 2021 | 38 Exhibit 31 | Median Household Income by Census Tract in Tacoma, 2021 | 39 Exhibit 32 | Employment by Major Sector in Tacoma, 2022 | 40 Figure 33 | Means of Transportation to Work, 2021 | 41 Exhibit 34 | Means of Transportation to Work by Race and Ethnicity | 42 Exhibit 35 | Tacoma Housing Tenure, 2010 & 2020 | 43 Exhibit 36 Household Median Income and Housing Status, Tacoma, 2020............................................... 43 Exhibit 37 Household Median Income and Housing Status, Pierce County, 2020 ............................... 44 Exhibit 38 Household Median Income and Home Ownership Rate, Tacoma and Pierce County 2020. 44 Exhibit 39 Tacoma Monthly Median Home Sales Price, September YOY Change (%) 2012-2023 ....... 45 Exhibit 40 Tacoma Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicity, 2021............................................................ 46 Exhibit 41 Percent of Households Cost Burdened by Tenure, 2020 ....................................................... 47 Exhibit 42 Distribution of Renter Cost Burdened-Households in Tacoma, as a % of Block Group Population, 2020 ........................................................................................................................... 48 Exhibit 43 Vehicle Access by Housing Tenure in Tacoma, 2021 .............................................................. 49 Exhibit 44 Household Vehicle Access, as a % of Block Group Population in Tacoma, 2021 ................ 50 # 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Tacoma is situated on a natural delta region and traditional lands of the Puyallup Tribe. The U.S. government relocated several Puget Sound area tribes onto reservations through the Treaty of Medicine Creek 1854. Today the Puyallup Reservation encompasses all of Northeast Tacoma and parts of the New Tacoma and the Eastside neighborhood council district. Tacoma is a port city and the primary urban center on the South Puget Sound. The city is bordered by other incorporated suburban areas to the east and south and the Puget Sound waterways to the north and west. The Tacoma Narrows Bridge to the west connects to other incorporated communities on the Kitsap Peninsula. In the most recent decade Tacoma has experienced demographic shifts. While the City has been growing, outlying suburban areas have been growing more rapidly. Families with children are declining as a share of the population in Tacoma and are proportionately more prevalent in outlying parts of Pierce County. Retirees and working age adults without children are growing as a proportion of the Tacoma population. Though families with children are declining overall, there are pockets of Tacoma where they are highly concentrated (Eastside, South Tacoma and South End neighborhood council district), in some places making up over 40% of all households. However, these areas also experience relatively high mobility, with households moving in or out of the city for better access to opportunities in work, homeownership, childcare or school. Most communities of color are likely residing in the New Tacoma, Eastside, South End, and South Tacoma neighborhood council districts. There's a high concentration of Asian, Hispanic, and Latino communities in those areas that have varying degrees of English proficiency. Asian and Pacific Islander households have a lower English proficiency compared to other multilingual households. Housing, income, and race are highly linked in Tacoma. For example, the median income of Tacoma’s Black-headed households is nearly $20,000 less annually than the overall median income. Black households are the only racial or ethnic group in Tacoma to experience declining homeownership rate over recent years and the most likely to be renting. Data shows that very low-income households are losing foothold in the Tacoma market, where homeownership rates have declined for the income bracket between 30-50% area median income. In contrast, more **extremely** low-income households are living in homes that they own relative to 10 years ago. In both Pierce County and Tacoma, the only other income bracket to decline in homeownership rates is those earning 100% or more of HUD Area Median Family Income (HAMFI). This may suggest a slight change in preference for renting or geographic mobility among higher earners. **INCOME DEFINITIONS** Terms describing income are relative to the area’s median income and adjusted for household size. As a reference point, the FY 2023 AMI was $112,600. * Low-income: A family whose annual income does not exceed 80 percent AMI * Very low-income: A family whose annual income does not exceed 50 percent AMI * Extremely low-income: A family whose annual income does not exceed 30 percent of AMI # 2 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES The City of Tacoma is updating its Comprehensive Plan, One Tacoma, to plan for growth through the year 2050. This Community Profile is part of the scoping effort to understand the current context of the city and recent trends as a starting point for comprehensive plan research. It is also intended to serve as a key resource for shaping the community engagement process by summarizing information about City residents. The Community Profile is a working document, and each Comprehensive Plan chapter will expand on this research in the process of developing specific policies. This Community Profile is developed using publicly available sources of data, including U.S. Census products, data products from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Washington State Office of Financial Management. Some findings from prior analysis and action planning efforts such as the Vision Zero Action Plan and the Analysis of Systemic Disparities in Achievable Housing Options report also appear in this document. The 2015 One Tacoma Vision is that of a “15-minute city.” In other words, every Tacoma resident can reach daily essentials (groceries, school, parks, medical care, etc.) within 20 minutes without a car. This vision informed the selection of data presented. ## Document Organization The community profile has three sections. * **Geography** summarizes physical and administrative features and baseline data about availability of daily essentials. * **Demographics** summarizes information about who lives in Tacoma and their individual identities and characteristics. * **Individual and household outcomes** provides information about how residents are faring in terms of income, education, employment, housing and transportation. More detailed information about certain outcomes disaggregated by race and ethnicity may be available in the Equity Framework and baseline (see below). ## Other Reference Documents Related documents developed (or in development) during the scoping phase for the Tacoma 2050 include: * **Recent Engagement Gap Analysis**: A review of community engagement materials from recent years, highlighting gaps and priority populations. ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Background and Objectives * **Equity Assessment Context History and Baseline**: A review of relevant historical context, equity indicators, and baseline outcomes data disaggregated by race and ethnicity in Tacoma. * **Equity Assessment Framework**: A summary of equity priorities and policy and review rubrics used for the Comprehensive Plan policy audit. * **Engagement Plan**: A draft plan for Comprehensive Plan engagement in 2024-2025. Tacoma’s Equity Index and Map also contains a wealth of data on community demographics and 32 outcomes across Accessibility, Economy, Education, Livability, and Environmental Health. The Index summarizes these 32 indicators into a single measure of opportunity that ranges from very high to low. The Equity Index has been an integral tool for the City of Tacoma to shape and prioritize city policies, programs, and investments. This profile does not intend to replicate this work but will refer at times to high opportunity or low opportunity as defined by the Equity Index. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography # 3 GEOGRAPHY Encircling the natural deepwater port of Commencement Bay and rich in natural resources, the land that comprises the City of Tacoma has been inhabited for thousands of years. These traditional homelands of the Puyallup Tribe were conveyed to the United States in the 1854 Treaty of Medicine Creek and the City of Tacoma was incorporated in 1875 with a population of roughly 1,000. Today, the city is a dynamic, multiethnic community of 217,332 – the county seat and urban core of Pierce County and the third largest city in Washington State. The City of Tacoma has eight neighborhood council districts as shown in Exhibit 1 each with distinct character. State Route 16/Interstate 5 delineates the three southern neighborhood council districts of South Tacoma, South End, and Eastside from the northern neighborhood council districts of North End, Central, New Tacoma, and North East before crossing the Tacoma Narrows strait to the Kitsap Peninsula to the west. The West End neighborhood council district has portions on both sides of SR-16. I-5 bisects the city in the south before running northeast out of the city. North East Tacoma is on the far north eastern side of Commencement Bay, separated from the rest of the city by New Tacoma neighborhood council district which is largely made up of industrial port areas and downtown as seen in Exhibit 2. ### NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL DISTRICTS In 1992, the Tacoma City Council passed legislation designating eight Neighborhood Councils whose boundaries correspond to the City’s traditional planning areas. * Central Tacoma * Eastside * New Tacoma * North End * Northeast * South End * South Tacoma * West End The goal of the Neighborhood Council Program is to foster a partnership of open communication between the City and its neighborhoods and to ensure residents feel included and empowered to contribute to improving the livability of their communities. Each Neighborhood Council serves as an independent, non-profit organization to promote community-based efforts for neighborhood improvement. Analysis in this document and other baseline conditions documents use neighborhood council districts to disaggregate data geographically. At times, the term “neighborhood” is used as shorthand for neighborhood council district. However, it is important to remember that these planning areas are large and diverse and contain many “neighborhoods” in the sense of the word meaning an area with distinguishing community characteristics and in the sense of a 15-minute neighborhood. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography Exhibit 1 City of Tacoma Neighborhood Council Districts, 2023 <
> Source: City of Tacoma, Seva Workshop. 2023. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography food stores, parks, and schools. The Vision also aspires to a robust multimodal transportation network and pedestrian infrastructure such that these amenities are accessible without a car. Tacoma residents vary in proximity to this vision, depending on where they live as shown in Exhibit 3. The Stadium to Dome corridor through the downtown core, Hilltop in Central Tacoma, Oakland/Madrona in South Tacoma, and the Proctor District in North End score highly on the composite walkability score and would be considered 20-minute neighborhoods. Most of the rest of Tacoma rates as areas where walking to meet daily needs would be challenging using these criteria. Further analysis will be needed to see which neighborhoods meet the 15-minute neighborhood vision. Exhibit 3 20-minute Neighborhoods Based on 2015 Vision <
> Source: City of Tacoma, 2015. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography # 3.2 Access to Parks and Open Space In the City of Tacoma, park and open space services are provided by the City in partnership with Metro Parks Tacoma. Active areas are those that are developed for and dedicated to community access and recreation. Passive open space properties are generally undeveloped and covered with vegetation and most provide or have the potential to provide benefits to stormwater quantity and quality. There are approximately 1,480 acres of active open space and parks and 3,900 acres of passive open space (including undeveloped private property) in the City of Tacoma[^p70-1]. In 2014, the passive open space parcels were transferred from the City Planning and Development Services to Environmental Services while Active open space sites remain managed by the City’s Public Works Department, specifically the Real Property Services section. In 2018, Metro Parks Tacoma adopted, and the City of Tacoma endorsed, the goal that every resident within the Park District have access to a park or open space within a 10-minute walk of their residence. Metro Parks analysis conducted as part of their 2024 update of the System and Strategic Plan noted that only approximately 75% of Tacoma residents live within a 10-minute walk of a park. They have identified the Tacoma Mall Area, Southwest Tacoma, Helen B. Stafford Elementary Area, Northwest Tacoma (Silas High School Area), and the Larchmont & Fern Hill Neighborhoods as particularly underserved by parks access[^p70-2]. [^p70-1]: City of Tacoma, Parks and Open Space Inventory [^p70-2]: Metro Parks Tacoma System & Strategic Plan, https://engagepiercecounty.mysocialpinpoint.com/strategic-plan ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography **Exhibit 4 Parks in Tacoma, with 10-minute walksheds.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma, 2022; Seva Workshop, 2023. ## 3.3 Tree Cover Tacoma, with 20% of the land area covered by tree canopy, has the least amount of tree canopy as a percentage of land cover for all communities assessed in the Puget Sound ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography Region[^p72-3]. The City of Tacoma Urban Forestry team has committed to a goal of 30% tree canopy cover by 2030. Tacoma’s existing tree canopy is mapped in Exhibit 5. When an area has fewer green spaces and more impervious surfaces like roads, parking lots, and buildings, etc. it absorbs and retains more heat from the sun and can create a heat island. Because of built infrastructure, many urban areas experience higher temperatures compared to their rural surroundings. This difference in temperature is what defines an urban heat island effect. A 2020 analysis conducted by Earth Economics found that urban heat islands in Tacoma increase maximum temperatures by as much as 6.2°F above the local baseline. Combined with regional climatic effects, neighborhoods in Central and South Tacoma may be as much as 14°F hotter than neighborhoods in North Tacoma. Higher opportunity neighborhoods, according to the Equity Index, have 15% more tree cover than lower opportunity neighborhoods. Lower opportunity neighborhoods have 19% more impervious surface than higher opportunity neighborhoods. [^p72-3]: “Urban Tree Canopy Assessment” City of Tacoma, 2018 ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography Exhibit 5 Tree Canopy in Tacoma, 2017. <
> Source: City of Tacoma, 2017; Seva Workshop, 2023. # 3.4 Access to Transportation and Complete Streets A safe and accessible multimodal transportation network is key for ensuring the health and wellbeing of the Tacoma community. Currently, many in Tacoma do not have direct access to ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography quality pedestrian infrastructure, public transportation, or bicycle lanes. Addressing traffic safety concerns for travelers of all modes is a top priority for ensuring community health. In February 2020, Tacoma City Council adopted Resolution 40559 committing to Vision Zero and setting the goal of zero traffic fatalities and serious injuries by 2035. While the City of Tacoma has made substantive efforts to create safer streets over many years, there is still an unacceptable number of crashes. In alignment with the City’s Complete Streets ordinance adopted in 2009 and in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City is working to make Tacoma’s streets safe and accessible for all ages and abilities. The City manages 760 miles of streets and over a thousand miles of sidewalks[^p74-4]. These assets represent a huge opportunity for improving community health and the daily experience of moving in and around Tacoma. The 2015 Transportation Master Plan outlines a vision for a comprehensive network of multimodal transportation across Tacoma (see Exhibit 6). Many elements of this vision remain unrealized. The Transportation Master Plan will be updated as part of the comprehensive planning process to align with the updated future land use map. [^p74-4]: City of Tacoma, Transportation Inventory, 2022 ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography Exhibit 6 Vision for Multimodal Transportation Networks in Tacoma, 2015. PRIORITY NETWORKS (ALL MODES) <
> Source: City of Tacoma, Transportation Master Plan, 2015 ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography # 3.5 Access to Healthy Food Healthy food is one of the daily essentials contained in the draft vision for Tacoma. City plans and programs can create the conditions for healthy food stores and temporary food markets to open in neighborhoods, as well as support mobile food options, food affordability, and food distribution. The Tacoma Equity Index uses the modified Retail Food Environment Index (mRFEI) to measure access to healthy food, a methodology first used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The mRFEI is the percentage of all food retailers in an area that are considered healthy. This measure captures areas with no food options (“food deserts”; correspond to a score of zero) as well as areas that have food outlets that are dominated by large relative amounts of unhealthy snack foods (“food swamps”; correspond to lower scores) (Centers for Disease Control). City-wide the mRFEI ratio is about 0.25, meaning about one out of every four food retailers is considered healthy. Areas that tend to have more unhealthy options than healthy options are in Central Tacoma, South End, and Eastside. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography Exhibit 7 Food Access Map of Tacoma. <
> Source: City of Tacoma, Equity Index 2024. # 3.6 Access to Childcare In Tacoma, current licensed childcare availability only meets the needs of approximately 25% of children under 6 in low- and low-middle income families (<=85% state median income) who need care. For infants and toddlers (under 3 years old) only 15.3% of the estimated need is met. Between childcare centers and family childcare homes, there were over 4,000 childcare slots in the TPS Boundary before the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, much of the area ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Geography is considered a childcare desert by the Center for American Progress and the areas of low childcare access overlap with areas of high poverty in the region[^p78-5]. **Exhibit 8** **Childcare Supply Relative to Demand** <
> Source: Center for American Progress, Child Care Deserts, 2023. In 2020, the average monthly cost of full-time childcare in Pierce County was $987 per child, which meant 18 percent of the median household income for a family with a child aged 6 years or younger went towards childcare costs. Paying for childcare is a larger financial burden for households with a single parent, where 28 percent of the household income went towards childcare costs. Black households with a single parent spent 36 percent of their household income on childcare costs. Comparatively, households with two parents spent 15 percent of their household income on childcare costs. A White household with two parents spent 14 percent of their household income on childcare costs[^p78-6]. [^p78-5]: “Head Start Needs Assessment”, Tacoma Public Schools, 2021. [^p78-6]: https://www.childcareaware.org/our-issues/research/ccdc/state/wa/ ONE TACOMA 2050 # 4 DEMOGRAPHICS Tacoma has grown in the past decade, but its growth has been slower than the county as a whole. Compared to 2011, Tacoma today is a city with smaller-sized households, more retirees, and a higher proportion of working-aged adults without children. There is a declining proportion of teenagers and families with young children. The main driver of regional growth in recent years has been net migration, as opposed to natural causes, which has been stable or declining due to a declining birth rate coupled with the aging population. Net migration primarily comes from other parts of the County and Washington State (as opposed to out of state and international migration). Tacoma and Pierce County have been particularly attractive for the Baby Boomer generation, having experienced high rates of growth among adults between 60 and 79 years of age. In Tacoma, there has been a 45% increase in the size of this population from 2011 to 2021. Countywide, this cohort has grown by 50%. Tacoma has also been a destination for 30-39 year olds which has seen a large proportional increase in the population. The population of middle-aged adults (40 – 59) has remained relatively stagnant in size. This is fairly consistent with countywide trends, although there is slightly higher growth shown at that scale. This reflects the smaller size of Gen X nationally. Areas adjacent to Tacoma have grown much faster than the city in both population and housing units. Relative to other parts of Pierce County, the population of households with young children in Tacoma and school age children has remained relatively stagnant or declining. This change has important implications for the school networks and local service providers. In conjunction with changes observed in surrounding areas, families with children may be leaving the city for home ownership opportunities, opportunities to access different schools, affordable childcare, and/or larger unit sizes that may support working from home or larger families. Tacoma is also not attracting many adults in their 20s or families with 2 or more children relative to other parts of Pierce County, again suggesting affordability concerns. Opportunities for homeownership have tightened in Tacoma over recent years. Housing sales prices have been on a steep incline without wage increase to match. Low-income households especially have lost ground in homeownership rates, as have Black households. ## 4.1 Population The City of Tacoma has an estimated population of 217,332 people (2021), up 9% over the past ten years. The average annual rate of population growth over this decade (2011 to 2021) is 0.9%. In Pierce County overall, there has been an average of 1.4% population growth annually, over this same time period. The most rapid rates of growth in Pierce County have been in incorporated areas adjacent to Tacoma such as Gig Harbor (5.3%) and Ruston (3.5%). Nearby communities of Milton (3.5%) and Edgewood (3.4%) have also seen high rates of growth. ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics Central Tacoma, Eastside, and South End have the greatest land areas with high population density, more than 6,000 people per square mile. The neighborhood council districts of West End, South Tacoma, and North East are less densely populated these are geographically very large areas and include variation in population density. As can be seen on the following map, Exhibit 9, the incorporated areas surrounding Tacoma to the northeast, south, and west have similar levels of population density. **Exhibit 9 Tacoma Population Density, 2021** <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017 to 2021). The Office of Financial Management estimates components of population change at the County level based on census estimates and vital statistics. Population change in a given region is comprised of natural change (births minus deaths) and net migration (people moving in minus ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics people moving out). As shown in Exhibit 10, the combination of births and deaths has been a steady, and in recent years slightly declining, contributor to population growth in Pierce County. This reflects broad trends in decreasing birth rates and an aging population. Net migration has been a more volatile variable in population change with a few peaks and valleys highlighted in the following exhibit. Since 2016, net migration has been the more significant contributor to population growth in Pierce County (as opposed to natural change). Exhibit 10 Total Population and Components of Population Change 1960-2023, Pierce County <
> Source: Office of Financial Management April 1 population estimates, U.S. Census Bureau decennial census counts, and vital statistics from the Washington State Department of Health. Exhibit 11 and Exhibit 12 show that the age cohorts contributing the most to population growth between the years 2011 and 2021 have been 60 to 79 year olds and 30 to 39 year olds in both the City of Tacoma and Pierce County overall. The retirement age cohort has grown by roughly 50% in both regions over the past decade. However, there are also notable differences between the City of Tacoma and Pierce County in population changes by age. For example, the City of Tacoma has seen little to negative growth in the number of young people (ages 0 to 29) in the population while Pierce County has had growth in line with overall trends or greater. Tacoma has also had a net loss of residents aged 80 and over while Pierce County has seen this population grow. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics Exhibit 11 City of Tacoma Population by Age, 2011 and 2021 <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017 to 2021). Exhibit 12 Tacoma and Pierce County Percent Population Change (%) by Age Cohort, 2011-2021. | | Tacoma | Pierce County | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Under 10 | 1% | 11% | | 10 to 19 | -9% | 3% | | 20 to 29 | 0% | 13% | | 30 to 39 | 35% | 27% | | 40 to 49 | 1% | -1% | | 50 to 59 | -1% | 5% | | 60 to 69 | 46% | 50% | | 70 to 79 | 45% | 51% | | 80 and over | -16% | 18% | | **Total Population Change** | **9%** | **15%** | Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates, 2011 & 2021. There is a high degree of intra-county geographic mobility, especially in younger age cohorts. Compared to their residence one year ago, 19% of those between age 20 and 29 and 16% of those under 5 years old were living somewhere else in Pierce County. The 20 to 29 year old age cohort is also the most likely to have moved in from somewhere else in the state or from another state. Though Tacoma has a very significant foreign-born population (see 4.5 ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics Immigration) moves from abroad was a much smaller contributor to net migration in the last year compared to within-County and withing State moves. **Exhibit 13 Tacoma Geographic Mobility by Age, 2021** <
> ■ Same house 1 year ago ■ Moved within same county ■ Moved from different county within same state ■ Moved from different state ■ Moved from abroad Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates, 2021. The areas shown on the following map with the largest proportion of population 65 years old and older are largely natural and commercial areas with overall low population density, including Port Defiance, Brown’s Point and the Cheney Stadium and Allenmore Hospital and Golf Course area. Several senior and retirement housing options, as well as adult family homes and assisted living facilities can be found in these areas. Outside of these areas, the senior population tends to live in West End and North End neighborhood council district, with other pockets scattered throughout the rest of the city. ONE TACOMA 2050 # Exhibit 14 City of Tacoma Population Age 65 and Older, 2023 <
> ## 4.2 Household Composition An estimated 87,379 households reside in Tacoma, up approximately 10% in the last ten years and in line with overall population growth. This translates to an average of 2.4 people per household. ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics Figure 15 Household Composition in Tacoma, 2021 <
> Note: Household composition considers children as all persons under 18 years of age living in the household, regardless of relation to the householder. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021) B11005; Seva Workshop, 2023. Exhibit 16 Change in Household Composition in Tacoma & Pierce County, 2011 & 2021 | Households by type | Tacoma | | Pierce County | | % change 2011-2021 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | 2011 | 2021 | 2011 | 2021 | Tacoma | Pierce County | | Households with children under 18 | 24,365 | 24,091 | 105,422 | 110,973 | -1% | 5% | | Households without children under 18 | 55,065 | 63,288 | 192,417 | 224,996 | 15% | 17% | Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021) B11005; Seva Workshop, 2023. Overall, 28% of Tacoma households have children. In 2011, this figure was 31%. Despite overall population growth in this period, Tacoma has fewer households with children under 18 today compared to 2011. This aligns with the overall trend observed in age cohorts with a reduced proportion of children in the city. In contrast, Pierce County has had a modest increase in households with children. Households without children have significantly increased both in Tacoma and in Pierce County overall, and at similar rates. The households with children in Tacoma tend to concentrate in more affordable residential neighborhoods and near schools. The map in Exhibit 17 explores this geographic distribution, with higher concentrations of children in neighborhood council districts including North East Tacoma, Eastside, South Tacoma and South End, as well as the North End. In some of these residential pockets of Tacoma, over 40% of households have children. Many of these areas with ONE TACOMA 2050 the highest density of children also abut other parts of Pierce County that have similarly high concentrations of households with children. Together with the high within-county geographic mobility for these age groups, these data suggest a high degree of movement for families with young children across the line dividing the City of Tacoma from the rest of Pierce County. **Exhibit 17 Tacoma Density Map for Households with Children, 2021** <
> Note: Household composition considers children as all persons under 18 years of age living in the household, regardless of relation to the householder. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021). ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics Exhibit 19 Race and Ethnicity in Tacoma, People of Color Detail 2011 & 2021 <
> Note: AIAN=American Indian and Alaska Native; NHOPI=Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Hispanic or Latino is an ethnicity. The Hispanic or Latino category includes Hispanic and Latine people of all races. All other categories show non-Hispanic races. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates, 2011 & 2021. Compared to Pierce County, Tacoma has a higher proportion of People of Color. This is particularly true for the Asian and Black communities, as well as the American Indian and Alaska Native, ‘Other race’, and multiracial identities. The percentage that identifies as American Indian and Alaska Native alone or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander may appear small. However, these populations include relatively large communities that are often farthest from opportunity and representation due in part to their smaller size in Census figures. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics Exhibit 20 Tacoma and Pierce County Populations by Race and Ethnicity, 2021 <
> Notes: AIAN=American Indian and Alaska Native; NHOPI=Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Hispanic or Latine is an ethnicity. The Hispanic or Latino category includes Hispanic and Latine people of all races. All other categories show non-Hispanic races. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021). The map in Exhibit 21 explores the geographic distribution for communities of color in Tacoma. The highest concentrations for people of color are in the city’s southern and eastern neighborhoods. Densities are lowest in the North and West. The current distribution of communities of color is the result of historical policies and practices, such as treaties, redlining[^p88-7], Japanese incarceration, and Chinese expulsion as well as the outcomes of individual household resources and decisions. The City of Tacoma is located on the traditional homelands of the Puyallup Tribe and today the municipal border of the city extends into the reservation lands of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians to the northeast, established by the 1854 Treaty of Medicine Creek. The Puyallup Reservation encompasses all of Northeast Tacoma and parts of the New Tacoma and the Eastside neighborhood council districts. The culture and identity of the Puyallup people within Tacoma is an important piece of its multiethnic identity today. The redlining practices of the Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) identified the North End and areas extending to the bay as the most desirable parts of the city. Downtown and Hilltop area and the northern parts of Eastside and parts of South Tacoma as hazardous or undesirable due to the presence of non-white [^p88-7]: For a more detailed history see: Mapping Inequality, https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/map/WA/Tacoma/context#loc=12/47.2481/-122.4546 ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics residents. These practices concentrated communities of color in neighborhoods that were de-prioritized for public investment and services. **Exhibit 21 People of Color as a Proportion of the Population in Tacoma by Block Group, 2021** <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021). A location quotient is a metric calculated to show the concentration of communities of interest in each census tract relative to county as a whole. It is a useful way to illustrate segregation of ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics groups. For example, if 7% of the neighborhood population is Black, and 7% of the county population is Black, then the location quotient is 1. A tract where 14% of residents are Black would have a location quotient of 2. And a track where only 3.5% of residents are Black would have a location quotient of 0.5. So, tracts with high location quotient scores have a greater share of that population compared to the rest of the County. Tacoma has long been more diverse than Pierce County as a whole. As noted above, the City has historically been home to particularly high concentrations of Asian and Black residents as compared to Pierce County. However, as the location quotient maps show, these communities are likely to live just outside of the Tacoma City boundary in other urban, peri-urban areas of Pierce County. The location quotient and charts suggest that the concentration of White and Hispanic/Latino communities is relatively even across Tacoma and Pierce County. The durability of redlining effects can be seen in the North End that has a higher concentration of White households than compared to Pierce County as a whole and lower concentration of Asian, Black and Hispanic/Latino residents. For an overview of the structural factors that have contributed to these patterns, see PSRC’s Legacy of Structural Racism and the Racial Restrictive Covenants Project. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics Exhibit 22 Location Quotient, Asian, Black, Hispanic Latino, White Alone <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021); Seva Workshop, 2023 # 4.4 Linguistic and Cultural Groups There is a wide range of languages spoken across Tacoma. While most Tacoma residents age 5 and older speak English as their primary language (82%), other common languages spoken at home are Spanish (7%), Vietnamese (2%), and Russian, Polish, or other Slavic languages (1.4%), Korean (1.1%), and Tagalog (0.9%). An additional 3% of the population speaks other ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics Asian and Pacific Island languages, which could include languages such as Samoan, Marshallese, Chuukese, and Lao. Roughly 20 percent of the population speak more than one language at home with varying English proficiency. Asian and Pacific Islander language speaking households are less likely to have English proficiency of “very well” compared to other multilingual households. They comprise roughly half of the population that speaks English less than “very well.” Another one-third of households that speak English less than “very well” are primarily Spanish speakers. **Exhibit 23 Language Spoken at Home among Population aged 5 and older, 2021** <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021). ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics ## Exhibit 24 English Proficiency for Households that Speak Additional Languages | | Speak English "very well" | Speak English less than "very well" | % of those who speak English less than "very well" | Total | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Speak Asian and Pacific Island languages** | 5,990 | 8,377 | 51% | | | **Speak Spanish** | 9,028 | 5,277 | 32% | | | **Speak other Indo-European languages** | 3,434 | 2,350 | 14% | | | **Speak other languages** | 1,645 | 493 | 3% | | | **Speak only English** | | | | 167,248 | | **Total Population, 5 years and older** | | | | 203,842 | Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021). The map in Exhibit 24 captures the geographic distribution of those who speak English less than “very well.” The residential communities located in the Eastside and South End neighborhood council districts are home to the highest prevalence of speakers who don’t speak English very well. The Tacoma Equity Map provides additional insight to specific language groups in these areas. Spanish is most prevalent in the Eastside and Central Tacoma. Russian, Polish, Slavic languages are most common in West End and South Tacoma. Vietnamese is most common in South Tacoma, South End and Eastside. Tagalog is common in the West End, South Tacoma, South End, and the Eastside. Korean is most common in the West End, Central Tacoma, and North East. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics Exhibit 25 Persons with Limited English Proficiency as a Proportion of the Population in Tacoma by Block Group, 2021 <
> Note: While New Tacoma shows a high proportion of Limited English Proficiency persons, the area is primarily industrial with few residents. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021) # 4.5 Immigration The City of Tacoma is home to 26,123 foreign-born residents, comprising 13% of its total population. Immigrants in Tacoma come from across the world, but highest numbers are from ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics countries in Asia (46% of total), Latin America (26%), and Europe (16%). This aligns with the findings on languages spoken at home in the above section. Rates of immigration have slowed over the past decade for Tacoma: the foreign-born population increased 4% in 2011-2021 compared to 9% citywide population growth. The graph in Exhibit 27 highlights this decline, which is likely related to shifts in immigration policy at the federal level. As described earlier in this profile, Tacoma’s growth in recent years has primarily been driven by net migration, but mostly from within county and within state rather than from abroad. **Exhibit 26 Foreign-Born Place of Birth for Tacoma and Pierce County Population, 2021** <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021). **Exhibit 27 Tacoma Foreign-Born Population by Year of Entry, 2021** <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021). ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics # 4.6 Disability Fifteen percent of the population are living with a disability, including disabilities in hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living. This statistic has remained consistent for the last 5 years. The population living with a disability in Tacoma is slightly higher in Tacoma as compared to Pierce County overall where it is about 13%. While people with disabilities live in every block group within Tacoma as shown in Exhibit 28, there are neighborhood council districts where over one-quarter of residents are living with a disability. Areas of the West End, downtown Tacoma and South End are home to the highest concentrations of residents living with a disability. These concentrations may be related to the presence of services and or housing that are well-suited to living with a disability. It may also be due to housing affordability relative to other parts of the City and County. Notably, just outside the Eastern boundary of the city in Pierce County, there is also a relatively high concentration of residents living with a disability. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Demographics Exhibit 28 Persons with a Disability as a Proportion of the Population in Tacoma by Block Group, 2021 <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021) ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes # 5 INDIVIDUAL AND HOUSEHOLD OUTCOMES ## 5.1 Education Tacoma’s population is attaining higher levels of education. Over the last ten years the proportion of residents with a completed Associate’s degree or higher has increased from 34% to 42%. The City has also made gains in rates of residents with at least a high school diploma or equivalency completion. Despite these gains, Tacoma’s rates of educational attainment still lag behind statewide levels. More than one third of residents (35%) have terminated formal education at high school completion or earlier, compared to 30% in Washington state overall. These lower rates in Tacoma are consistent across almost every race category. Racial disparities in educational attainment also persist, with Black attainment of a bachelor’s degree at around 18.9% in contrast to 33.4% of White residents. **Exhibit 29 Population by Highest Level of Education Attained, 2011 & 2021** <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2007-2011 & 2017-2021). ONE TACOMA 2050 # 5.2 Income and Employment Tacoma’s overall median household income in 2021 was $69,956, a 42% increase (without inflation adjustment) from the overall median household income in 2011, which was $49,232. Adjusted for inflation, real median household income has increased by about 22%. There are wide disparities for median household income when comparing by race and ethnicity, as shown in Exhibit 30. White households have a higher median household income at $77,531. Black and AIAN households have the lowest incomes, with medians at $19,353 and $18,722 below the citywide median - respectively. All other BIPOC groups also have median household incomes below the citywide median. For an overview of the structural factors that have contributed to these disparities, see PSRC’s Legacy of Structural Racism. In Tacoma, incomes are higher in areas around the North End, West End, and Northeast Tacoma. Incomes are lowest in South Tacoma, the South End, and the Eastside. These geographic trends are visualized in the map in Exhibit 31. **Exhibit 30 Household income by race and ethnicity, compared to Tacoma’s median in 2021** <
> Note: Exhibits per group are compared to the overall median income. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021) ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes ## Exhibit 31 Median Household Income by Census Tract in Tacoma, 2021 <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021) According to the 2021 American Community Survey, Tacoma has a population of 117,407 that is 16 years of age or older and in the labor force. 2% of these individuals are in the Armed Forces and 93% are employed in the Civilian labor force. This translates to an unemployment rate of 5%, about equal to that of Pierce County. The 3 largest sectors for covered employment in Tacoma are Services (54%), Government (11%), and Retail (10%). Top employers in the Tacoma area represent the government and ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes healthcare providers: Joint Base Lewis-McChord, MultiCare Health System, the State of Washington, CHI Franciscan Health, and Tacoma Public Schools[^p101-8]. Services includes professional, scientific, and technical services; health care and social assistance; and accommodation and food services. **Exhibit 32 Employment by Major Sector in Tacoma, 2022** <
> Note: “Const_Res” = Construction and Resources; “FIRE” = Finance, Insurance, & Real Estate; “WTU” = Wholesale Trade, Transportation, & Utilities. Sources: PSRC, 2022; Seva Workshop, 2023. ## 5.3 Commuting Characteristics According to 2021 LEHD Origin Destination Employment Statistics (LODES), only 28% of working Tacoma residents also work in Tacoma. A combined 21.7 percent have places of employment in surrounding cities of Lakewood, Kent, Auburn, Federal Way, and Fife. Twelve percent (12%) of Tacoma workers have their place of employment in Seattle. About one-third work elsewhere – this includes at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, one of the largest Tacoma resident employers. It is important to note the LEHD data is based on administrative records such as unemployment insurance reporting connecting place of residence and place of employment. These numbers reflect both commuters and those who are working remotely. They also do not include self-employed workers who are more likely to work from home. [^p101-8]: City of Tacoma Economic Development Services, 2020. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes The American Community Survey is based on self-reported respondent experiences and will be inclusive of self-employed workers. Based on the 2021 ACS data, the Tacoma workforce largely commutes by car, 70% driving alone and another 10% carpooling. Ten percent of the workforce works from home. The mean travel time to work is 30.4 minutes with 22.7% of workers commuting 45 minutes or more to work. **Figure 33 Means of Transportation to Work, 2021** <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021) The likelihood of Tacoma workers taking a certain means of transportation to work varies by race and ethnicity. The following exhibit compares the distribution of commute methods to the underlying distribution of workers by race and ethnicity. Communities of color are more likely than average to carpool. Black workers are much more likely than average to commute to work by public transportation. White, non-Hispanic or Latino, workers are the most likely group to commute alone by car, truck, or van. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes **Exhibit 34 Means of Transportation to Work by Race and Ethnicity** <
> Note: Indexed means of transportation to work for workers aged 16 and over, by race and ethnicity in the last 12 months. A value of 0 indicates the share of that group using that means of transportation is equal to their share in the overall population. AIAN=American Indian and Alaska Native; NHOPI=Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Hispanic or Latine is an ethnicity. The Hispanic or Latino category includes Hispanic and Latine people of all races. All other categories show non-Hispanic races. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021) (B08119, B08105B-I) # 5.4 Housing The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) dataset produced by Housing and Urban Development estimated Tacoma to have 85,565 occupied housing units in 2020. This represents an 8% increase over the 2010 estimate of housing units. Housing has grown more rapidly in Pierce County overall, where the number of occupied housing units increased 12% from 2010 to 2020. HUD and the US Census Bureau define the homeownership rate as the percent of occupied housing units occupied by an owner. This rate, 54% in Tacoma and 63% in Pierce County has remained stable over the last decade. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes ### Exhibit 35 Tacoma Housing Tenure, 2010 & 2020 | | 2010 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Owner Occupied | 43,250 (54%) | 46,375 (54%) | | Renter Occupied | 36,750 (46%) | 40,190 (46%) | | Total Households | 80,005 | 86,565 | Source: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2006-2010 & 2016-2020 Household income has a direct relationship with the likelihood of being in owner-occupied housing. Exhibit 36 displays homeownership rates disaggregated by Household Area Median Family Income (HAMFI). 72% of households in Tacoma earning at least the area median income are living in owner-occupied housing, whereas households earning 30% of the median or less are much less likely to live in owner-occupied housing (29%). ### Exhibit 36 Household Median Income and Housing Status, Tacoma, 2020 <
> Source: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020 Pierce County households trend slightly higher both in incomes and homeownership rates. For example, 15% of households in Tacoma are in the very low income bracket of earning less than 30% median income, while 11% of Pierce County households earn at this level. However, Pierce County households in the low and very low income levels are significantly more likely to own their homes than similar households in Tacoma. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes ### Exhibit 37 Household Median Income and Housing Status, Pierce County, 2020 <
> Source: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020 Comparing homeownerships rates over the past ten years, it is apparent that Tacoma and Pierce County have both seen significant improvements in rates for the very low income bracket. However, the low income bracket of 30-50% area median income has significantly declined in homeownership rates in Tacoma, while the rate for the same group has increased in Pierce County. This may reflect more availability of affordable homeownership options outside of the City boundaries, and the lack of homeownership programs and support (relative to those in the very low income bracket). The only other income group to see declines in homeownership rates has been households earning 100% or more than the area median income. ### Exhibit 38 Household Median Income and Home Ownership Rate, Tacoma and Pierce County 2020 | | Tacoma | | | Pierce County | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | 2010 | 2020 | Change | 2010 | 2020 | Change | | <= 30% | 20 | 29 | ↑ 9 | 29 | 36 | ↑ 7 | | >30% to <=50% | 36 | 31 | ↓ 5 | 40 | 43 | ↑ 3 | | >50% to <=80% | 46 | 47 | ↑ 1 | 50 | 51 | ↑ 1 | | >80% to <=100% | 53 | 57 | ↑ 4 | 58 | 62 | ↑ 4 | | >100% | 75 | 72 | ↓ 3 | 80 | 79 | ↓ 1 | Source: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2006-2010 & 2016-2020 ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes The median sales price for a home in Tacoma in September 2023 was $540,000, a 57% increase from 2018. Household incomes have not kept pace with the increase in home prices. For example, from 2018 to 2021, the Tacoma nominal median income increased about 19% (from $58,617 in 2018 to $69,956 in 2021) while home prices increased 46% (from $345,000 in September 2018 to $502,000 in September 2021) **Exhibit 39 Tacoma Monthly Median Home Sales Price, September YOY Change (%) 2012-2023** <
> | | 2012-13 | 2013-24 | 2014-15 | 2015-16 | 2016-17 | 2017-18 | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **YOY Change** | 8.3% | 1.4% | 11.1% | 10.0% | 16.4% | 7.8% | 8.7% | 14.7% | 16.7% | 6.6% | 0.9% | The likelihood of owning their place of residence varies widely across racial and ethnic groups in Tacoma. White and Asian households have the highest likelihood of owning their home at 61% and 62%, respectively. Comparatively, NHOPI and Black households are much more likely to be renters than homeowners, with ownership rates of 32% for both groups. Both of these groups have experienced a significant decline in likelihood of homeownership rates over the past decade. In 2011, 36% of Black households and 39% of NHOPI households were homeowners. An in-depth discussion of race-based disparities homeownership in Tacoma and factors contributing to this decline is available in this report[^p106-9]. [^p106-9]: ECONorthwest and BDS Planning, *Analysis of Systemic Disparities in Achievable Housing Options*, 2021. https://www.cityoftacoma.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/cms/CBCFiles/Tacoma%20Housing%20Disparities%200Report_2021.pdf ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes ### Exhibit 40 Tacoma Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicity, 2021 <
> Note: AIAN=American Indian and Alaska Native; NHOPI=Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Hispanic or Latine is an ethnicity. The Hispanic or Latino category includes Hispanic and Latine people of all races. All other categories show non-Hispanic races. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates The median gross rent in 2021 was $1,146 for a 1-bedroom unit and $1,750 for a 3-bedroom unit. These rents translate to about 20% and 30% of the overall median household income in Tacoma, but 27% and 42% of the median income for households headed by Black earners. Households that pay 30% or home of their income toward housing are considered cost-burdened and may struggle to cover other essential household expenses, such as transportation or healthcare. Renters in Tacoma are much more likely than homeowners to experience housing cost burden, which is defined as 30 percent or more of a household’s income going towards housing costs. Forty-eight percent (48%) of renters experienced housing costs burden in 2020, and 27% of homeowners experienced housing cost burden. See Exhibit 41. The map in Exhibit 42 explores the geographic distribution of renter cost burden in Tacoma. These rates are particularly high (over 65%) in areas across the City, but are most concentrated in Central, South Tacoma, and the South End. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes ### Exhibit 41 Percent of Households Cost Burdened by Tenure, 2020 <
> ■ Not Cost-Burdened | ■ Cost-Burdened ■ Severely Cost-Burdened | ▨ Cost Burden data not available Note: Cost-Burdened households spend between 30-50% of income toward housing. Severely cost-burdened households spend more than 50% of gross income for housing. Source: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020. ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes Exhibit 42 Distribution of Renter Cost Burdened-Households in Tacoma, as a % of Block Group Population, 2020 <
> Source: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020. ## 5.5 Vehicle Access In 2021, about 7,545 households or 9% of households in Tacoma live without access to a personal vehicle. These households rely on other modes, such as public transportation, bicycle, ONE TACOMA 2050 or pedestrian networks. For these households, the 15-minute walkshed (Exhibit 3) and strong multimodal transportation infrastructure (Exhibit 6) are paramount concerns. While Tacoma lacks complete streets and distribution of amenities for these households, they often bear an excessive time burden for accessing daily essentials. These households are primarily renting households as shown in Exhibit 43. While there is some expected concentration of vehicle-free households in the walkable central neighborhoods of Tacoma, there are also low rates of vehicle access in the Eastside neighborhood council district and in the South End where transit is less frequent and pedestrian infrastructure is less developed. Households' vehicle access is mapped in Exhibit 44. Demonstrating safe access to schools, grocery stores, and other essential daily routes for non-drivers in these areas is important for promoting quality of life and achieving the City's vision. **Exhibit 43 Vehicle Access by Housing Tenure in Tacoma, 2021** <
> ■ No Vehicle Access ■ Vehicle Access Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates, 2021. ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes **Exhibit 44 Household Vehicle Access, as a % of Block Group Population in Tacoma, 2021** <
> Source: ACS 5-year estimates, 2021. # 5.6 Homelessness The Point-in-Time count is a one-day survey of people experiencing homelessness. It is a challenging survey to conduct requiring many volunteers over a large, geographically distributed ONE TACOMA 2050 ONE TACOMA Community Profile | July 2024 Individual and Household Outcomes area and attempting to contact individuals who may not want to be visible to officials. Results are highly sensitive to external factors like the weather and availability of volunteers. For these reasons, it is well known to be an undercount of the actual prevalence of homelessness, though it is uncertain the degree to which it undercounts. For example, the 2023 Pierce County Point-in-Time Count physically recorded 2,148 unsheltered individuals but 6,500 individuals were known to be in contact with the homeless crisis response system in roughly the same period (and even more may be homeless or at risk of homelessness but not in contact with the system). While the measure has its flaws, it is an important way to track the prevalence of homelessness. Compared to 2019, the 2023 Point in Time Count identified 44.5% more individuals experiencing homelessness. Part of this increase may be due to new methodology that includes more people connected to services (but not unsheltered) in 2023, but at least part of this increase is likely attributable to increases in homelessness overall. While roughly one-third of respondents do not record a last known zip code, typically 25-30% give a Tacoma zip code as the last address. Forty-one percent of those experiencing homelessness in the 2023 count identified as Black, Indigenous, or a Person of Color, disproportionate to Pierce County’s overall population (Exhibit 20). The majority of households in the Point in Time count are households without children (93% in 2023). Seven percent were households with children and another 1% percent (9 households) represented unaccompanied youth and young adults. However, a youth-specific Point in Time Count conducted in October 2022 suggests that the number of unaccompanied youth and young adults (ages 13-24) experiencing homelessness is much higher, identifying 332 individuals. Historically, the Point in Time count relies on definitions of homelessness set by Housing and Urban Development and has not included numerous individuals and families living in places unfit for long-term habitation (such as motels) or “doubled up” with other households to remain sheltered. The broader Mc-Kinney Vento definition used by the Department of Education does include these households (though limited to counting households with children connected to public schools). School districts and buildings can vary greatly in the resources available to identify and support homeless children. According to this definition, in the 2022-23 school year, 7.0% (2,030) of Tacoma Public School students are homeless. This rate ranges from 0.7% at Browns Point Elementary School[^p112-10] to Sherman Elementary School to a high of 27% in Oakland High School. [^p112-10]: Excludes data from Remann Hall Juvenile Detention Center with 0.0% homeless enrollment ONE TACOMA 2050 # REFERENCES BDS Planning and Urban Design; ECONorthwest. (2021). Analysis of Systemic Disparities in Achievable Housing Options. City of Tacoma. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). Retrieved Nov 2023, from PLACES: Local Data for Better Health: https://places.cdc.gov/?view=place&locationIds=5370000 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2023, November 24). PLACES: Local Data for Better Health. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/places/about/index.html Centers for Disease Control. (n.d.). Census Tract Level State Maps of the Modified Retail Food Environment Index (mRFEI). Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/downloads/census-tract-level-state-maps-mrfei_TAG508.pdf Child Care Aware of America. (2020). Washington Affordability. Retrieved from https://www.childcareaware.org/our-issues/research/ccdc/state/wa/ City of Tacoma. (2022). City of Tacoma: Transportation Inventory. City of Tacoma. (2022). City of Tacoma: Transportation Project Sheets. Retrieved from https://city-tacoma-wa-budget-book.cleargov.com/resource/cleargov-prod/projects/documents/2ded75b7c513e43deafd.pdf City of Tacoma. (2023, September). Canopy Cover. Retrieved from Tacoma's Tree Canopy Cover: https://www.cityoftacoma.org/cms/one.aspx?pageId=35885 City of Tacoma. (2023, September). Community Forestry StoryMap. Retrieved from https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/0b0e009ae2bf4fc3850161bfdfce5740 City of Tacoma. (2023, November 23). Complete Street Design Guidelines Project. Retrieved from https://www.cityoftacoma.org/government/city_departments/planning_and_development_services/planning_services/complete_street_design_guidelines_project City of Tacoma. (2023, Sept). Environmental Health Index. Retrieved from https://data.cityoftacoma.org/datasets/tacoma::environmental-health-index--1/ City of Tacoma. (2023). Tacoma Equity Index. Retrieved from Tacoma Strategic Plan: https://tacomastrategicplan.org/strategic-projects/tacoma-equity-index/ City of Tacoma. (2023, September). Tacoma Vision Zero Crash Data Dashboard. Retrieved from https://tacoma.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/9e7d27ebc79849c39708b70aa334699a City of Tacoma. (n.d.). Homelessness Strategy 2022-2028. Retrieved Oct 2023, from https://www.cityoftacoma.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/cms/NCS/NCS/Homelessness%20Strategy-v3_footnotes.pdf City of Tacoma. (n.d.). Parks and Open Spaces Inventory Document. City of Tacoma. Retrieved from https://city-tacoma-wa-budget-book.cleargov.com/resource/cleargov-prod/projects/documents/f7474760b7674659ca4f.pdf Department of Children, Youth and Families. (2023). Child Care and Early Learning Need and Supply Data. Retrieved from https://www.dcyf.wa.gov/practice/oiaa/reports/early-learning-dashboards/child-care-need-supply-data Department of Ecology. (n.d.). Overburdened Communities Highly Impacted by Air Pollution. Retrieved from https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c10bdbfc69984a9d85346be1a23f6338 Geo Education & Research. (2023). Disrupting and Healing Trauma Associated with Youth Violence: Root Causes, Service Gaps, and Proven Strategies. Tacoma. Pierce County. (n.d.). 2023 Homeless Point-In-Time County. Retrieved Oct 2023, from https://www.piercecountywa.gov/4719/Homeless-Point-in-Time-PIT-Count Puget Sound Regional Council. (2023, July). Covered Employment by City - Major Sector. Retrieved from https://psrc-psregcncl.hub.arcgis.com/datasets/PSREGCNCL::covered-employment-by-city-major-sector/explore Redfin. (n.d.). Tacoma, WA Housing Market. Retrieved Oct 2023, from https://www.redfin.com/city/17887/WA/Tacoma/housing-market Tacoma Public Schools. (2021). Head Start Needs Assessment. Tacoma, C. o. (n.d.). Transportation Master Plan. Retrieved from https://www.cityoftacoma.org/government/city_departments/public_works/engineering/transportation_master_plan Tejada-Vera B, Bastian B, Arias E, Escobedo LA., Salant B,. (2020). Life Expectancy Estimates by U.S. Census Tract, 2010-2015. (N. C. Statistics, Producer) Trust for Public Land. (2020). Tacoma Green Schoolyards Plan. U.S. Census Bureau. (2022, 2019). American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates: B25031 Median Gross Rent by Bedroom. U.S. Census Bureau. (2023). Retrieved from 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates: https://data.census.gov/ U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). Quick Facts Tacoma city, Washington. Retrieved Oct 2023, from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/tacomacitywashington/IPE120222#IPE120222 USTA Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice. (2022). Tacoma Police Department Violent Crime Reduction Plan, 2022-25. City of Tacoma. Washington State Healthy Youth Survey. (2021). HYS Fact Sheets - Health and Health-Related Behaviors. Retrieved from https://www.askhys.net/SurveyResults/FactSheets Workforce Central. (2022). Monthly Employment Report. Retrieved Oct 2023, from https://workforce-central.org/research-data/laborreport-2/#workforce-central-report ONE TACOMA 2050 City of Tacoma, Washington ONE TACOMA A Comprehensive Plan for a Vibrant, Connected, and Sustainable City Equity Framework | July 2024 # CONTENTS **1 Purpose 1** **2 Equity Assessment Methods & Criteria 2** 2.1 Methods 2 2.2 Criteria 3 Alignment Criteria 3 Implementation Criteria 3 **3 One Tacoma Equity Outcomes 4** **4 Policy Audit Rubrics 7** 4.1 Policy Impacts on Equity Goals 7 4.2 Language 9 ONE TACOMA Equity Framework # 1 PURPOSE The City of Tacoma is updating its Comprehensive Plan One Tacoma to the year 2050. Equity is a key focus for the City of Tacoma and therefore this update. There are also statewide and regional efforts to articulate equity and orient policies and programs to achieve more equitable outcomes for Washington residents. For example, House Bill 1220 introduced new requirements related to housing equity in Growth Management Planning which the Comprehensive Plan will be subject to. This framework is intended to curate measurable and observable equity goals for the City of Tacoma to prioritize in policy updates. This single evaluative framework will be used to assess the existing Comprehensive Plan and meet 1220 requirements. It will also be a guide for policy and program updates to the plan. The content of this framework is based on contextual research and analysis, a summary of which appears in an accompanying document: **Equity Assessment Context History and Baseline.** # 2 EQUITY ASSESSMENT METHODS & CRITERIA **How did we develop the assessment and select outcomes to focus on in One Tacoma 2050?** ## 2.1 Methods The existence of equity occurs across multiple dimensions and can be considered among infinite ways of characterizing subgroups of people. Even with the guidance of existing policies and frameworks as described in the previous section, the Comprehensive Planning process needed to further focus priority equity outcomes. We undertook the following steps to arrive at the analysis contained in this document. 1. **Conduct background research and understand policy context.** The study team gathered existing documentation produced by state, regional, and city entities defining equity priorities. We also researched Tacoma’s historical context. A summary review of findings from this research appears in the accompanying **Equity Assessment Context History and Baseline**. 2. **Develop and apply criteria.** The project team including consultants, City staff and key external partners met and discussed criteria by which the indicators would be filtered for inclusion in this Equity Assessment and which subgroups to prioritize for analysis. These criteria are described below. The consultant team and staff applied these criteria to develop the selected indicators. 3. **Conduct baseline analysis.** The consultant team produced the baseline analysis in this document assessing disparities in outcomes. The data comes from various sources and therefore was available for different subgroup definitions and geographic levels. Where possible, data was disaggregated by race, income, geography (neighborhood). The full compendium of analysis is available in Excel format. Key findings are included in this document while the full baseline appears in the accompanying **Equity Assessment Context History and Baseline**. Outcomes displaying high disparities between a given subgroup and the general population were prioritized for discussion in this document: 4. **Develop assessment rubric with project team.** One rubric guides the assessment of the policy/program **content** for impact and opportunities to move equity goals. A second helps screen for biased or vague **language**. 5. **Audit the Comprehensive Plan** for equity impact on desired outcomes, language, and (re)develop policy options. The Comprehensive Plan audit using the information and rubrics in this document is planned for June-July 2024. ## 2.2 Criteria The following criteria were used to filter and focus on the equity outcomes most relevant to the One Tacoma Comprehensive Plan: ### Alignment Criteria * Anti-Racism. The City’s stated goal of becoming an anti-racist city is outlined in Resolution 40622. Indicators should be disaggregated and analyzed by race to be able to effect anti-racist policies. * Targeted Universalism. The City of Tacoma’s Equity and Empowerment framework led by the Office of Equity and Human Rights uses a strategy of “targeted universalism” which recognizes that we all need different strategies to achieve our full potential. We show a universal population measure and disparities by race and income according to this framework. The rubric guidance needs to be flexible enough to allow for different strategies for different populations. * HB 1220. The new State requirement mandates housing analysis conducted by income and geography to identify and address housing disparities. ### Implementation Criteria * Drives the Vision. The Comprehensive Plan vision is a Tacoma where “every resident can reach daily essentials (groceries, school, parks, medical care etc.) within 15 minutes without a car.” Outcomes that contribute to this vision were prioritized. * Coordination with Council and Community Priorities. We prioritized adopting measures that have already been articulated to avoid duplication of effort, such as the homelessness strategy, the affordable housing action strategy, the climate action plan, and Vision Zero. Comprehensive Plan strategies and these actions should be mutually supportive. * Replicable/trackable. We prioritized indicators with publicly available data or data that is already being tracked by the City to be able to assess future progress on. * Actionable. We prioritized outcomes over which the Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Plan have influence. This Equity Assessment is intended as key reference material for plan writers to craft policies and programs addressing key disparities. One key decision relating to actionability was to not include overall Index measures as an outcome (such as the Tacoma Equity Index or Displacement Indices), but rather, key component measures. # 3 ONE TACOMA EQUITY OUTCOMES **Selected equity outcomes for One Tacoma 2050.** These outcomes were selected by the project team according to the criteria outlined above. A baseline analysis identified the areas and groups listed in the table as farthest from equitable outcomes. Designing programs and policies specifically for these areas and groups will help Tacoma achieve universal goals. | OUTCOME CATEGORY | INDICATORS | PRIORITY AREAS AND GROUPS | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **HOUSING** |
  • First-time buyers of single dwelling structures
|
  • South Tacoma
  • Black households
  • Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander households
| | |
  • Renter-occupied housing cost burden greater than 50%
|
  • South Tacoma
  • New Tacoma
  • Black households
  • Multi-race households
  • Very low income and Low income households
| | |
  • Percent of residents living in the same house one year ago
|
  • South Tacoma
  • South End
  • Hispanic/Latine individuals
  • Multiracial individuals
| | **HOMELESSNESS** |
  • Rare: Point in time count
|
  • Black individuals
  • American Indian/Alaska Native individuals
  • Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islanders
| | |
  • Brief: Placement rate
|
  • American Indian/Alaska Native individuals
| | |
  • One-time: 2-year return rate
|
  • American Indian/Alaska Native individuals
| | **HEALTH** |
  • Life expectancy at birth
|
  • Eastside
  • New Tacoma
  • South End
  • South Tacoma
| | |
  • Access to healthy food
|
  • North East
  • South Tacoma
  • West End
| | OUTCOME CATEGORY | INDICATORS | PRIORITY AREAS AND GROUPS | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | • Youth mental health | • Grade 12 students
• American Indian/Alaska Native students
• White students
• Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander students
• Asian students | | ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE / CLIMATE IMPACTS | • Urban heat | • Central
• Eastside
• South Tacoma
• South End | | | • Air quality (PM 2.5) | • North East and Eastside communities adjacent to freeways and freight routes | | TRANSPORTATION | • High-capacity transit access | • South Tacoma
• North East | | | • Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure | • North East
• Eastside
• New Tacoma
• South Tacoma
• West End | | | • Household vehicle access (Transit dependency) | • New Tacoma
• South Tacoma | | PUBLIC SERVICES AND AMENITIES | • Walkability | • North East
• South Tacoma
• West End | | | • Commercial amenities per acre | • Eastside
• North East
• North End
• South Tacoma
• West End | | COMMUNITY SAFETY | • Average time in minutes between call received and police dispatch | • Eastside
• North End
• South End
• South Tacoma | | | • Perception of safety | • District 4
• District 5
• Hispanic/Latine individuals
• Multiracial individuals | | OUTCOME CATEGORY | INDICATORS | PRIORITY AREAS AND GROUPS | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY | • Median household income | • American Indian/Alaska Native household
• Black households
• Hispanic/Latine households
• Other race households | | | • Childhood Poverty - children under 5 | • Eastside
• South Tacoma
• South End | | | • Good and Promising job availability | • North End | | CULTURAL VITALITY | • Level of access to arts, culture, science, and/or heritage programs or experiences in your community | • BIPOC community
• District 5 | | HISTORIC PRESERVATION | • Thematic representation | • unknown | | | • Distribution of landmarks and districts | • Eastside
• South End
• South Tacoma
• West End | # 4 POLICY AUDIT RUBRICS **How can we assess which policies contribute to more or less equitable outcomes?** ## 4.1 Policy Impacts on Equity Goals This rubric is designed to be a tool for reviewers to assess Comprehensive Plan policies regardless of prior assessment and equity experience. The goal is not to “score” each policy on each of the Assessment Considerations. Instead, the considerations are guiding questions and lenses for reviewers to think through the policy and its characteristics and implications. After thinking though the considerations, we recommend assigning an overall rating as a synthesis of the results. In the audit process, multiple reviewers independently review the policies and assign ratings. Comparing the results of these independent audits, policies where different ratings were assigned would warrant further discussion to arrive at a consensus. We note that the goal is not to have a plan full of transformative policies, but to build in key opportunities to advance equity, especially on priority outcomes and for priority groups listed above. | Assessment Considerations | Overall Rating | | :--- | :--- | | **Purpose** | • Who is this policy intended to serve?
• What impact or outcomes does this policy intend to create? Does it affect priority equity outcomes?
• Was it created in response to input from the community it was intended to serve? | • Harmful/Exploitative - Perpetuates or exacerbates existing injustices in the distribution of benefits and burdens.
• Neutral/Blind - Does not call out or recognize differences by subgroup. May be implicitly biased according to dominant paradigms.
• Sensitive/Responsive – Recognizes differences by subgroups and targets interventions by subgroup to respond to differential needs within in the existing paradigm.
• Transformative – Structurally shifts systems of power and distribution of benefits and burdens in a just way. | | **Implementation** | • How are the activities of this policy resourced (funding, staffing, public will/attention)?
• Are there explicit equity-focused priorities identified and resourced accordingly?
• Are resources for implementation of this policy distributed equitably?
• How do communities access the benefits of this policy? What unique barriers may exist for specific subgroups? | | | Assessment Considerations | Overall Rating | | :--- | :--- | | |
  • What is the process for implementation of this policy? Are there points at which bias may affect the outcome?
| | **Impact** |
  • How is the policy aligned with Comp Plan goals and/or specific Equity outcomes?
  • Who is impacted (benefiting or burdened) by the implementation of this policy? Are specific priority groups or areas identified?
  • Is the policy alone sufficient for achieving equity outcomes? If no, are complementary policies and programs available and sufficient?
  • What unintended impacts may result from this policy and how are the benefits and burdens of these distributed?
| | **Accountability** |
  • Are there relevant disaggregated data and measures available to assess the success of this policy?
  • Who is accountable for the results of policy implementation?
  • Are results of this policy transparent to impacted communities?
  • Are there mechanisms and venues to continue to engage impacted communities in the improvement and redesign of this policy?
| ## Example Review Policy H-1.6 “Allow and support a robust and diverse supply of affordable, accessible housing to meet the needs of special populations, to include older adults, and people with disabilities, and permanent, supportive housing for homeless individuals, especially in centers and other places which are in close proximity to services and transit.” Rated: S with considerations for improvement * If the City’s role is to “allow and support” are complementary strategies and partnerships needed to achieve the implied goal? Can the City have a stronger/proactive role? * Input from older adult, people with disabilities, and homeless individual housing needs * Who already lives in the areas identified for this housing and how will they be impacted? * How will we measure the housing outcomes for these subgroups? * Add priority for housing American Indians and Alaska Native individuals who are affected most by homelessness. # 4.2 Language Similar to the policy rubric, the language rubric is intended as guidance to help reviewers screen for issues and opportunities to make policy language more inclusive and less subject to bias. An overall rating is assigned primarily to help quantify the results of the review and to plan for the work of updating the language. The rating should not be interpreted as a score. | | Assessment Considerations | Overall Rating | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Purpose** | ▪ Does the policy have a clear purpose, rationale, and scope of application?
▪ Was it created in response to input from the community it was intended to serve? | ▪ Harmful/Exploitative (H) - Perpetuates or exacerbates existing biases and stereotypes.
▪ Neutral/Blind (N) – Leaves space for biased interpretation according to dominant paradigms.
▪ Sensitive/Responsive (S) – Is explicit in purpose, responsible actors, and beneficiaries and uses appropriately inclusive and accessible language. | | **Inclusion and Accessibility** | ▪ Does the policy use asset-based language (and avoid deficit-minded language) when describing groups and goals?
▪ Does the policy use inclusive language that adequately covers the goal and intended beneficiaries?
▪ Does the policy include implicit assumptions about people and households? (common assumptions include ability, gender, citizenship, housing status, heteronormativity)
▪ Does the policy avoid unnecessary jargon, acronyms, and specialized language?
▪ Where relevant, does the policy include specific examples to aid interpretation? | | | **Bias and Accountability** | ▪ Does the policy language appropriately identify the responsible institutions, departments, and partners?
▪ Does the policy language specifically identity intended beneficiaries and/or priority populations?
▪ Does the policy use clear and universal terms to describe intended impact (and avoid vague and subjective terms like “neighborhood character” and “appropriate uses”)?
▪ When listing groups, does the policy use the opportunity to list non-dominant groups first? | | ## Example Review Policy H-1.6 “Allow and support a robust and diverse supply of affordable, accessible housing to meet the needs of special populations, to include older adults, and people with disabilities, and permanent, supportive housing for homeless individuals, especially in centers and other places which are in close proximity to services and transit.” Rated: S with considerations for improvement * More specificity around older adults (age ranges) and disabilities (conditions). * More specificity to define centers and proximity to services and transit. * Clarity around whether the term “special populations” is broader than the named subgroups, and if so, who else is included. (blank page) --- ## Circulation — One Tacoma Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 6: Transportation (adopted June 24, 2025) - Source: https://cms.tacoma.gov/Planning/Comprehensive%20Plan/Tacoma%20Comp%20Plan%2006_T%20Final.pdf - Pages: 223 - Covers: circulation - **Transcription findings were recorded for this document;** check figures against the source. # 06 # Transportation # Tacoma # Transportation # and Mobility Plan June 2025 <
> ONE TACOMA A Comprehensive Plan for a Vibrant Connected and Sustainable City CITY OF Tacoma # Acknowledgments ### CITY COUNCIL Victoria Woodards, Mayor Kiara Daniels, Deputy Mayor John Hines Sarah Rumbaugh Jamika Scott Sandesh Sadalge Joe Bushnell Olgy Diaz Kristina Walker ### TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Matt Stevens, Co-Chair Bruce Morris, Co-Chair Joe Korbuszewski Rubén Casas Austin Goble Troy Serad Penny Grellier Richard Gardner Quanah Spencer Pamela Wrenn Kerri Hill ### PLANNING COMMISSION Christopher Karnes, Chair Anthony Steele, Vice-Chair Jordan Rash Morgan Dorner Payton Swinford Robb Krehbiel Brett Marlo Matthew Martenson ### BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TECHNICAL ADVISORY GROUP Ileana Areiza Steve Demmer Jennifer Halverson-Kuehn Julian Helmer Teena Johnson Dmitri Keating Sara Kiesler Thomas O'Neil Treveon Parish Matt Pavolka Jami Stavlo Riley Weaver ### PARKING TECHNICAL ADVISORY GROUP Steph Farber, Co-Chair Joe Loran, Co-Chair David Schroedel Stephanie Sarber Noah Struthers Amalie O'Connor Robyn LaChance Melissa Broom Lynda Best ### INTERNAL TECHNICAL ADVISORY GROUP Carrie Wilhelme Liz Kaster Rachel Barra Ricky Clousing Grayson Reim Adam Leslie Aneka Olson Stephen Antupit Wesley Rhodes LaKecia Farmer Gail Himes Rebecca Solverson Cailin Henley Darin Stavish, Pierce Transit Anna Petersen, Pierce Transit ### CONSULTANTS Nelson\Nygaard Fehr + Peers Seva Workshop ### ILLUSTRATIONS Natalie Dupille ### PHOTO CREDITS Photos in this document were taken by the City of Tacoma # Contents 4 INTRODUCTION 5 What is the Transportation and Mobility Plan? 6 How to Read this Document 7 COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES 7 Engagement Overview 9 Key Community Inputs 10 VISION AND GOALS 11 Vision 12 Goals 17 OUR OPPORTUNITY 18 What Shapes Transportation Needs in Tacoma? 20 Regional Partners 21 Asset Management 22 Commute Travel Trends 23 Mode Shift Goals for All Trips 24 Regional Travel Patterns in 2050 26 Key Opportunities 28 A SAFE, EQUITABLE, AND INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 29 Integrated Network Approach 33 Priority Corridors 34 ELEMENTS OF OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 36 Pedestrian Element 41 Bicycle Element 46 Transit Element 51 Freight Element 55 Auto Element 60 Curb Management Element 64 Public Realm and Activation Element 68 IMPLEMENTING THE TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY PLAN 68 Implementation Strategy 69 Challenges 70 Program and Project Identification 75 Multimodal Level of Service 79 Performance Measurement # Introduction Tacoma’s sense of identity is unmistakable. The city is surrounded by a beautiful natural environment, made up of unique neighborhoods that are full of character, and enlivened by a thriving arts and cultural scene. The Port of Tacoma and the city’s position along Interstate 5 (I-5) make it an important economic center in the region. Tacoma’s affordability, relative to other parts of the Puget Sound, has helped the city maintain a diverse community and support local businesses, although rising costs are gradually impacting this dynamic. The city’s transportation system is a crucial asset that shapes this sense of place. It links people to destinations like parks, grocery stores, local businesses, and places of employment; it gets essential goods and services to people and businesses; and ultimately it connects people to each other. As Tacoma grows, the need for better ways to move throughout the city and access the broader region becomes even more important. A safe, equitable, and reliable transportation system is critical for Tacoma to be a healthy and thriving place, where people want to live, work, and play. The Tacoma Transportation and Mobility Plan (TMP) evaluates the current transportation system, identifies needed improvements, and lays out a roadmap to improve walking and rolling, biking, public transit, and other modes of transportation that make it safer and healthier to move around the city and region. <
> **IN THIS CHAPTER:** * What is the Transportation and Mobility Plan? * Why is a Transportation and Mobility Plan Needed? * How to Read this Document Chapter 01: Introduction # WHAT IS THE TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY PLAN? The TMP is part of Tacoma’s One Tacoma: Comprehensive Plan and outlines the City’s transportation priorities for the next 25 years. It ensures Tacoma meets the requirements of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA), which requires local transportation plans to align with future land use, population, and job growth goals. The TMP builds on the 2015 Transportation Master Plan, refining the City’s long-term vision, goals, and priorities. The plan also details the policies, strategies, projects, and actions needed to keep Tacomans safe, connected, and thriving. <
> <
> <
> ## GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT (GMA) REQUIREMENTS Washington State’s Growth Management Act requires cities to create transportation plans that align with land use decisions and financial planning. For Tacoma, this means: * Developing a transportation plan that supports the future land uses outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. * Considering how Tacoma’s growth will impact nearby communities, such as Ruston, Fife, Federal Way, Lakewood, Fircrest, University Place, and unincorporated Pierce County. * Setting performance goals for all travel options, so the transportation system works for everyone. * Identifying projects, policies, and programs that align with these performance goals. * Creating a practical financial plan to make sure key projects and programs can be completed. <
> <
> # WHY IS A TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY PLAN NEEDED? Tacoma is experiencing significant growth, welcoming new residents, businesses, institutions, and destinations. To manage this growth while supporting long-time residents, the city needs a multimodal transportation system that can move more people while also increasing safety, reducing emissions, and improving accessibility. This requires reducing reliance on cars and expanding access to other transportation options including high-quality public transit, walking, rolling, and bicycling. The TMP sets strategies and actions to make transit, walking, rolling, and biking the safest, most affordable, and most convenient ways to move around the city and connect to the region. It is an opportunity to rethink how different modes of travel have been prioritized in the past and shift toward a future transportation network that aligns with Tacoma’s long-term vision. <
> <
> Chapter 01: Introduction # HOW TO READ THIS DOCUMENT The chapters of the TMP build on one another, showing how the City’s goals shape the policies and projects needed to bring our vision to life. 02 **CHAPTER 02:** **COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES** Community inputs that shape the TMP, gathered through years of process, and joint public engagement with the Comprehensive Plan. 05 **CHAPTER 05:** **A SAFE, EQUITABLE,** **AND INTEGRATED** **TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM** An approach informed by Tacoma’s core values, guiding decision-making about how to use limited street space and financial resources. 03 **CHAPTER 03:** **VISION AND GOALS** Community-driven transportation vision and goals that form the foundation of the TMP. Supported by key policies that guide the development of strategies, projects, and programs. 06 **CHAPTER 06:** **ELEMENTS OF OUR** **TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM** The vision for each key element of our transportation system and the strategies and actions that get Tacoma there. 04 **CHAPTER 04:** **OUR OPPORTUNITY** Key challenges and opportunities that shape the future of our transportation system. 07 **CHAPTER 07:** **IMPLEMENTING THE** **TRANSPORTATION AND** **MOBILITY PLAN** List of projects and an approach to get priorities funded, engage with partners in delivery, and measure the results of progress. A-E Five appendices provide detailed plans for essential transportation modes—pedestrian, bicycle, transit, auto, and freight—as well as other critical street and public space functions, such as curb use and the public realm. A: Key Terms B: Modal and Functional Elements C: Multimodal Level of Service D: Project List E: Model Documentation # Community Perspectives ## ENGAGEMENT OVERVIEW As part of the One Tacoma: Comprehensive Plan update process, the City of Tacoma provided community members with a forum to have their voices heard and to ensure diverse voices and community perspectives underpin TMP recommendations and strategies. ### IN THIS CHAPTER: * Engagement Overview * Key Community Inputs *** 9 9 Community Visioning Workshops attracting over 300 attendees 8 8 community events including pop-ups at schools, parks, and other community destinations 5K Mailer to 5,000 households 7 languages Multilingual survey (in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Khmer, Korean, Russian, and Ukrainian) distributed by Language Ambassadors 1.6K 1,600 comments gathered through various channels <
> # BUILDING ON RECENT ENGAGEMENT EFFORTS The City of Tacoma’s conversation with the community is active and ongoing. In addition to One Tacoma outreach, the city has recently engaged with the community through planning efforts for: <
> **2024 COMMUNITY SURVEY** <
> **VISION ZERO** <
> **HOME IN TACOMA** <
> **PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING** <
> **SUB-AREA PLANNING** <
> **NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING** <
> **SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL ACTION PLAN UPDATE** <
> **COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION FOUR-YEAR PLAN UPDATE: 2025-2029** Chapter 02: Community Perspectives # KEY COMMUNITY INPUTS Community members identified transportation and mobility as prominent themes throughout the One Tacoma: Comprehensive Plan engagement process. Access to community destinations, reliable transit, safe and comfortable places to walk, roll, and bike all emerged as priorities. Key areas of focus from community input include: ### 15-MINUTE NEIGHBORHOODS Participants identified access to amenities as an important priority. There was broad support for 15-Minute Neighborhoods and related concepts such as increasing walkability, reducing car reliance, and being able to easily access amenities and community-serving destinations. ### RELIABLE PUBLIC TRANSIT Community members commented on the need for more reliable transit and advocated for expansion of high-capacity transit like light rail or bus rapid transit. Other important highlights included frequent service, safe stations and stops, and better off-peak service. ### SAFE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY Participants felt that a lack of safe and connected bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure limited their use of active modes to complete daily trips. Street safety was an important theme, with a particular focus on accessibility for older adults, children, and people with reduced mobility. People voiced support for traffic calming measures to slow down drivers and improve safety. ### BEAUTIFYING STREETS, NEIGHBORHOOD IDENTITY, AND SENSE OF PLACE Prominent community concerns included a lack of cleanliness and street maintenance, such as potholes and faded crosswalk markings. # BEYOND ENGAGEMENT FOR ONE TACOMA Beyond engagement for One Tacoma, the City has heard support from the community for initiatives that make it easier and safer to travel through other planning processes. Key themes that continue to emerge in conversation with community include support for: * Reliable transit * Traffic calming * Pedestrian safety * Residential bike ways * Street maintenance * Slower driving speeds * Repurposing right-of-way for community and tree coverage <
> # Vision and Goals The vision and goals guide the development of strategies, projects and programs, and provide a reference against which different projects are assessed and prioritized. The TMP vision statement and goals are rooted in community input and were developed in partnership with the City’s Transportation Commission. *** **IN THIS CHAPTER:** * Vision * Goals <
> Chapter 03: Vision and Goals # TMP VISION <
> To create and sustain a transformative multimodal transportation system <
> that connects people to places <
> and people to people <
> Chapter 03: Vision and Goals # GOALS The vision is supported by eight goals and related policies that guide the strategies, actions, and projects recommended in the plan. The goals offer a high-level overview of what is needed to achieve Tacoma’s vision, while the policies provide specific guidance to accomplish those goals. | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **GOAL 1**
Advance Equity and
Livability | **GOAL 2**
Offer a Safe and
Comfortable
Experience | **GOAL 3**
Make Tacoma an
Environmentally
Sustainable and
Healthy Place to Live | **GOAL 4**
Cultivate Meaningful
Partnerships | | **GOAL 5**
Promote Transparent
Decision-Making | **GOAL 6**
Connect the Tacoma
Community | **GOAL 7**
Maintain and
Upgrade Tacoma’s
Transportation
Resources | **GOAL 8**
Support a Thriving
Economy | <
> ### Vision **THE DESTINATION** The overarching idea of where we want to go as a city ### Goals **THE DIRECTION WE TAKE TO GET THERE** The aspirational direction for the city and what the realized benefit or impact looks like ### Policies **THE STEPS WE TAKE TO GET THERE** Describes what the City needs to do in order to realize our goals and vision Chapter 03: Vision and Goals # 1 Goal 1: Advance Equity and Livability Harm is repaired, and burdens from legacy transportation infrastructure decisions are alleviated by prioritizing investments identified through equitable engagement in communities that have experienced disproportionate impacts and disinvestment. a. Center the voices of communities of color, individuals with a lived experience of poverty, and underrepresented groups when planning, designing, and making-decisions about key transportation policies, projects, and programs. b. Prioritize policies, programs, and projects that remove systemic and physical barriers and address harm from past and contemporary infrastructure decisions. c. Facilitate accessible and dignified services to all persons so all travelers regardless of mobility status can safely and effectively navigate the transportation system. d. Plan and design transportation investments to support and strengthen community assets and reduce displacement risk. e. Empower communities affected by harm or disinvestment to shape their neighborhoods' futures by fostering inclusive participation and encouraging reciprocal dialogue, while utilizing technical guidance from subject matter experts for collaborative decision-making and meaningful change. f. Prioritize investment in affordable transportation options so everyone can take the trips they need to make, when they need to make them. # 2 Goal 2: Offer a Safe and Comfortable Experience All users of the transportation system can move freely and without fear of traffic violence, supported by safe, comfortable, and intuitive multimodal travel options. a. Advance the commitment to zero fatal and serious injury crashes by implementing safe and equitable design and practices that uphold the principle that no loss of life is acceptable on Tacoma's transportation network. b. Design and operate a Complete Streets network that prioritizes safety, accessibility, and connectivity for all users—particularly vulnerable road users such as pedestrians, bicyclists, and small mobility device users. Build out complete, ADA-compliant pedestrian facilities and a citywide bicycling system that accommodates riders of all ages and abilities and connects neighborhoods. c. Reduce vehicle speeds to increase safety for all street users, prioritizing safety and mobility over single occupancy vehicle throughput. d. Concentrate safety investments in areas with the highest risk and history of fatal and serious injury collisions, guided by safety and equity data, while secondarily enhancing routes to key destinations such as schools, transit stops, mixed-use centers, and health-serving destinations. e. Foster a public realm that people want to spend time in, where communities are empowered to look out for each other, and all people can use without fear of harassment or threats. f. Design and maintain the transportation network to secure safe and reliable emergency access, facilitating rapid response for emergency vehicles and efficient emergency evacuation routes. # Goal 3: Make Tacoma an Environmentally Sustainable and Healthy Place to Live Transportation and land-use strategies enable a citywide shift towards a greener future, delivering better outcomes for the environment and ultimately for the people who live here. a. Prioritize active travelers and public transit riders in the planning, design, and construction of streets using the Green Transportation Hierarchy. b. Design new transportation infrastructure to be climate resilient and withstand the impacts of climate change. c. Promote transportation programs and infrastructure that reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and cut air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. d. Establish land use, zoning, and design regulations that create development patterns and street designs that minimize conflicts between road users and prioritize and incentivize transit and active transportation. e. Support the transition from fossil fuels to electric and cleaner transportation technologies, including electric fleets and emission-free vehicles and devices for all types of motorized mobility. f. Transform streets into green streets by incorporating features such as trees, bioswales, and permeable pavement to manage stormwater, reduce urban heat, and enhance air quality. g. Promote active transportation and public realm activation by creating safe, accessible, and engaging public spaces that encourage walking, rolling, biking, and social interaction to support physical health and mental well-being. # Goal 4: Cultivate Meaningful Partnerships Local, regional, state, and intergovernmental efforts are coordinated and aligned, supporting a more seamless multimodal transportation system. a. Develop shared goals with other agencies, which balance local and regional needs, to help guide and navigate trade-offs in ongoing coordination. b. Establish and maintain regular communication channels across departments and agency partners to identify opportunities for better alignment in decision-making, funding, and planning processes. c. Equip Tacoma city staff with the skills and resources to engage in multimodal transportation planning and design using a Safe Systems Approach, promoting partnerships across work groups and departments to foster collaborative improvements. d. Promote ongoing capacity building for community organizations to strengthen local advocacy networks. e. Collaboratively define scope and responsibilities for using the city right-of-way early in the planning process, balancing enhancements with the need for effective project delivery. f. Pursue City-led initiatives to raise revenue for the development, operation, and maintenance of the city’s multimodal transportation system, leveraging the resources of private development, and local, regional, state, and federal partnerships. Chapter 03: Vision and Goals # Goal 5: Promote Transparent Decision-Making Transportation decisions are made openly and with community, and lessons from projects are captured and used to make future work better, while success and challenges are shared to improve community trust. a. Use a data-driven approach for transportation investments, making the decision-making process accessible and clear to the public. b. Track and publicize the measurable outcomes of transportation investment. c. Create defined processes for how lessons learned are used to inform and improve future projects. d. Regularly provide progress updates in ADA-accessible formats that are easy for all members of the public and stakeholders to understand and engage with, considering language needs and literacy levels. e. Solicit community input to navigate tradeoffs that prioritize safety and equity while striving to address community needs. f. Engage relevant City boards, commissions, and advisory groups in planning processes to incorporate their expertise and reflect adopted plans and policies in decision-making. # Goal 6: Connect the Tacoma Community Streets and the public realm serve as essential public spaces, which are inclusive for all ages and abilities, foster social interaction, provide multimodal access, and enrich quality of life. a. Support land use policies and investments in transportation infrastructure that transform the Frequent Transit Network into conduits for equitable transit-oriented development. b. Reallocate street space to prioritize people, creating enjoyable places that also facilitate goods delivery and mobility. c. Create streets as public spaces that are enjoyable for people to travel to and through, give people a sense of pride and community care, and encourage them to travel by walking, biking, or rolling. d. Redesign streets that divide neighborhoods by creating frequent safe and accessible crossing opportunities, slowing driver speeds through arterial traffic calming, and increasing tree canopy. e. Support land use and grid street patterns that promote mixed-use developments, bringing housing, retail, workplaces, and recreational spaces closer together to create walkable neighborhoods. f. Support the development of shared streets and people-focused streets that prioritize walking, rolling, and community gathering over vehicle access, particularly in areas with high pedestrian activity or limited park and plaza space. # Goal 7: Maintain and Upgrade Tacoma’s Transportation Resources Infrastructure is preserved and modernized to support the city’s sustainable and multimodal future. a. Pursue reliable sources of funding that align with Tacoma’s multimodal transportation investment priorities. b. Keep streets, sidewalks, bikeways, bridges, trails, and transit facilities well-maintained and able to meet the needs of all transportation users. c. Prioritize maintenance of transportation facilities in areas of historic underinvestment. d. Prepare Tacoma for emerging mobility trends and technology and leverage proven technology to improve safety and efficiency. e. Invest in the timely maintenance of transportation assets to reduce long-term repair and upkeep costs. f. Foster and strengthen partnerships to support clean, safe, and vibrant public spaces that contribute to neighborhood and business vitality and community well-being. # Goal 8: Support a Thriving Economy An effective multimodal transportation system facilitates connections that enable people, goods, and services to access jobs, services, and destinations, boosting economic vitality. a. Promote safe, reliable, and convenient multimodal transportation options that support seamless commutes and enhance workforce mobility. b. Enhance access to local businesses through improved transit, active transportation, and inviting public realm in mixed-use centers, fostering welcoming business environments for people to visit, gather, and invest in. c. Include small and disadvantaged businesses in the planning, design, and construction of transportation projects to advance Tacoma’s transportation vision. d. Facilitate the safe movement of goods within and through the city, to get supplies to local businesses and connect the Port with the broader region, while reducing local impact. e. Remediate the impacts of I-5 and current and legacy state routes on the commercial success of designated growth areas to support economic vitality and sustainable development. f. Advance flexible curb management to adapt to changing land use and support economic development while balancing the diverse needs of all users. g. Prioritize multimodal investments in centers and high-capacity station areas to support walkable neighborhoods, reduce VMT, and maximize transit access. # Our Opportunity The City of Tacoma is a lively, diverse, and dynamic community with a population of 217,332, making it the third largest city in Washington State and the urban center of Pierce County. Tacoma is expected to grow significantly, welcoming an estimated 60,000 new housing units and 94,000 new jobs by 2050. This projected growth will increase the demand on Tacoma’s transportation systems and assets including streets, bridges, and trails. **IN THIS CHAPTER:** * What Shapes Transportation Needs in Tacoma? * Regional Partners * Asset Management * Travel Trends and Mode Shift * Key Opportunities <
> # WHAT SHAPES TRANSPORTATION NEEDS IN TACOMA? **TACOMA’S GROWTH STRATEGY DIRECTS NEW DEVELOPMENT TO SPECIFIC AREAS THAT CAN ACCOMMODATE IT MOST SUSTAINABLY** Downtown Tacoma and the Tacoma Mall area have been designated as Regional Growth Centers and will be key areas for development over the next 25 years. The One Tacoma: Comprehensive Plan also identifies mixed-use centers that will help manage a significant portion of future population and job growth by providing housing, employment opportunities, transit-oriented development, a strong multimodal transportation network, and community destinations. With the adoption of the Home in Tacoma zoning and standards package, future population and job growth will also be concentrated along transit corridors connecting to regional growth and mixed-use centers. As Tacoma grows, the city is actively working to increase the availability of affordable housing options and enhance housing diversity. <
> **TACOMA SITS ON THE TRADITIONAL LANDS OF THE PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS** The city works closely with the Puyallup Tribe to support their transportation needs, which include supporting tribal members access to schools, jobs, healthcare, and cultural sites, such as gathering places for ceremonies and community events. Reliable public transit is especially crucial for elders, youth, and those without personal vehicles. The Tribe has emphasized the need for better pedestrian safety near the Emerald Queen Casino, a major regional attraction surrounded by auto traffic coming from the nearby Port of Tacoma and I-5. The Tribe's transportation planning focuses on sustainability and sovereignty, emphasizing environmental stewardship and the importance of creating self-sufficient, connected communities. <
> **THE PORT OF TACOMA IS AN IMPORTANT HUB FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND IS ONE OF THE BUSIEST PORTS IN THE UNITED STATES** Near the southern end of the Puget Sound, Commencement Bay offers a naturally deepwater port for ocean-going vessels. In 1837, the Northern Pacific Railway chose the Bay as the terminus of its first transcontinental rail line. The Port plays a crucial role in the region's economy by managing millions of tons of cargo each year. It supports over 43,000 jobs in Pierce County and generates nearly $3 billion in labor income while handling more than $25 billion in commerce. The Northwest Seaport Alliance, which jointly manages the Port of Tacoma with the Port of Seattle, was formed to increase international competitiveness through coordinated operation of these two nearby port facilities. <
> Chapter 04: Our Opportunity TACOMA SERVES AS A HUB FOR VARIOUS TRANSIT SERVICES, INCLUDING PIERCE TRANSIT, SOUND TRANSIT, THE POINT DEFIANCE-TAHLEQUAH FERRY, GREYHOUND, AND AMTRAK The city is anticipating significant new investments in regional transit funded by the Sound Transit 3 (ST3) expansion program. This includes the arrival of Link Light Rail at Tacoma Dome Station in 2035, which will provide frequent, all-day connections between Tacoma and Pierce County to destinations in King and Snohomish Counties. Additionally, the T Line will be extended to connect more neighborhoods in Tacoma to Downtown and to intercity rail at the Tacoma Dome Station. Sound Transit is also investing over $65 million in multimodal improvements to enhance access to the South Tacoma Station, Tacoma Dome Station, and planned Portland Avenue Station. These substantial investments in Tacoma’s high-capacity transit networks have the potential to stimulate new growth and greatly enhance Tacoma’s connections with the surrounding region. <
> I-5 CONNECTS PEOPLE AND FREIGHT TO COMMUNITIES UP AND DOWN THE WEST COAST INCLUDING JOINT BASE LEWIS MCCHORD (JBLM), A MAJOR MILITARY INSTALLATION JUST SOUTH OF TACOMA I-5 travels north through Tacoma, bending east before passing Downtown and the Port of Tacoma, and entering Fife. At the bend, State Route 16 (SR-16) branches northwest, connecting Tacoma to Kitsap County via the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. I-5 is also a source of pollution for local neighborhoods near the freeway and a major impediment to local travel, particularly for people looking to walk, roll, or bike between neighborhoods divided by the freeway. <
> <
> Chapter 04: Our Opportunity # REGIONAL PARTNERS Tacoma coordinates transportation and land use planning with other regional jurisdictions such as Pierce Transit, Sound Transit, Pierce County, Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), to ensure people and goods can access the broader region. Ruston, Fife, Federal Way, Fircrest, Lakewood, University Place, Puyallup, and unincorporated Pierce County partner with the City to ensure people and goods move efficiently between communities. The TMP outlines both transportation priorities that are within the City’s direct purview, as well as those that would need to be a joint effort between Tacoma and its regional partners. The TMP can serve as an opportunity to solidify Tacoma’s priorities and serve as a starting point for coordination with regional partners. <
> PIERCE TRANSIT <
> SOUND TRANSIT <
> PARKS TACOMA <
> PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS <
> PIERCE COUNTY <
> PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL (PSRC) <
> WSDOT <
> RUSTON <
> FIFE <
> FEDERAL WAY <
> THE CITY OF FIRCREST <
> LAKEWOOD <
> UNIVERSITY PLACE <
> PUYALLUP Chapter 04: Our Opportunity # ASSET MANAGEMENT The City of Tacoma is responsible for maintaining and operating its transportation system so it remains in a state of good repair. This requires strategic planning to identify and prioritize assets in need of maintenance to uphold systemwide quality. As new assets such as bikeways and traffic signals are added, the City’s maintenance responsibilities—and associated costs—continue to grow. However, current funding falls short of meeting the demands of maintaining the existing transportation system, let alone supporting the upkeep of new multimodal infrastructure. A proactive approach to maintenance is critical. By investing in regular, routine repairs, the City can extend the lifespan of its infrastructure and avoid the higher costs associated with premature asset replacement. Over the past decade, the City has made significant strides in improving its asset management systems to track and maintain an expanding catalog of infrastructure. Despite this progress, a comprehensive inventory of all assets is still incomplete. Reliable, consistent asset condition data is essential for guiding these investments, enabling data-driven decisions that maximize the value and longevity of Tacoma’s transportation system. ## AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) TRANSITION PLAN The City of Tacoma is committed to establishing and maintaining an accessible community. The City’s ADA Transition Plan, adopted by Council in 2008 and currently being updated, provides a roadmap for identifying and addressing barriers to accessibility in the right-of-way. The plan guides project planning and prioritization so that accessibility improvements are integrated over time. <
> ONE TACOMA TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY PLAN 21 # COMMUTE TRAVEL TRENDS People in Tacoma predominantly use cars to get around, with two-thirds of the population driving alone on their commute. Car usage in Tacoma is slightly higher than the state average but lower than the average for Pierce County, reflecting a slightly higher incidence of active mode and transit usage for work trips. <
> **HOW PEOPLE GET TO WORK** *Source: American Community Survey, 2023, 5-Year Estimates, Table S0801* Chapter 04: Our Opportunity # MODE SHIFT GOALS FOR ALL TRIPS Tacoma’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) sets a goal for shifting trips away from drive alone trips towards other, more sustainable modes of transportation. As a part of the CAP’s net zero modeling scenario, a set of target assumptions were established by the City to achieve its ultimate target of net zero GHG emissions by 2050. This created a target for Tacoma to improve mode shares to reach 15% biking, 15% walking, and 19% transit by 2050, and reduce personal vehicle trips from 90% to 51% for internal trips. <
> As Tacoma grows, regionally designated centers will continue to serve as key hubs for housing and employment. Because they attract high volumes of people and activity, these centers hold the greatest potential to influence how people move around the city. By focusing transportation investments on expanding alternatives to single-occupancy vehicle travel, especially in and between centers and along frequent transit corridors, Tacoma can increase access, support more sustainable travel choices, and shape long-term travel behavior. <
> ### 2050 Target for Non-Commute Trips * DRIVE ALONE * SHARED RIDE * TRANSIT * WALK OR BIKE # REGIONAL TRAVEL PATTERNS IN 2050 The diagram below shows the projected change in regional travel patterns in 2050 for travel between Tacoma and areas outside of the city. <
> # Travel Patterns Within Tacoma in 2050 <
> This map shows the projected top 20 origin-destination pairs in 2050 for travel within the City of Tacoma. The color of each zone refers to the number of trips *within* that zone. Arrows refer to trips *between* different zones. ### Origin-Destination Pairs (2050) **Trips per Square Mile** | Intra-zone | Inter-zone (top 20) | | :--- | :--- | | 0 - 10,000 | 7,144 - 8,000 | | 10,001 - 20,000 | 8,001 - 12,000 | | 20,001 - 50,000 | 12,001 - 16,000 | | 50,001 - 100,000 | 16,001 - 20,000 | | 100,001 + | 20,001 + | * **T** Transit Centers * Mixed Use Centers * 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) * City of Tacoma * Railroad ONE TACOMA TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY PLAN 25 Chapter 04: Our Opportunity # KEY OPPORTUNITIES The TMP is an opportunity to align transportation investments with Tacoma’s broader goals. It is a roadmap that guides where, when, and why the City should invest. The TMP connects transportation priorities with other key issues that shape daily life in Tacoma, such as land use, safety, climate change, and future growth. **Make Tacoma streets safer for everyone.** Tacoma’s Vision Zero goal is to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2035. This means designing streets and infrastructure that slow down cars, support walking, rolling and biking, and improve compliance with traffic laws. **Build a transportation system that works for all Tacomans.** Everyone—no matter their income, ability, or background—deserves access to safe, affordable, and reliable transportation. The TMP puts special focus on people with a lived experience of poverty, people of color, and individuals with disabilities, as well as others who have not benefited or have been harmed by past transportation decisions. **Keep neighborhoods connected and easy to get around.** The City’s Home in Tacoma initiative encourages a wider variety of housing—like duplexes, triplexes, and mid-scale apartments—in areas that were traditionally single-family neighborhoods. This program addresses housing shortages, promotes sustainable growth, and helps create more affordable, inclusive communities while maintaining neighborhood character. Importantly, it puts housing where transit services already exist, making it easier for people to walk, roll, bike, or take transit to local amenities. **Reduce our impact on the environment with cleaner transportation options.** The Climate Action Plan calls for shifting to sustainable transportation, like walking, biking, and public transit, and switching to electric vehicles for moving both people and goods. TMP policies and projects help guide Tacoma towards a more sustainable transportation system. **Celebrate Tacoma’s unique neighborhoods and community spirit.** Tacoma is known for its strong neighborhood identity. The TMP makes streets more inviting and pedestrian-friendly, creating spaces where people feel safe, connected, and surrounded by the character that makes the city special. **Invest in a balanced, multimodal transportation system.** By creating coordinated plans for all the modes and street functions that comprise the transportation network and by focusing on key corridors, the TMP guides transportation spending, building a system where walking and rolling, biking, taking transit, and driving work together for everyone. **Encourage a culture of movement beyond driving.** When more people choose to walk, bike, or take transit, those options become safer and more enjoyable. In Tacoma, 23% of trips are just one mile or less—creating spaces that support walking, rolling, and biking can enable a shift toward healthier, more sustainable ways of getting around. <
> Chapter 04: Our Opportunity **Prepare for new regional transit connections.** When the Sound Transit Link Light Rail extends to Tacoma Dome Station in 2035, it will facilitate new regional connections. The TMP will help Tacoma get ready for the new transit and land use changes these connections will bring. <
> | | | | :--- | :--- | | **Pierce Transit** | | | | Pierce Transit Stream Bus Rapid Transit | | | Public Transportation Benefit Area | | | | | **Current & Planned** | | | **Sound Transit Projects** | | | | ST3 Link Light Rail | | | ST3 Sounder Commuter Rail | | | ST Express Bus | | | Proposed Shoulder-Running Buses/ Speed and Reliability Improvements | | | | | **Pierce County Regional Trails Plan (PCRTP) 2020** | | | | Existing Connector Trail | | | Existing Regional Trail | | | Proposed Connector Trail | | | Proposed Regional Trail | [^p28-10]: Source(s): Sound Transit 3 The Regional Transit System Plan, https://www.soundtransit.org/sites/default/files/project-documents/st3-system-plan-2016.pdf. Pierce County Regional Trails Plan., https://www.piercecountywa.gov/7049/Regional-Trails-Plan *Source: Pierce Transit Destination 2045 Long Range Plan* # A Safe, Equitable, and Integrated Transportation System Thousands of people and goods travel in Tacoma each day. These journeys are made possible by our roads, bridges, sidewalks, bicycle facilities, trails, transit services, and other transportation assets. Travelers barely think twice when all goes smoothly, yet behind the scenes there is a lot happening to make sure Tacoma’s multimodal transportation assets and services are safe and reliable. The TMP is a 25-year plan to create a safe, accessible, multimodal transportation system that meets diverse community needs. The TMP includes seven critical transportation modes and functions of the street (see a summary of each in Chapter 6 and full detailed elements in B). Each of these elements calls for dedication of street space and implementation of strategies that optimize travel for people walking, rolling, bicycling, riding transit, and traveling in vehicles. On certain streets, these priorities overlap, and spatial needs exceed the available right-of-way. The integrated network approach guides TMP priorities in these situations. **IN THIS CHAPTER:** * Integrated Network Approach * Priority Corridors <
> Chapter 05: A Safe, Equitable, and Integrated Transportation System # INTEGRATED NETWORK APPROACH The TMP uses local values—expressed through TMP goals—to allocate limited street space (reflected in the modal vision maps in Chapter 6) and identify areas that require future study and design. The following process can be used to identify, resolve, and establish future planning needs for important multimodal transportation corridors. **OVERLAY THE MODAL AND FUNCTIONAL ELEMENT MAPS WITH PLANNED LAND USE TO UNDERSTAND SPATIAL NEEDS** 1 Identify important synergies and opportunities to advance TMP goals and policies. For example, where might pedestrian infrastructure and transit needs be addressed through a single project? 2 Identify potential conflicts (spatial or policy) and recommend further action or study. For example, what corridors have multiple modal facilities planned, but insufficient street space to accommodate them all? 3 Resolve conflicts by adjusting modal element maps or refining key strategies and actions. 4 Identify specific projects or investments that will be required to resolve potential conflicts (see the TMP Project List in Appendix D). 5 Identify corridors that require future refinement or planning studies to optimize limited space and support TMP goals. <
> Chapter 05: A Safe, Equitable, and Integrated Transportation System ## Considerations for Prioritization Where implementation of modal elements requires more space than is available, five key considerations are used to determine priorities. ### SAFETY The safety of Tacoma’s most vulnerable travelers is top priority. Tacoma’s High Risk Network identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan give priority to projects that reduce risk, improve safety, and support the Safe Systems Approach. ### EQUITY The Tacoma Equity Index is a tool developed to identify areas of the community with lower access to opportunity. This tool is used to support equitable access in these areas to connected walking, rolling, and bicycling networks, high-quality transit, and other mobility options. ### GREEN TRANSPORTATION HIERARCHY Everyone is a pedestrian at some point during their trip regardless of the travel mode used. To rebalance the transportation system, street design and operations will need to prioritize people walking or rolling first, followed by people biking or using micromobility and people taking transit, followed by commercial trucks and vehicles, and then people driving. ### DEMAND The TMP is guided by the One Tacoma: Comprehensive Plan and the guidance it provides for future land uses. Designated growth centers and corridors shape demand for travel, today and in the future. The regional travel demand model helps with understanding travel patterns and the corridors travelers will select to make those trips. ### PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS Tacoma’s arterial streets do the heavy lifting in moving people by all modes, moving goods, and providing access to homes, businesses, and industrial lands. Spatial needs often exceed the available street space. Where this occurs, our approach assesses: * Whether a parallel street can accommodate key functions (e.g., can a street that parallels a major arterial be designated a bikeway/greenway)? * Is a more detailed study or design process required to determine the proper set of corridor investments? <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> Chapter 05: A Safe, Equitable, and Integrated Transportation System # CENTERING SAFETY AND EQUITY Tacoma’s Vision Zero Action Plan sets actions to eliminate fatal and serious injury crashes on Tacoma streets. Successful outcomes will improve the lives of people in areas that offer lower access to opportunity and meet the City’s Climate Action Plan goals to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. <
> The Vision Zero Action Plan is built around the widely adopted principles of the Safe Systems Approach, stressing the need for design, programming, and systems redundancy to overcome the inevitability of human mistakes in protecting our most vulnerable travelers. The TMP advances Vision Zero commitments to: * Design streets that make safe behavior the default. * Change our codes and policies, such as reducing speed limits, adding automated enforcement traffic cameras in key locations, and calming traffic in our neighborhoods, that result in safer roadways for all. * Educate drivers to be safe and respectful of all road users. * Create systems for evaluation that allow corrective action. * Significantly increase our investments in active transportation projects (sidewalks, crossings, bikeways) to improve safety for vulnerable road users and encourage mode shift. * Make every transportation project an opportunity to improve safety. The Vision Zero Action Plan identifies Tacoma’s High Risk Network, those corridors with the highest concentration of fatal and severe crashes or where conditions create a high risk of such crashes, especially for vulnerable road users. Tacoma’s Equity Index and High Risk Network mapped together are key indicators of where we can invest to build a safe and equitable transportation system. # Tacoma's High Risk Network <
> **Vision Zero High Risk Network** * **High Risk Network** * **Schools** * **Hospitals** * **Mixed Use Centers** * **1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe)** * **Parks** * **City of Tacoma** * **Railroad** Chapter 05: A Safe, Equitable, and Integrated Transportation System # PRIORITY CORRIDORS The process outlined above identified several corridors that require additional planning, design, and community engagement to balance multiple mobility, safety, and access needs. Investments in these corridors will have the opportunity to address multiple systems needs through coordinated investment. Future priority corridor studies will: * Identify specific projects and programs needed to address High Risk Corridors for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. * Apply an equity lens so corridor investments prioritize needed investments in areas with Very Low and Low Access to Opportunity as identified in Tacoma Equity Index. * Balance modal and functional space priorities where corridors are identified for multiple investments, including conducting further study and analysis to inform street design decisions. * Inform investment decisions being made by partner agencies (e.g., the preferred location of a transit capital project). * Align street design and transportation improvements with the mobility needs generated by planned land uses. These corridors take priority for future corridor planning studies and should be coordinated with neighborhood and sub-area plans to align with future land use decisions. <
> ## CORRIDORS RECOMMENDED FOR FURTHER PLANNING STUDIES * Pacific Avenue *(already underway)* * East Portland Avenue *(beginning in late 2025)* * 74th and 72nd Streets * 38th Street * 56th Street * North Pearl Street * Center Street * 6th Avenue and 19th Street *(studied together to inform major transit investments)* * South 47th and 48th Streets * Yakima Avenue * Tacoma Avenue # Elements of Our Transportation System This chapter describes each of the elements, the role that mode or function plays as a part of an integrated transportation system, and the key opportunities or challenges related to that mode. The City has set long-term outcomes for each element and recommends specific strategies and actions to advance towards that vision. Combined, these elements shape Tacoma’s opportunity to meet its transportation vision. Tacoma streets are used by people walking, rolling, bicycling, riding transit, traveling by car, making deliveries, hailing rides, and are also places people use for relaxing, eating, and socializing. Each of these uses has specific demands on the street, from right-of-way to design and amenities. While *A Safe, Equitable, and Integrated Transportation System* explores how to prioritize different uses of the street based on context, the *Elements of Our Transportation System* chapter delves into each of these modes and functions in more detail. The seven elements for the TMP’s modes and functions are: *** **IN THIS CHAPTER:** * Pedestrian Element * Bicycle Element * Transit Element * Freight Element * Auto and Street Element * Curb Management Element * Public Realm and Activation Element *** <
> **PEDESTRIAN** Element Outcome: Safe, accessible, and comfortable mobility for people walking and rolling on all our city streets. <
> **BICYCLE** Element Outcome: All ages and abilities network provides safe, comfortable access to our city. <
> **TRANSIT** Element Outcome: Frequent, reliable mobility connecting all neighborhoods and to the region. <
> **FREIGHT** Element Outcome: Dependable access to Port facilities and regional freeways. <
> **AUTO AND STREET** Element Outcome: Improve street safety, provide vehicular mobility and access, and promote reliable emergency vehicle access. <
> **CURB MANAGEMENT** Element Outcome: Efficient and flexible access for people, goods, and services. <
> **PUBLIC REALM AND ACTIVATION** Element Outcome: Places for community life to unfold. Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System While the individual elements focus on the context and needs for each specific mode or function, they also incorporate components related to other uses of the street. While some modes present conflicts and trade-offs with each other, many are also interconnected. For example, nearly all transit trips begin as pedestrian trips, so improving pedestrian access is important to both modes, particularly on streets connecting neighborhoods to transit corridors. Safety is a key issue for both pedestrians and bicyclists, and encouraging walkable, mixed-use development advances goals found under the transit, pedestrian, and public realm elements. Full elements for each mode and function are provided in B. This chapter summarizes key components of each element including: * How the element helps Tacoma meet the TMP Vision and Goals * A network map (for key modes like walking, biking, and transit) * Key strategies * Priority actions ## COMPLETE STREETS The City has had a Complete Streets policy in place since 2008. The policy aims to create a safe, accessible, and equitable transportation network for all users while fostering a sense of place in the public realm. The City recognizes that not every street can accommodate every need, and that collectively, two or more streets can combine to serve as a complete corridor. <
> Image credit: Transit Street Design Guide, NACTO, 2016 Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System <
> # PEDESTRIAN ELEMENT Envisioning a pedestrian-friendly future that welcomes people of all ages and abilities to walk and roll. Tacoma envisions a pedestrian-friendly future—with a complete, accessible and connected pedestrian network that welcomes people of all ages and abilities to walk and roll. In this future, Tacomans choose to walk and roll for most of their short trips – because it allows people to connect with their neighbors and community and offers a comfortable and convenient way to get to school, work, transit, and our favorite local businesses. Tacoma is committed to this vision, but the City still has a long way to go to make it a reality. The pedestrian network is far from complete and significant barriers exist. Barrier curbs, missing link sidewalks, and unimproved and inaccessible crossings make Tacoma’s pedestrian network difficult to navigate, particularly for people with disabilities, youth, and older adults. Additionally, not all neighborhoods face the same challenges when walking and rolling. Many neighborhoods do not have easy access to everything they need to thrive, both because things like grocery stores, schools, parks, and local businesses may not be in close proximity and the routes to get there are not safe or accessible. Building a complete pedestrian network with connected sidewalks, accessible curb ramps, and frequent safe crossings will help Tacoma meet some of our most important goals as a community: those relating to safety, equity, access, and climate. When pedestrians are prioritized through infrastructure design and investments, policies and programs, the City is helping build a healthy, livable, and thriving Tacoma. *** **WALKING AND ROLLING** Pedestrians include people: * Walking * Using assistive mobility devices, like wheelchairs and walkers * Using human-powered modes, like skateboards, roller skates, or scooters Throughout this plan, the terms “pedestrian” or “walking and rolling” will be used to encompass all these active ways of traveling. # Tacoma's Arterial Pedestrian Network Vision <
> ## Arterial Pedestrian Network **Demand** Higher (Pink to Purple gradient bar) Lower **Factors that Increase Demand** * Growth Centers * Land Use * Development Patterns * Pedestrian Focused Development Standards in Place * Frequent Transit Netwrok --- — Shared Use Path — Public Schools — Mixed Use Centers — 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) (T) Transit Centers --- City of Tacoma — Railroad — Parks All streets in Tacoma shall prioritize pedestrian safety and accessibility. This map helps illustrate where we expect higher pedestrian volumes based on land use and connectivity to key destinations. # Tacoma's Neighborhood Greenways Network Vision <
> **Neighborhood Greenway** — Neighborhood Greenway — Other Residential Streets — Shared Use Path Public Schools Mixed Use Centers 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) Parks Ⓛ Libraries Ⓣ Transit Centers [---] City of Tacoma Railroad All streets in Tacoma shall prioritize pedestrian safety and accessibility. This map helps illustrate where we expect higher pedestrian volumes based on land use and connectivity to key destinations. # Pedestrian Strategies The following strategies guide how Tacoma will balance and invest in its pedestrian infrastructure and programs that make it safer, more viable, and more enjoyable to traverse the city on foot or by rolling. <
> 1. Build a safe, connected, equitable, and comfortable pedestrian network—including sidewalks, street crossings, and shared-use paths—for all ages and abilities which allows people to meet their daily needs by walking and rolling to schools, parks, jobs, businesses, mixed use centers, health care, and community destinations. 2. Prioritize Tacoma’s pedestrian investments based on safety, equity, and connectivity to address disparities in safety and access and maximize the impact of City investments. Use a data-driven Vision Zero Safe Systems Approach to proactively address the greatest barriers to pedestrian safety and accessibility. 3. Expand funding for the construction and maintenance of active transportation infrastructure so Tacoma is on-track to meet the City’s Climate Action Plan’s goal of a complete active transportation network by 2050 and the Vision Zero goal of eliminating crashes that cause serious injuries or deaths by 2035. 4. Establish pedestrian safety, accessibility, and connectivity as critical considerations in every project that improves the public right-of-way. During project scoping, pursue opportunities to advance the City’s active transportation goals and implement the Transportation and Mobility Plan. During project construction, prioritize pedestrian safety and access through the construction zone or provide safe and accessible detours. 5. Enhance mobility by prioritizing investments in ADA-compliant pedestrian routes and crossings connecting to and along the Frequent Transit Network. 6. Provide safe, accessible, and connected pedestrian routes and crossings to every public school, park, and community center in Tacoma. Work with Tacoma Public Schools and Parks Tacoma on capital planning to encourage them to include pedestrian safety and access as key elements in their capital projects. 7. Align the City’s zoning and land use codes and development requirements to support pedestrian safety, accessibility and mobility, with frequent and responsive updates to further the City’s active transportation and transit goals. 8. Re-imagine how the public right-of-way is used. Create vibrant public spaces that encourage people to walk and roll and provide opportunities for play and connection. Support people-friendly places through art, trees and landscaping, and community gathering spaces. 9. Harness funding and opportunities when private development occurs to build safe pedestrian connections to and through the development site, ensuring that people can walk and roll to and from the new development. 10. Increase opportunities to safely cross busy arterials, state highways, heavy and light rail crossings, and other barriers to pedestrian connectivity by installing new and/or enhanced crossings, improved lighting, and other treatments. 11. Document and prioritize pedestrian improvements needed to comply with ADA and create a fully accessible pedestrian network. Accelerate implementation of improvements that make streets accessible for all, including sidewalks (connection and condition), curb ramps, and accessible pedestrian signals. 12. Support neighborhood traffic calming and neighborhood greenway projects that help reduce traffic volumes and speeds and make neighborhood streets safer and more comfortable for people walking and rolling. Invest in arterial crossing treatments that make it easier for pedestrians to use these calm and comfortable routes for transportation. 13. Support programs that emphasize the joy and community connections that walking and rolling offers—including open streets events and Safe Routes to School programs. 14. Support a climate resilient transportation system – help buffer pedestrians from the short-term effects of climate change (i.e., plant shade trees, awnings, covered walkways, partner with transit agencies during heat and air quality events, etc.) while working towards mode shift and policy changes at the local, state, and federal levels that can help prevent additional climate impacts. 15. Enhance transparency by expanding opportunities for community members to understand and help shape the City’s approach to pedestrian safety and accessibility and share their expertise on what it’s like to walk and roll in their neighborhoods. ## Pedestrian Actions The following actions outline the necessary steps to achieve the desired outcomes for the Pedestrian Element. | NUMBER | ACTION | | :--- | :--- | | P.1 | Implement a project initiation process so projects in the public right-of-way center safety for all users and support Complete Streets and active transportation safety and access. | | P.2 | Develop conceptual designs for high priority pedestrian improvements – based on safety, equity, and connectivity– to ready pedestrian projects for future grant opportunities and leverage opportunities presented by private development. | | P.3 | Develop and implement policies for low-cost, high impact strategies to enhance pedestrian safety - including Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI), No Right Turn on Red, quick-builds, and daylighting. | | P.4 | Complete the I-5 Crossing Study to address pedestrian connectivity and safety across I-5. Develop an implementation plan to fund study recommendations including short-term improvements, grant and funding requests, and partnerships with WSDOT. | | P.5 | Update the City of Tacoma’s Design Manual and Tacoma Municipal Code to support pedestrian safety and access. | | P.6 | Collect and maintain inventory and condition data on the active transportation network including sidewalks and crosswalk and bikeway striping to help prioritize maintenance and capital expenditures. | | P.7 | Identify the level of funding needed to maintain the City’s pedestrian assets and develop a funding strategy and schedule for maintenance and upgrades. | | P.8 | Create a dashboard showing annual progress towards completing the City’s pedestrian network, making intersections ADA accessible, and upgrading signals with accessible pedestrian signals (APS) and LPI. | | P.9 | Evaluate the City’s pedestrian infrastructure for compliance with the ADA and Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) and prioritize barriers for removal. Document and include this information in the City’s ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan. | Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System <
> # BICYCLE ELEMENT Becoming a bike-friendly city where bicycling is both accessible and enjoyable. Tacoma is committed to becoming a bike-friendly city, where safe, comfortable, and connected bike routes support community cohesion, enhance well-being, and enable community members of all ages and abilities to meet their needs. In Tacoma's bike-friendly future, choosing this affordable, healthy, and environmentally friendly mode of transportation is seamless, supported by robust infrastructure, comprehensive programs, and forward-thinking policies so that bicycling is both accessible and enjoyable. Tacoma has made notable progress toward realizing a bike-friendly vision, yet there remains significant work ahead. The current bicycle network is fragmented. Many neighborhoods and key destinations lack provisions for bike travel altogether. To meet Tacoma's safety, equity, and climate goals, it is essential to develop a connected bike network that is safe and accessible for individuals of all ages and abilities, alongside implementing supportive policies and programs to address disparities within the transportation system. ### BICYCLING Bicyclists include people riding: * Bicycles * Tricycles * Adaptive bicycles * E-bikes In Tacoma, people using electric motorized foot scooters and electric personal assistive mobility devices (EPAMDs) are also allowed to use bicycle facilities and paved shared use paths. Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System # Bike Facility Types <
> **NEIGHBORHOOD GREENWAYS** Residential or similar streets with traffic calming to reduce traffic speeds and volumes. Safety improvements make it easier for people walking, biking, and rolling to cross busy streets. Sidewalks, curb ramps, and trees help make the street more complete. <
> **BIKE LANES** Painted bike lanes delineate on-street space for bikes. A painted buffer can be used to provide additional horizontal separation from moving traffic. <
> **SEPARATED BIKE LANES** These bike lanes include vertical separators (concrete curbs, plastic curbs with delineators, or parked cars) between bicyclists and moving traffic. <
> **SHARED USE PATHS** Paved trails provide shared space for people walking, rolling, and bicycling. They are fully separated from vehicular traffic, but may be adjacent to roads. <
> **SHARROWS** Shared lane markings (also known as sharrows) reiterate that bikes and cars both use the full lane. “Sharrows” can be used as wayfinding to help connect bike routes. <
> **ENVISIONED FUTURE CONNECTIONS** These routes would provide valuable connectivity to the bikeway network, but are not within City right-of-way. If redevelopment occurs, opportunities to create these connections should be explored. # Tacoma's Bicycle Network Vision <
> **Bike Network** - Bike Lane - Separated Bike Lane - Neighborhood Greenway - Shared Use Path - Sharrows - Envisioned Future Connection - Public Schools - Mixed Use Centers - 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) - Parks - Libraries - Transit Centers - City of Tacoma - Railroad <
> Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System # Bicycle Strategies The following strategies guide how Tacoma will become a bike-friendly city by making it safer, more comfortable, connected and joyous to bike in throughout the city. <
> 1. Build a connected, all ages and abilities bicycle network, including separated bike lanes, neighborhood greenways, and shared use paths, which allows people to meet their daily needs by bike, and safely access schools, parks, jobs, businesses, mixed use centers, health care, and community destinations. 2. Prioritize Tacoma’s bicycling investments based on safety, equity, and connectivity to address safety and access disparities and maximize the impact of City investments. Use a data-driven Vision Zero Safe Systems Approach to proactively address the greatest barriers to bicycle safety and access. 3. Expand funding for the construction and maintenance of active transportation infrastructure so Tacoma is on-track to meet the City’s Climate Action Plan’s goal of a complete active transportation network by 2050 and the Vision Zero goal of eliminating crashes that cause serious injuries or deaths by 2035. 4. Make bicycle safety and connectivity key considerations in projects that improve the public right-of-way. During project scoping and design, pursue opportunities to advance the City’s active transportation goals. During project construction, prioritize bicycle safety and access through the construction zone and provide safe detours. 5. Enhance mobility by investing in safe bike connections to transit. Encourage transit agencies to support people on bikes by expanding secure bicycle parking and options to bring bicycles on transit. 6. Provide safe, accessible, and connected bicycle routes and crossings to every public school, park, and community center in Tacoma, along with secure, covered bicycle parking. Work with Tacoma Public Schools and Parks Tacoma on capital planning to encourage them to include bicycle safety, access, and secure bicycle parking as key elements in their capital projects. 7. Align zoning, land use codes, and development requirements with bicycle safety, access, and mobility goals, updating them regularly to support active transportation and transit priorities. 8. Strengthen partnerships with the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, transit agencies, Parks Tacoma, Tacoma Public Schools, WSDOT, and adjacent jurisdictions to improve bike transportation planning, cross-jurisdiction connectivity, construction, and education/outreach coordination. 9. Harness funding and opportunities when private development occurs to build safe bicycle connections to and through the development site, ensuring that people can bicycle to and from the new development and safely secure their bicycle on-site. 10. Increase opportunities to safely cross busy arterials, state highways, heavy and light rail crossings, and other barriers to bicycle connectivity by installing new and/or enhanced crossings, improved lighting, and other treatments. 11. Reduce barriers to bicycling through education and encouragement programs, supportive end-of-trip infrastructure such as covered bike parking, enhanced wayfinding, and improving access to bikes, especially e-bikes. Implement transportation demand management strategies and incentivize the use of active transportation and transit. 12. Support neighborhood traffic calming and neighborhood greenway projects that help reduce traffic volumes and speeds and make neighborhood streets safer and more comfortable for people bicycling. Invest in arterial crossing treatments that make it easier for people on bikes to use these calm and comfortable routes for transportation. 13. Support programs that emphasize the joy and community connections that bicycling offers, including open streets events and Safe Routes to School bike programs. 14. Enhance transparency by expanding opportunities for community members to understand and help shape the City’s approach to bicycle safety and access and share their expertise on what it’s like to bicycle in their neighborhoods. 15. Support micromobility options, like scooters and shared bikes, through targeted infrastructure investments, transit integration, and connections to key destinations, with a focus on equitable access and thoughtful curb space management that protects pedestrian accessibility. 16. Educate drivers, including transit and freight operators, on the rights of bicyclists and safe practices for sharing the road. Take steps to discourage bike lane obstructions—such as those caused by parked vehicles or garbage cans—through a combination of education, warnings, and appropriate follow-up actions. 17. Pursue partnerships and grant opportunities to develop programs that provide incentives for purchasing or using e-bikes and e-scooters, expanding access and encouraging sustainable transportation options. 18. Work proactively with emergency services, transit agencies, USPS, and solid waste to develop shared solutions and best practices for common issues in bikeway design. ## Bicycle Actions The following actions outline the necessary steps to achieve the desired outcomes for the Bicycle Element. | NUMBER | ACTION | | :--- | :--- | | B.1 | Update the City’s standard plans to reflect best practices in bikeway design including, but not limited to, arterial bike crossings, bike crossing markings and signals, sharrow placement, volume management and traffic calming on neighborhood greenways, and bike lane and transit stop interactions. | | B.2 | Develop conceptual designs for high-priority bicycle projects to position them for future grant opportunities and to leverage opportunities presented by private development. | | B.3 | Create a maintenance plan for the bikeway network, including cleaning, repairs, and re-striping, and develop a funding strategy so facilities remain safe and welcoming. | | B.4 | Collect data on the City’s existing wayfinding signage and develop a plan to enhance wayfinding by strategically locating additional wayfinding signs. | | B.5 | Expand neighborhood greenways and coordinate with city programs, such as repaving and traffic calming, to align budgets and priorities. Evaluate and upgrade existing greenways with enhanced traffic calming and crossing treatments to meet current best practices. | | B.6 | Update the City’s traffic control handbook to require bicycle safety and connectivity through/around construction zones. | <
> Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System <
> # TRANSIT ELEMENT A frequent and reliable transit network operating as the backbone of Tacoma’s multimodal transportation system. Transit plays an essential role in Tacoma’s transportation system. To deliver its transportation goals, Tacoma needs a frequent and reliable transit network that provides access to jobs, schools, healthcare, and essential non-work destinations. Transit is the backbone of Tacoma’s multimodal transportation system and helps to mitigate the impacts of automobile travel as the city grows, improve air quality and reduce emissions, and provide travelers with a reliable, affordable means to traverse the city and connect to the region. The term "transit" can refer to bus, rail, streetcar, trolley, ferries and other shared public transportation services. Pierce Transit delivers bus service in Tacoma and surrounding Pierce County communities. Sound Transit is the regional provider of express bus, commuter rail, and light rail services. The City of Tacoma plays a critical role in ensuring transit is reliable and accessible through management of streets and signal systems, provision and maintenance of safe pedestrian and bicycle access to bus stops, rail stations, and transit centers, and through a range of other programs that encourage use of transit and non-motorized travel. Tacoma collaborates with its transit agency partners to align service offerings with the city’s current needs and to plan for transit that supports planned land use growth. *** ### TRANSIT Tacoma has a diverse set of transit offerings designed to respond to its regional setting and land use patterns. In addition to local Pierce Transit service, Sound Transit, Amtrak, and WSDOT connect Tacoma with other cities in the region. **Pierce Transit:** * 29 bus routes on set schedules, plus additional regional express bus routes * *SHUTTLE* paratransit is a ride-request, door-to-door service for qualifying persons with disabilities within 3/4-mile of a bus route * *Rideshare* provides vehicles for three or more people to share a commute * *Runner* on-demand microtransit allows people to book rides in dedicated microtransit zones at Joint Base Lewis McChord, Parkland/Spanaway/Midland, Ruston Way, and Port of Tacoma Tideflats **Sound Transit** * *Sounder* commuter rail from Seattle to Tacoma * Tacoma Dome *Link Light Rail* Extension will extend light rail to Tacoma (expected in 2035) * *T Line*: street running light rail that connects downtown Tacoma to the Tacoma Dome Station and the Hilltop Neighborhood **WSDOT** * *Point Defiance – Tahlequah* Ferry connects to the southern tip of Vashon Island **Amtrak** * *Amtrak Cascades* runs from Vancouver, British Columbia to Eugene, Oregon, connecting Tacoma to Portland and Seattle # Tacoma's Frequent Transit Network Vision Meeting this vision requires substantially more operating resources than are available today, yet the FTN can guide City partnerships with Pierce Transit and Sound Transit. <
> The Frequent Transit Network (FTN) is an aspirational vision for a network of high-quality transit providing freedom for people moving around the city to travel easily and when needed. “Transit” refers to bus transit and light rail transit. The methodology is available in Appendix B. <
> ### Frequent Transit Network Vision | | | | :--- | :--- | | | Frequent: 10 Minutes | | | Frequent: 15 Minutes | | | Frequent: 20 Minutes | | | Other Transit Routes | | - - | Point Defiance - Tahlequah Ferry | | | Tacoma Dome Link Extension (Funded, Opens 2035) | | | Potential Future Light Rail Extension Opportunities | | | Parks | Mixed Use Centers | | H | Hospital | [ ] City of Tacoma | | T | Transit Centers | — Railroad | | | 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) | N | # Tacoma's Capital Investment Corridors Capital Investment Corridor indicate priority for investment, but do not represent specific lines or indicated service. The methodology is available in Appendix B. <
> <
> ### Capital Investment Corridors * **Tier 1 Corridors – Rail or Bus Rapid Transit** * **Tier 2 Corridors – Corridor Enhancements** * **Tier 3 Corridors – Spot Improvements** * **T Line** * **Tacoma Dome Link Extension (Funded, Opens 2035)** * **Potential Future Light Rail Extension Opportunities** * **Other Transit Routes** * **Point Defiance - Tahlequah Ferry** * **Parks** * **Mixed Use Centers** * **Hospital** * **City of Tacoma** * **Transit Centers** * **Railroad** * **1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe)** Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System # Transit Strategies The following strategies guide how Tacoma will partner and invest in a complete public transportation system that can provide effective, affordable, and dignified travel for people of all abilities traveling in Tacoma and connecting to the region. <
> 1. Fund and develop a transit network that is frequent, reliable, and safe by building toward the Frequent Transit Network (FTN) vision (page 47), making transit the most practical and affordable means to travel in and around Tacoma. 2. Actively engage in transit service planning with Pierce Transit and Sound Transit, and advocate for service plans to match the city’s FTN and connectivity needs for major destinations. 3. Explore opportunities to expand service and improve transit frequency and span in Tacoma (using the FTN as a guide). This could include exploring local source funding used to develop service buy-up agreements with Pierce Transit. 4. Work with transit agency partners (Pierce Transit and Sound Transit) to balance the provision of intra-city transit and regional transit, so people can effectively use transit for their trips within Tacoma and their trips in the greater region. 5. Replace high-ridership bus routes with enhanced bus service or other forms of high-capacity transit such as Pierce Transit’s Fast, Frequent, and Reliable Network up to and including bus rapid transit. 6. Focus on developing Commerce Street as a local and regional transit center, and as a focal point for transit service. Support changes to Commerce Street to accommodate this shift, which could include re-routing personal vehicles. 7. Begin planning efforts to prepare for future high-speed rail and the fast ferry in Tacoma. 8. Implement bus lanes and transit signal priority on the FTN, particularly priority capital investment corridors (page 48). Reconfigure streets (e.g., use of turn-lanes, on-street parking) to prioritize the efficient movement of transit. 9. In corridors with the highest levels of transit demand, congestion, and critical connectivity function, study high-capacity transit alternatives, including rail (see Tier 1 Corridors on page 48). 10. Invest in incremental and spot improvements which bolster reliability and use capital projects to eliminate chokepoints. Consider transit improvements as arterial corridors are repaved and there are opportunities to reallocate space through low-cost paint and post type treatments. 11. Incentivize transit-oriented development to attract businesses needed by transit riders, and incorporate amenities like food and beverage vendors and restrooms at transit centers. 12. Create areas near and connected to transit that are safe, comfortable, welcoming, and foster a sense of community. Provide adequate lighting, seating, shade, tree canopy, and public art. Build and maintain safe and accessible pedestrian and bike connections. Install pedestrian-scale lighting at transit waiting areas and areas connecting to transit stops. 13. Align with Pierce Transit and Sound Transit in identifying and conducting early planning for future Bus Rapid Transit and rail corridors. Plan for development, capital projects, zoning changes, and right-of-way preservation so land uses are supportive of transit when the project opens. 14. Plan for interface between transit and other modes, particularly for people accessing transit by walking, rolling, or bicycling. Create low stress active transportation networks that connect directly and safely to transit stops, centers, and stations. Design interchanges between transit and active modes to support safe, direct, and intuitive access for all users. 15. Provide high-quality rider information at transit stops, including real-time arrival information, audible announcements in English and other languages, tactile information, maps, and wayfinding to help people easily navigate the system. ONE TACOMA TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY PLAN 49 16. Promote ORCA for Business for large and smaller employers, and apartment and condominium complexes in Tacoma. Encourage employers and educational institutions to provide transit benefits to their employees and students. 17. Provide support for employers on commute trip reduction for their employees, including training, informational materials and guidance on employer-based transportation demand management strategies. 18. Work with local community-based organizations to implement community-based transportation behavior changes and encouragement measures. 19. Prioritize city right-of-way for high-capacity transit, following the Green Transportation Hierarchy and state mandates. 20. Encourage strategies to improve connectivity between the 1-Line and Downtown Tacoma’s central business district (CBD), such as aligning T-Line frequency and span with 1-Line service or extending future 1-Line service into the CBD. 21. Encourage options for improving regional transit connectivity between Tacoma Dome, South Downtown, Tacoma Mall and nearby mixed-use centers via potential extension of 1-Line (or T-Line), with interim regional express bus service. 22. Preserve rail corridors using the practice of railbanking, so they remain available for future rail projects while allowing for trails and public access improvements. # Transit Actions The City of Tacoma will work with key partners on the following actions to realize the desired outcomes of the Transit Element. | NUMBER | ACTION | | :--- | :--- | | T.1 | Develop local source funding for transit that can supplement Pierce Transit operating funds. The City of Tacoma should use the FTN vision to direct operating resources to Pierce Transit to increase frequency and span in key corridors, along with future route expansion plans. | | T.2 | Develop a program within Tacoma Public Works to analyze, plan, and develop bus speed and reliability projects, signal improvements, and tactical bus treatments. Make prioritization of street space for high-frequency transit a top issue. | | T.3 | Assess needs and develop a plan to bring all pedestrian facilities in proximity to the FTN up to ADA compliance. | | T.4 | Conduct corridor or area planning for central Tacoma that includes a clear decision about transit priorities for 19th Street and 6th Avenue, allowing Tacoma to take a clear position in advocating for corridor investments in future Sound Transit rail expansion and Pierce Transit BRT efforts. | | T.5 | Continue to develop staff expertise and capacity in transit planning and design, allowing for Tacoma to be a more active partner in working with transit agency partners to design transit capital projects, identify priority access improvements, and realize investment in local service priorities. | | T.6 | Partner with Sound Transit to support Link light rail system planning, delivery of future light rail expansions, and improvements to the light rail system, including improved service frequency, station access improvements, and identification of future expansion and right-of-way preservation (including a connection between Tacoma Dome Station and the Tacoma Mall.) | | T.7 | Utilize existing funds from the ride-sharing fee adopted in 2014 to establish a program for accessible taxis in Tacoma. | | T.8 | Submit identified high capacity transit corridors (Tier-1) to the PSRC Regional Transportation Plan for inclusion and consideration for future development and funding. | Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System <
> # FREIGHT ELEMENT ## Supporting Tacoma’s economy and connecting goods to people and businesses. Tacoma's identity as "Grit City" is deeply tied to its industrial heritage and freight movement, which have been integral to the city's economic success and cultural fabric. From its origins as a key port city in the late 19th century to its position today as a hub for global trade, Tacoma’s freight network has supported local industries and connected the city to the world. As Tacoma continues to grow and evolve, the city's freight system remains a vital component of the economy, ensuring that essential goods reach businesses and residents efficiently. The vision for Tacoma’s freight network is one that balances economic vitality with the health, safety, and well-being of the community. While freight is essential to Tacoma’s economy, it also presents significant challenges that must be addressed to maintain community livability. Traffic congestion from large trucks can strain the city's roadways, contributing to delays and reducing safety for all road users. Noise and air pollution from freight vehicles disproportionately affect neighborhoods near industrial areas, especially those with vulnerable populations. These challenges highlight the need to plan and manage freight movement in a way that supports economic activity without compromising the quality of life for Tacoma’s residents. The objective of the Freight Element is so freight movement continues to support the city’s economy while minimizing negative impacts on the community and environment. By promoting sustainable practices, optimizing routes, and incorporating advanced technologies like Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), Tacoma seeks to create a system that is efficient, safe, and environmentally responsible. This element will guide Tacoma’s approach to balancing freight needs with community health and livability, ensuring that as the city grows, it remains a place where both industry and residents can thrive. ## THE PORT OF TACOMA The Port of Tacoma is a critical component of the Northwest Seaport Alliance, a partnership with the Port of Seattle, making it one of the largest container ports in North America. It handles between 9 and 13 million tons of cargo annually, with significant trade links to Asia, particularly China, Japan, and South Korea. The Port's operations support over 43,000 jobs in Pierce County and contribute nearly $3 billion in labor income. It handles more than $25 billion of commerce, highlighting its vital role in the regional economy. <
> **Freight and Goods Transportation System** **Truck corridors** - T-1 corridors: more than 10 million tons - T-2 corridors: 4 million to 10 million tons - T-3 corridors: 300,000 to 4 million tons - T-4 corridors: 100,000 to 300,000 tons - **...** Heavy Haul Network - Manufacturing Industrial Centers - 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) - Parks - City of Tacoma - Railroad # Freight Strategies Freight strategies guide how Tacoma will support critical freight and goods movement while balancing the impacts of large truck and rail traffic, prioritizing safety and centering the needs of vulnerable communities. <
> 1. Minimize the impacts of freight activities near sensitive land uses by optimizing routes using Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), implementing noise and emission reduction measures, and enhancing multimodal infrastructure design to improve safety. 2. Reduce the number of at-grade heavy rail crossings to improve safety by prioritizing grade separation or alternative routing where feasible. 3. Establish quiet zones in areas with high residential or community activity to minimize noise impacts from heavy rail operations. 4. Strengthen Tacoma as a primary hub for regional, Alaskan, military, and international goods movement, serving as a gateway to national and global markets by integrating the development and operation of air, trucking, heavy rail, and maritime terminal facilities to enhance the freight transportation system and bolster the City’s economic base. 5. Design heavy haul freight network to optimize turn radii, use durable paving materials, and set appropriate lane widths for efficient and safe freight movement. 6. Enhance the safety and visibility of bicyclists using vertical and horizontal separation and other best practice design solutions where a freight route shares a street with a bicycle route. 7. Incorporate pedestrian comfort and safety into the design of designated freight corridors by including safe crossings (e.g. pedestrian refuse islands, extended walk time), creating a vegetated buffer between the sidewalk and road, and installing safety measures such as clear signage and driver mirrors at driveways frequented by freight traffic. 8. Enhance transit and active transportation access to manufacturing and industrial centers to provide reliable, 24-hour connectivity for workers, including those without access to a car, accommodating the needs of those working non-traditional hours. 9. Implement freight signal priority, adaptive signals, and modernized infrastructure with optimized vehicle detection and signal timing to improve efficiency, safety, and reduce delays for freight movement. 10. Prioritize safety in the design, operation, and management of freight corridors by reducing conflict points between freight vehicles and other road users, implementing speed reduction measures, signal phase separation, and enhancing visibility at intersections. 11. Increase green infrastructure, including tree canopy, to absorb pollutants and improve air quality in industrial and freight-heavy areas. 12. Promote commercial vehicle safety through education and a consistent application of safety regulations and inspection procedures. 13. Establish a collaborative data-sharing platform where stakeholders (e.g., logistics firms, retailers, city authorities) can share data on traffic, routes, and delivery schedules. Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System # Freight Actions The City of Tacoma will work with key partners on the following actions to realize desired outcomes of the Freight Element. | NUMBER | ACTION | | :--- | :--- | | F.1 | Use the freight model to facilitate the planning for future capital projects. | | F.2 | Regularly review operations and engage stakeholders to adapt strategies that balance freight movement with community health and livability. | | F.3 | Develop a freight routing plan that supports Tacoma’s multimodal vision and minimizes impacts on surrounding neighborhoods while supporting the efficient movement of goods. | | F.4 | Support the Port of Tacoma’s efforts to become environmentally sustainable by assisting with grant applications, advocating for green technology investments, and fostering partnerships that promote cleaner operations and reduced emissions. | | F.5 | Create standard plans to guide the safe integration of multimodal elements on designated freight corridors. | | F.6 | Support and partner to identify and implement freight electric charging opportunities throughout Tacoma’s Manufacturing and Industrial Centers. | <
> Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System <
> # AUTO ELEMENT Moving all street users safely and reliably. Streets are the backbone of the transportation system, serving all modes of travel including automobiles, trucks, transit, bicycles, and pedestrians. While the current reliance on automobiles is recognized, the City's approach is to redesign streets as spaces that support all users—creating a street system that prioritizes safety, sustainability, and multimodal transportation. By enhancing infrastructure for transit, walking, rolling, and biking, Tacoma aims to gradually shift away from automobile dependency, promoting a more connected and livable urban environment with a variety of safe and connected multimodal travel options. The prominence of automobiles in accessing work, education, healthcare, and leisure is largely due to past transportation and land use policies that prioritized car travel. Over time, this focus has shaped Tacoma’s streets and influenced how residents interact within the built environment. While automobiles can provide convenience, this approach has contributed to increased greenhouse gas emissions, heightened congestion, and compromised safety. Tacoma is committed to providing safe and reliable streets for those who need to drive—such as emergency responders, freight operators, service providers, and individuals who rely on a car—while also fostering a shift toward multimodal transportation. The Auto Element emphasizes enhancing road safety and efficiency for all modes of travel, so that every journey, regardless of how it’s made, can be completed safely and without incident. Tacoma streets will be designed to be no wider or faster than necessary. Rather than aiming to eliminate congestion or provide free-flow travel conditions, Tacoma’s goal is to create a safe environment for all road users, while managing congestion effectively. By achieving these goals, Tacoma aims to reduce fatalities and serious injuries, lower greenhouse gas emissions through mode shift, and create a more connected community. Tacoma’s street network serves a number of critical functions for road users. The map on page 56 shows the functional classification of Tacoma streets, which is indicative of volumes and the extent to which a street serves more a more local or citywide/regional function. The map on page 56 shows critical emergency response routes in the city. Safety on Tacoma streets is a key issue for vehicular travel, and the map on page 32 in Chapter 5 shows Tacoma’s High Risk Network—corridors and intersections determined through crash data analysis and selected risk factors to be high risk locations for future fatal and serious injury crashes. # Tacoma's Street Functional Classification <
> **Functional Classification** - Highway - Principal Arterial - Minor Arterial - Collector Arterial - Nonclassified Arterial - Non-Arterial - Mixed Use Centers - 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) - Parks - City of Tacoma - Railroad <
> # Tacoma's Emergency Response Routes <
> **Tier 1 Emergency Response Routes** — Emergency Response Routes [ ] Mixed Use Centers [ ] 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) [ ] Parks H Hospitals [ ] City of Tacoma — Railroad Tier 1 streets are those used to reach more than 300 responses per year or that provide critical connectivity to hospitals. <
> # Auto Strategies The following strategies guide how Tacoma will manage its limited street space to support automobile access in ways that also advance broader community goals for a safe multimodal transportation system. <
> 1. Implement targeted traffic flow improvements that enhance total throughput so safety for all road users is maintained or improved, avoiding any compromise to pedestrian and bicyclist safety. 2. Control the placement and design of driveways and intersections to improve safety and traffic flow. This may include consolidating driveways, adding medians, and regulating the number of access points to minimize conflict points. 3. Employ best practices for stormwater management to reduce impact of runoff on roadways. Design stormwater elements in compliance with Tacoma’s most recently approved Stormwater Management Manual, Complete Streets Policy, Right of Way Design Manual, and Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) Standard Plans. 4. Emphasize Low Impact Development design elements like tree retention, bioretention, infiltration, bioswales, permeable pavements, and street tree planting to improve aquifer recharge, reduce evapotranspiration, and reduce the risk of harmful pollutants entering our waterways. 5. Design narrower streets to minimize hard surfaces and reduce the overall project footprint, focusing on prevention rather than mitigation of environmental impacts. 6. Promote the long-term sustainability of transportation infrastructure by using the Greenroads® or equivalent rating system for planning, designing, construction, and maintenance by addressing them in the construction project specifications, allocating funds in capital budgets, and educating the public on the benefits of this pavement technology. 7. Work with emergency responders and transit operators on multimodal street design and curb management strategies to understand and support access, operations, and incident response. 8. Use quick-build projects to test and deploy street design changes that calm traffic, improve visibility, and create safer conditions for people walking rolling, and biking. Temporary treatments should be evaluated and replaced with permanent safety improvements when successful. 9. Leverage Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) to improve the safety, efficiency, and reliability of the transportation network. 10. Promote the safety and livability of residential neighborhoods by implementing traffic calming measures that utilize design strategies such as speed reduction elements, pedestrian enhancements, and streetscape improvements to reduce vehicle speeds, discourage cut-through traffic, and enhance the overall quality of life for residents. 11. Implement road diets (reducing the number of lanes) and lower speeds to improve safety. Create space for other active transportation modes or public realm activation by working with the community to plan, design, and identify opportunities and tradeoffs to improve safety and access. 12. Support routine maintenance and cleanup measures such as street sweeping, along with other pollution source control efforts, through design and maintenance/operations of the transportation system. 13. Integrate public art and interesting design treatments into streets and bridges to enhance street aesthetics and create lively streetscapes that contribute to a greater sense of community and enjoyment. 14. Regularly inspect and maintain bridges to foster structural integrity and public safety. Prioritize repairs and maintenance activities based on condition assessments, safety ratings, and the need to retrofit existing bridges with seismic design standards and climate adaptation measures to withstand natural disasters, sea-level rise, and extreme weather events. 15. Retrofit existing bridges and design new bridges to accommodate all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit, alongside motor vehicles. Incorporate sidewalks, bike lanes, and accessible pathways as standard design elements. 16. Address infrastructure gaps, inadequate design, safety hazards, and at-grade railroad crossing conflicts to increase safety, rail capacity, and timeliness of both over-land and rail freight, using appropriate programs, regulations, and design standards. 17. Proactively plan for emerging transportation technologies by creating adaptable infrastructure, policies, and regulations that facilitate the safe integration of autonomous vehicles, vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication, and other innovations to enhance mobility and safety for all users. 18. Adopt an asset management approach for transportation infrastructure that emphasizes proactive maintenance, long-term cost efficiency, and safety enhancements, ensuring that all streets and assets are well-maintained and accessible for all modes of travel. 19. Facilitate transit and active transportation connections by encouraging street system design in a rectangular grid pattern with smaller block sizes, frequent interconnection, and clear wayfinding. Strongly discourage cul-de-sacs or dead-end streets and only allow them in new locations if a short multi-use path will connect the dead-end to another street. 20. Coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions to align multimodal and safety improvements, creating seamless connectivity and consistent infrastructure across boundaries. ## Auto Actions The following actions outline the necessary steps to achieve the desired outcomes for the Auto Element. | NUMBER | ACTION | | :--- | :--- | | A.1 | Re-evaluate and update Tacoma’s street classification system (such as arterial, collector, neighborhood greenway, and local streets) to better reflect modern transportation needs, land use changes, and community priorities. | | A.2 | Develop a toolkit of standard design strategies that seek to mitigate potential impacts to emergency response mobility as streets are redesigned to support multimodal transportation and traffic calming strategies are implemented to slow driver speeds. | | A.3 | Proactively plan and coordinate repaving projects to align with Vision Zero High Risk Network priorities and multimodal improvement opportunities, so that resurfacing projects are prepared in advance to maximize safety enhancements and support multimodal transportation. | | A.4 | Update the Complete Streets ordinance and design guidelines while developing an internal process and project checklist so safe, multimodal, and sustainable design features are considered in the initial planning and design phases. | | A.5 | Identify and pursue diverse funding sources, including federal and state infrastructure grants, public-private partnerships, and local initiatives, to secure resources needed for the maintenance of bridges vital to commerce and multimodal access. | | A.6 | Develop a plan to deploy and expand ITS tools, such as signal coordination, transit signal priority, and emergency vehicle preemption, with a focus on supporting the Frequent Transit Network, priority freight corridors, and Vision Zero High Risk Network to enhance safety, improve reliability, and optimize traffic operations for key routes. | | A.7 | Upgrade outdated traffic signals with modern, adaptive technologies to enhance safety, manage congestion, and support multimodal needs. | Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System <
> # CURB MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ## Effectively managing curb space for better community and transportation outcomes. The curb is where mobility and access intersect. Curb management policies balance overlapping demands in a way that aligns with community and neighborhood needs, as well as citywide goals: separating vehicles and pedestrians, ensuring ADA accessibility, allowing transit passengers to depart and arrive comfortably, reserving areas for loading passengers and goods, providing parking for autos and bikes, creating space for shared mobility, and making room for public interaction and human connection. Traditionally, decisions on how best to manage the curb space, such as parking designation and time regulations, have been based on the adjacent building and road segment, assuming cars are the primary mode of transportation. Past policy and program elements reflect the complex and deeply entrenched system of automobile dependence. This approach often results in inefficient management and overbuilding of parking supply, leading to increased single-occupancy vehicle ownership, traffic growth, higher housing costs, and barriers to smart growth and efficient transit services. As Tacoma grows in population and accommodates different forms of transportation, the need for strategic curb management becomes increasingly important. Additionally, the 2020 COVID pandemic has shifted consumer preferences, increasing demand for curbside pickup, outdoor dining and gathering places, and other services. To meet these evolving needs, Tacoma must adopt flexible and innovative curb management strategies that balance the diverse demands on curb space so that a wide variety of users can safely coexist on Tacoma’s streets. This will promote the efficient and equitable use of public spaces, enhancing mobility and supporting the city’s growth and development. ONE TACOMA TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY PLAN 60 Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System # Who Uses the Curb? The curb serves multiple uses, balancing the needs of mobility, access, and public space. It provides parking for cars and bicycles, loading zones for goods and passengers, and access for transit vehicles. Additionally, curbs are used to manage stormwater with drainage infrastructure and support public amenities such as parklets, outdoor dining, and green space. Emerging needs like ride-hailing pick-up/drop-off zones, electric vehicle charging, and micromobility parking further diversify curb uses. <
> <
> <
> <
> Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System # Curb Management Strategies The following strategies guide Tacoma in managing curb space to more effectively serve the needs of all street users. <
> 1. Develop a framework for flexible curb use that adapts to time of day and demand, such as allocating curb space for deliveries in the morning, ride-hailing or short-term parking during midday, and residential parking in the evening. 2. Broaden the application of dynamic curb allocation to promote non-traditional uses such as markets, streeteries, parklets, open-street events. 3. Leverage technology to gain real-time insights on curbside patterns and commuter behaviors by using sensors, cameras, and apps to monitor and share curb usage data with drivers to enable the City to adjust policies based on actual patterns and prioritize curb activities more effectively. 4. Support transit and active transportation within curbside management to help reduce congestion, enhance safety, and promote environmentally friendly travel modes, shifting focus away from vehicle storage as the primary function. 5. Design curbs to support accessibility for individuals with disabilities, including adding designated parking spaces, installing ramps, or creating more accessible drop-off zones. 6. Encourage the use of curb space for green infrastructure, such as rain gardens, to promote sustainability and reduce the environmental impact of certain curbside activities. 7. Integrate curb management into street redesigns and transportation planning to align with the City’s broader transportation and mobility goals and create a cohesive, integrate transportation network. 8. Involve local communities, businesses, and other stakeholders in the planning process for curb management. Involvement with affected stakeholders early and often provides context for community needs which may differ from existing land uses. 9. Manage on-street and off-street parking as an integrated system, recognizing that well-managed off-street parking can reduce curb congestion and free up curb space for other uses. 10. Enforce parking regulations through data driven strategies and tiered enforcement measures, such as warnings for first time offenders and educational outreach in conjunction with fines. 11. Promote efficient land use by "right-sizing" parking to support smart growth, using tools like predictive parking impact analysis, shared use incentives, and parking in-lieu fees to assess current and future needs. Manage existing curb and off-street parking effectively before considering additional parking construction. 12. Establish sustainable funding sources to consistently support curb management services to help support compliance with regulations and enhancing safety for all users. 13. Support neighbors in implementing safety improvements on residential streets, such as red curb painting and tree planting in the ROW, to deter illegal parking behaviors and enhance community safety. <
> Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System # Curb Management Actions The following actions outline the necessary steps to achieve the desired outcomes for the Curb Management Element. | NUMBER | ACTION | | :--- | :--- | | CM.1 | Implement dynamic pricing for parking and curb usage based on demand and to promote desired behaviors. Appropriately priced curbside parking achieves desired occupancy levels, increases turnover, and helps keep spaces available for those who need them. | | CM.2 | Implement automated enforcement systems, such as license plate readers and cameras, to enforce parking regulations, time limits, and curb usage violations. | | CM.3 | Increase public awareness and understanding of parking regulations by using clear signage, mobile apps, and broad media campaigns. | | CM.4 | Establish Parking Benefit District program to define areas where meter revenue could be used for public services. | | CM.5 | Evaluate and update the building design code to promote flexibility in the operations of existing parking and future developed parking facilities. | | CM.6 | Implement a process for evaluating the effectiveness of various curbside management practices that serve very short-term users (less than 15 minutes) and zones that serve different users by time of day. | | CM.7 | Establish and phase in a clear brand and logo to help users become familiar with Tacoma’s public parking options. | | CM.8 | Update municipal code to reflect the centralization of the curb management system. | | CM. 9 | Develop right-of-way guidebook for supporting appropriate electric vehicle charging strategies, including planning, permitting, infrastructure, and maintenance. | <
> Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System <
> # PUBLIC REALM AND ACTIVATION ELEMENT Activating Tacoma’s public realm to connect people to people and nature. The City of Tacoma aims to inspire social interaction, build community, and reimagine a city where streets can be safely shared by pedestrians, multimodal forms of transportation, art, and new forms of placemaking that celebrate Tacoma’s unique heritage and creative community. As the population in Tacoma continues to grow, public spaces become increasingly important. The Public Realm and Activation Element focuses on activating streets, sidewalks, alleys, and trails as a way to create vibrant, inclusive, and safe spaces for people to experience. Tacoma’s public right-of-way already faces multiple and sometimes competing demands including vehicle traffic, bicycle lanes, transit facilities, parking, street trees, and utilities. Balancing these demands with community uses will be challenging and may require new approaches to street design and management. Additionally, opportunities for people to access the public realm beyond functional and utilitarian purposes are limited, with most of these spaces concentrated in Very High or High Opportunity Areas as identified by Tacoma’s Equity Index Map. This uneven distribution leaves many communities without accessible and inviting public spaces for recreation, social interaction, and community gathering. The public right-of-way is a valuable asset which operates as a network of transportation conduits, primarily used for human movement. The City of Tacoma’s objective is to strike a balance among the many needs of the right-of-way while committing to connect people to people and people to places. When reimagined with community-building in mind, these spaces can serve as multifunctional plazas, festival streets, farmers markets, cafes, block parties, and places where people freely and openly congregate together. *** ### WHAT IS THE PUBLIC REALM? Public Realm: Areas that are open and accessible to everyone, such as streets, sidewalks, and trails. ### WHAT DO WE MEAN BY "ACTIVATION"? Activation: The process of transforming underutilized or passive spaces into vibrant, engaging areas that encourage social interaction, economic activity, and community engagement. A commitment to activation embraces strategies that range from the planned and sanctioned to the informal and ephemeral. Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System # What Activates the Public Realm? The public realm is activated for people through elements that enhance engagement, safety, and enjoyment. These include street furniture like benches, trash receptacles, and bike racks; greenery such as street trees, planters, and landscaping that provide shade and visual appeal; and pedestrian-scale lighting that fosters safety and ambiance. Public art, wayfinding signage, and parklets create interest and encourage gathering, while features like widened sidewalks, curb extensions, and outdoor seating support social interaction. Open street events, such as street festivals and markets, further activate the ROW, making it vibrant and inviting for all. <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> # Public Realm and Activation Strategies The following strategies guide Tacoma in developing inviting, equitable, and community-centered public spaces. <
> 1. Incorporate local art into the streetscape to reflect community identity and create a more engaging environment. Commission artist-designed, age-friendly street furniture and street features and consider multiple uses to encourage different types of activation. 2. Work with artists to mitigate illegal tagging on transportation infrastructure. 3. Coordinate with Pierce Transit and Sound Transit when planning street closures or large events to minimize disruptions and extend transit service times as needed. Engage early to develop detour plans, adjust schedules, and communicate changes, ensuring reliable and accessible transit access for riders during events. 4. Simplify the permit process and expand opportunities for outdoor dining, food and street vendors to activate sidewalks and streets through partnerships with neighborhood business districts, Business Improvement Areas, the Chamber of Commerce, and the business community. 5. Create inclusive urban spaces that actively encourage socialization by incorporating universal accessibility, abundant trees and native vegetation, strategic pedestrian lighting for social areas, comfortable seating, and clear signage. 6. Support small, low-cost, and community-driven projects (“tactical urbanism”) to demonstrate the potential of spaces to be more people-focused (e.g., host events, paint streets, or install temporary urban furniture, parklets, or structures) 7. Promote safe and accessible active transportation in public spaces and during events by integrating bike connections, ample bike parking, and ADA-compliant routes and crossings. 8. Reallocate more street space for people-centered uses, identifying locations with an overabundance of space dedicated to vehicle mobility and storage in mixed-use centers. 9. Design, locate, and maintain transportation facilities to create an engaging, welcoming, and pleasurable environment that supports accessibility and active transportation choices through placemaking, beautification, activation, and other urban design tactics. 10. Promote flexible curb management strategies, so streets and amenity zones can be adapted to different uses, such as markets, parklets, or open street events. 11. Reduce barriers (permitting, fee structures, traffic control) to enable the community to program, activate, and manage public space with uses that are authentic and meaningful to them. 12. Conduct community workshops and outreach to gather input from residents and businesses, ensuring public realm designs and activation reflect local needs, culture, and identities, particularly in underserved neighborhoods. 13. Explore opportunities to implement car-free streets, woonerfs (shared streets prioritizing pedestrians and bicyclists), and festival streets to improve safety, encourage active transportation, and create vibrant public spaces while ensuring accessibility for all. Identify suitable locations through community input and pilot projects, prioritizing underserved areas, local businesses, and neighborhood connectivity. 14. Activate spaces that have historically been underutilized or inaccessible due to design, access, or location challenges, such as freeway underpasses and neglected rights-of-way in mixed-use areas. Engage with users that often frequent these areas to transform these areas into welcoming, inclusive spaces that thoughtfully integrate the needs of existing communities. Chapter 06: Elements of Our Transportation System # Public Realm and Activation Actions The following actions outline the necessary steps to achieve the desired outcomes for the Public Realm Element. | NUMBER | ACTION | | :--- | :--- | | PR.1 | Explore updates to the Tacoma Municipal Code to expand the 1% for the Arts program to include all capital projects, including those undertaken by Tacoma Public Utilities. | | PR.2 | Implement the Public Art Mini-Plan for capital projects to strategically integrate art into the planning and development of transportation infrastructure projects. | | PR.3 | Integrate special event and film permitting process into existing permitting portal for more consistent standardized process. | | PR.4 | Develop a Public Realm and Activation Plan as part of the update to the Downtown Plan and Tacoma Dome Link Extension station area planning. | | PR.5 | Develop a best practice guide for events in the right-of-way and work with event organizers to educate them on how to host events in the right-of-way. The guide will include strategies for encouraging walking, biking, and transit use to events, supporting sustainable transportation and reducing traffic impacts. | | PR.6 | Develop a permanent curbside program to convert on-street parking into a parklet/streatery that includes best practices for siting and designing parklets/streateries, plan for maintenance, and allowance for organizations and businesses to participate. | | PR.7 | Identify locations for easy street closures in Regional Growth Centers and mixed-use centers to support and encourage open street events and activation. | <
> # 07 # Implementing the Transportation and Mobility Plan ## IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY The implementation strategy moves Tacoma towards its vision of creating and sustaining a transformative multimodal transportation system. While the mode and functional elements outline the “what” needs to happen, the implementation strategy describes the “how” of making the TMP a reality. * What needs to happen: actions and strategies identified in the elements inform the development and prioritization of projects. * How do we make it happen: once projects are identified, how are they delivered—defining who delivers (staff and partner agencies) and how projects are funded. * How do we measure progress: what performance measures are in place to track progress towards implementing the TMP, meeting goals and moving Tacoma towards the TMP vision. ### IN THIS CHAPTER: * Implementation Strategy * Challenges * Program and Project Identification * Funding * Multimodal Level of Service * Performance Measurement <
> # CHALLENGES Tacoma will inevitably face growing pains as we adapt to increased population, evolving travel patterns, and the demand for more sustainable and efficient transportation options. One of the more significant challenges lies in the reallocation of our limited right-of-way space. Historically, Tacoma’s streets have been designed primarily to serve automobiles, but this approach is increasingly at odds with the need for a multimodal, people-centered transportation system. Moving forward, the City must make strategic decisions to transform streets into spaces that prioritize walking and rolling, biking, and transit alongside vehicles. These changes often require difficult trade-offs and the need for community buy-in. The TMP seeks to navigate this transition thoughtfully, striving to balance the needs of today with the vision for tomorrow. While the plan recognizes the importance of supporting current travel patterns and ensuring that residents and businesses can function effectively in the present, it also emphasizes the necessity of preparing for a future that prioritizes equity, sustainability, and livability. | ADDRESSING PRESENT CHALLENGES | PREPARING FOR FUTURE OUTCOMES | | :--- | :--- | | • Competing priorities | • Decrease in fatal and serious crashes | | • Behavioral shift | • Age-friendly community | | • Cost of retrofitting and maintaining streets | • Economic boosts from more pedestrian traffic | | • Parking constraints | • Improved public health | | • Disconnected and unreliable multimodal network | • Inclusion and accessibility | | • High crash rates | • Neighborhood cohesion | | | • Youth independence | By setting clear goals and policies, the plan aims to create a transportation network that evolves with Tacoma’s growth, ensuring that investments made today support a long-term vision of a vibrant, multimodal city. This approach reflects the City’s commitment to a forward-thinking transportation system that serves all residents while addressing the challenges of reallocation, growth, and adaptation. <
> Chapter 07: Implementing the Transportation and Mobility Plan # PROGRAM AND PROJECT IDENTIFICATION To advance Tacoma towards the network visions and outcomes outlined in the mode and functional elements, specific projects and programs are needed to address deficiencies while improving safety, convenience and reliability. In addition to the mode and functional element actions, which include specific project and programmatic recommendations, the City of Tacoma identifies projects through: * Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) * Existing planning documents * Staff-identified need * Resident or stakeholder input The City has limited resources and cannot implement all identified projects and must make strategic decisions about which projects and programs are prioritized for funding and implementation. The TMP is a 25-year plan that includes both small, incremental projects and larger visionary ideas. These will be implemented as funding and resources are available. A goal-driven approach is used to determine both priority and feasibility. This process establishes the City’s required six-year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), which is described in full in D. <
> Chapter 07: Implementing the Transportation and Mobility Plan # Program and Project Prioritization Tacoma utilizes a logic framework for project evaluation based on the TMP’s stated goals. This approach evaluates each project or program on how well it helps move Tacoma towards its goals, provides transparency on how priorities are set, and sets the foundation for measuring progress. Goal aligned criteria for project prioritization are outlined below: **Goal 1 Criteria:** **Equity and Livability** * Located in Very Low or Low Areas of Opportunity * Reduce physical barriers for people with disabilities **Goal 2 Criteria:** **Safe and Comfortable Experience** * On the High Risk Network * Improves traffic safety **Goal 3 Criteria:** **Environmentally Sustainable and Healthy** * Improves air quality by reducing greenhouse gas emissions * Strengthens land use and transportation connection **Goal 4 Criteria:** **Partnerships** * Supports local partners: Pierce Transit, Parks Tacoma, Tacoma Public Schools, Sound Transit, Puyallup Tribe of Indians, Port of Tacoma **Goal 5 Criteria:** **Transparent Decision-Making** * In a Sub-Area Plan or Neighborhood Plan **Goal 6 Criteria:** **Connect the Tacoma Community** * Improves the public realm * Transforms arterial streets from barriers to safe, accessible corridors **Goal 7 Criteria:** **Maintain and Upgrade** * Improves the condition of existing assets **Goal 8 Criteria:** **Thriving Economy** * Improves transit speed and reliability * Improves access in employment dense areas # Feasibility Screening Following the prioritization analysis, top scoring projects are screened for feasibility; including cost, complexity, delivery capacity, and required partnerships (if the City of Tacoma is not the delivery agency). This step helps determine which high-priority projects can be accomplished in the near-term, and which projects will need more support, funding, or partner resources to deliver. Projects that rate high on feasibility and goal-alignment are prioritized for implementation in the six-year TIP’s high priority projects that are more complex to deliver or may take time to develop full-funding plans are aligned with a reasonable implementation timeline (short-, mid-, or long-term). Chapter 07: Implementing the Transportation and Mobility Plan # Funding To deliver prioritized TMP projects and programs, the City needs to secure funding. The City is continually working to leverage additional grant funds to leverage existing revenue sources available to deliver transportation projects and programs. ## Existing Revenue for Transportation Projects and Programs The current sources of revenue that Tacoma uses for transportation projects are: * **Grants and Other Governmental Agencies:** Grants are made by the Federal Government, the State of Washington, Puget Sound Regional Council, and other governmental agencies to help cities and counties pay a variety of transportation improvements. Most grants require a share of the project cost to be paid by the City as match funds. The City’s share of project costs would need to come from other City revenues. * **Private:** Most of the private funding of Tacoma’s transportation projects is provided through local improvement districts (LIDs). LIDs are available only for transportation improvements that cause an increase in the value of property adjacent to or near the transportation improvement. * **Transportation Benefit District:** Tacoma updated its Transportation Benefit District in 2024, expanding the use of funds to support broader street and transportation infrastructure needs beyond residential streets. Additionally, City Council approved continuing a 0.1% sales and use tax starting in April 2026, with at least 15% dedicated to safety improvements like sidewalks, streetlights, and traffic calming. * **Gas Tax:** A portion of Tacoma’s gas taxes is used for transportation capital maintenance, and a portion is used for operations and non-capital maintenance of the transportation network. * **Public Utility:** When a transportation improvement project also provides the opportunity to improve or maintain utility lines, the public utilities can pay for a portion of the cost of the project. * **Debt:** Debt funding in the form of bonds is available for transportation improvements when the City borrows money for the project, and then uses other sources of revenue to repay the debt. * **Real Estate Excise Tax:** The City of Tacoma has adopted 0.5% real estate excise taxes (REET) authorized by state law. REET is collected each time a real estate transaction occurs in the city. * **Street Vacation:** When the City no longer needs an alley or street, the land is “vacated” and sold. * **Other Smaller Sources**, including Public Utility Rates, Interest Earnings, Public Works Street Operations, Port Heavy Haul fees. <
> Chapter 07: Implementing the Transportation and Mobility Plan # Potential Funding Sources to be Leveraged The City is continually exploring additional funding options to increase capacity to deliver the many critical transportation improvements identified in the TMP. To achieve the TMP vision, Tacoma will need to increase the amount of funding available for implementing transportation projects. The following sources are being evaluated or may be considered as viable options for additional transportation funding. Potential future funding sources for further study include: * **Automated Enforcement Fines:** The City currently has a red-light camera program, as well as automated school zone and speed enforcement program. When there are surplus monies in the automated enforcement fund, the surplus may be expended for transportation safety improvements. * **Ballot Measure:** A proposal placed before voters to approve new taxes, bonds, or other funding mechanisms for transportation infrastructure or services. Passed in 2015, Streets Initiative 1.0 is an example, funding street repairs through a combination of local sales tax and vehicle license fees. * **Bonds:** Tacoma can issue bonds to borrow money for a variety of purposes. The City could obtain additional funding for transportation by issuing more bonds (debt). Borrowing money for transportation projects allows the costs to be repaid over the useful life of the improvement, but it increases the cost by the amount of interest paid on the debt. * **Business License Fee:** Impose a license fee per employee that is used to build transportation improvements that benefit businesses. * **City Transportation Authority:** A legal entity a city can create to raise and manage funds for transportation projects, often through voter-approved taxes like vehicle license fees or sales taxes. * **Commercial Parking Tax:** Tax commercial parking businesses based on gross proceeds or number of stalls or tax the customer, similar to an admissions tax. Tax-exempt carpools, vehicles with disabled parking placards, and government vehicles are exempt from the tax. * **Impact Fees:** Impact fees are allowed to be charged to development to help fund their fair share of specific transportation projects that provide service and benefits to the community. Tacoma is currently in the process of studying Impact Fees as a priority for future funding. * **Land-Value Tax:** A levy on the value of unimproved land. It may be thought of as a payment for the benefits received from municipal improvements such as the street and sewer systems, park, schools, and transportation. * **Non-motorized Mitigation Fee:** Establish environmental standards that must be met by new development. Comparable programs require either payment of a fee per pedestrian/bicycle trip, or analyzing impact on sidewalks and bicycle facilities and then identifying, designing, and constructing specific improvements to mitigate impacts. * **Pierce Transit Sales Tax:** A voter-approved portion of local sales tax dedicated to funding Pierce Transit’s bus, vanpool, and paratransit services. * **Property Tax Lid Lift:** Ask voters to increase property taxes by increasing the tax rate. * **Sidewalk Funds:** The City could explore innovative approaches and diverse funding sources to accelerate sidewalk improvements. * **Sound Transit Enhanced Service Zone:** A designated area where Sound Transit provides expanded transit services, supported by additional local funding or partnerships. * **Utility Tax:** Although a previous attempt to propose a utility tax was not approved by voters, the City could explore this possibility again. <
> Chapter 07: Implementing the Transportation and Mobility Plan # Project Delivery Partnerships The City of Tacoma works with a number of regional partners to implement transportation projects and maintain infrastructure. Depending on the facility, mode, size and complexity of the project, Tacoma’s partners sometimes act as the lead agency, and in other cases, partners are critical funders or stakeholders to a Tacoma-led project. Maintaining strong working partnerships with local and regional agencies or groups is critical to delivering the TMP. <
> ### WSDOT Owner and operator of the State highway system – in Tacoma this includes I-5, SR 16, I-705, SR 7, SR 163, SR 167, and SR 509. WSDOT administrators federal and state transportation funds, and works with the City to improve the transportation system locally and regionally. <
> ### PORT OF TACOMA A major landowner, operating and leasing significant piers, docks, wharves, cargo handling equipment, and related upland facilities. The Port serves as a major economic engine for Tacoma, creating thousands of family-wage jobs and serving as a catalyst for economic development. <
> ### SOUND TRANSIT A regional provider of high-capacity transit services for King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties, including bus, commuter rail, and light rail. Sound Transit operates two commuter rail stations in Tacoma. Sound Transit also funds projects that enhance access to transit. <
> ### PIERCE TRANSIT Operates buses, paratransit services for people with disabilities, on-demand microtransit service, and rideshare. Pierce Transit also constructs improvements on city streets and is a partner in constructing transportation capital projects. <
> ### PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL (PSRC) The region’s metropolitan planning organization made up of cities, towns, counties, ports, tribes, transit agencies, and major employers. <
> ### PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS puyaləpabš are a federally recognized Coast Salish Native American tribe forcibly relocated onto reservation lands more than 100 years ago. The Tribe is an important partner in planning land use and transportation facilities in Tacoma, as well as improving city streets that serve the tribal community. <
> ### WASHINGTON TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION The State’s designated highway safety office, with the goal of reducing traffic fatalities and serious injuries through its Target Zero Plan. The WTSC provides grant funding to support education and encouragement traffic safety efforts. <
> ### TACOMA-BASED MUNICIPAL PARTNERS The City also partners with other internal or Tacoma-based municipal bodies, including the Tacoma Pierce County Health Department, Tacoma Public Schools, and Parks Tacoma. # MULTIMODAL LEVEL OF SERVICE Washington State’s Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that cities set performance goals for all travel options, ensuring the transportation system works for everyone. “Multimodal level of service standards for all locally owned arterials, locally and regionally operated transit routes that serve urban growth areas, state-owned or operated transit routes that serve urban areas if the department of transportation has prepared such standards, and active transportation facilities to serve as a gauge to judge performance of the system and success in helping to achieve environmental justice.” —GMA To meet the requirements set out by the GMA, Tacoma maintains a level of service (LOS) standard for pedestrian, bicycle, transit and auto networks. The cumulative effect of the targets is to evaluate and monitor transportation systems’ person trip capacity and its relationship to planned land use growth. Identified deficiencies in different transportation networks inform the TMP’s project list as well as project prioritization. In line with WSDOT, Tacoma uses the Highway Capacity Manual and AASHTO Geometric Design of Highways and Streets to determine an auto-based LOS for their roadways, which can result in "grades" ranging from LOS A to LOS F. LOS E is the lowest level acceptable for Tacoma roadways and intersections, but exceptions may be permitted since Tacoma also recognizes elements of multimodal level of service (MMLOS) to consider their transportation network as a whole. WSDOT and the PSRC will set the acceptable LOS for Highways of Statewide Significance that fall inside city limits. Proposed MMLOS standards for pedestrian, bicycle, and transit networks in Tacoma are summarized on the next three pages. A more detailed methodology for assessing MMLOS can be found in Appendix C. <
> <
> <
> <
> Chapter 07: Implementing the Transportation and Mobility Plan # Pedestrian Level of Service 1 A level that most people would find comfortable, accessible, and safe (youth, most individuals with disabilities, elderly) **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * Shared use path * ADA compliant sidewalk protected by robust physical barrier on a 30-MPH roadway with 1 thru lane per direction and less than 3,000 ADT # Pedestrian Level of Service 2 Little traffic stress, but requires more attention, especially for children **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * Any street above 35 MPH a sidewalk and robust physical barrier * A 30-MPH street with one thru lane in each direction and a 5 foot sidewalk with any ADT # Pedestrian Level of Service 3 Moderate traffic stress **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * A wide sidewalk on a 35-MPH street with 3 or more thru lanes and any ADT * A 5-foot sidewalk on a 30-MPH street with 2 or more thru lanes in each direction and 7,000 or more ADT # Pedestrian Level of Service 4 High traffic stress, not comfortable for most people **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * A street with a posted speed limit of 35-MPH or more with no sidewalk or only a 5-foot sidewalk and no buffer * A 5-foot sidewalk, no buffer, on a 35-MPH street <
> ## Pedestrian Level of Service Pedestrian level of service (LOS) is defined using pedestrian level of traffic stress. It is measured for Tacoma roadways based on the following factors: * Average daily traffic (ADT) * Posted speed limits * Existing pedestrian facilities * Sidewalk presence * Curb ramps (ADA-compliant curb ramp, non-ADA compliant curb ramp, no ramp) * Width (standard 5 feet, wide >5 feet, extra wide >5 feet with buffer) * Number of lanes Tacoma’s Pedestrian LOS standards consist of three elements: * Along roadways, Tacoma uses the level of traffic stress a person experiences walking or rolling in that segment. * At intersections, Tacoma ranks the LOS based on accessibility of curbs. * At a network level, Tacoma ranks the LOS based on crosswalk density. Pedestrian LOS is scored on a scale of 1 to 4 with one indicating the highest level of pedestrian service and four the lowest level of pedestrian service. The City will accept a Pedestrian LOS of 1 or 2 on city streets. Chapter 07: Implementing the Transportation and Mobility Plan # Bicycle Level of Service 1 A level that most riders of all ages and abilities would find comfortable and safe **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * Shared use path * A sharrow on a 25-MPH street with 1 thru lane per direction, and ADT of 750 or less # Bicycle Level of Service 2 Comfortable for most adults, but requires more attention, especially for children **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * Painted 5-foot bike lane on a 30-MPH street with 1 thru lane per direction with less than 3,000 ADT * Separated bike lane on a street with 2 thru lanes per direction # Bicycle Level of Service 3 Moderate traffic stress, little space or separation **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * A sharrow on a 30-MPH street with 2 thru lanes per direction and ADT under 7,000 * Painted bike lane on a street with 1 thru lane and speeds of 35 MPH # Bicycle Level of Service 4 High traffic stress, not comfortable for most riders **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * No facility on streets of 35 MPH or more * No facility on a 30-MPH street with 3 or more thru lanes per direction *Best level of service* <
> ## Bicycle Level of Service Bicycle level of service (LOS) is measured using bicycle level of traffic stress. It is evaluated for Tacoma roadways based on the following factors: * Average daily traffic (ADT) * Posted speed limits * Existing bicycle facilities * Number of lanes Bicycle LOS is scored on a scale of 1 to 4 with 1 indicating the highest level of bicycle service and 4 the lowest level of bicycle service. The City will accept a Bicycle LOS of 1 or 2 on city streets. *Worst level of service* Chapter 07: Implementing the Transportation and Mobility Plan ### 1 Transit Level of Service 1 Frequent service and easy, accessible pedestrian access to stations or stops **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * Buses run every 15 minutes during a majority of the day and sidewalks and curb ramps are complete and ADA-compliant within a 1/4 mile around bus stop (Pedestrian LOS 1). There are improved crossings approximately every 300 feet. ### 2 Transit Level of Service 2 Frequent service, poor pedestrian access to stations or stops **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * Buses run every 15 minutes, but sidewalks are poor or incomplete within a 1/4 mile of the stations. ### 3 Transit Level of Service 3 Infrequent service **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * Buses run every 30 minutes—an hour, but there are complete sidewalks within a 1/4 mile of the stations. ### 4 Transit Level of Service 4 Very low service, poor pedestrian access to stations **EXAMPLE FACILITIES:** * Buses run every hour, and there are incomplete sidewalks within a 1/4 mile of the stations. Best level of service <
> ### Transit Level of Service Transit level of service (LOS) is determined using transit service and pedestrian access conditions. Tacoma will use it to evaluate bus stops on their Frequent Transit Network based on the following factors: * Pedestrian LOS within 1/2 mile of a bus stop * Frequency of service at bus stop The city uses two measures for Transit LOS: * **Transit Access LOS**—determined based on how people get to a transit station and how frequent service operates at that station. * **Transit Speed LOS** uses the average speed of buses traveling between major destinations to determine the quality of transit between these destinations. Transit LOS is scored on a scale of 1 to 4 with 1 indicating the highest level of transit service and 4 the lowest level of transit service. Ridership will be used to determine what Transit LOS is desired at each location. The City will accept a Transit LOS of 1 or 2 on the Frequent Transit Network and LOS of 3 elsewhere. Worst level of service ONE TACOMA TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY PLAN 78 Chapter 07: Implementing the Transportation and Mobility Plan # PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT As the TMP is implemented over the next 25 years, it is important for the City to track and measure how actions and strategies are advancing Tacoma towards the TMP goals. For each TMP goal, performance measures tied to individual elements have been identified. These metrics should be tracked as the TMP is implemented to demonstrate the outcomes of TMP delivery. | GOAL ALIGNMENT | METRIC | DATA SOURCE | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Goal 1: Equity and Livability | Percentage of investment in Low and Very Low Opportunity Areas | Public Works and Equity Index | | Goal 1: Equity and Livability | Number of ADA curb ramps constructed | Public Works and Planning and Development Services | | Goal 2: Safe and Comfortable | Miles of missing link sidewalk constructed | Public Works and Planning and Development Services | | Goal 2: Safe and Comfortable | Number of fatal and serious injury crashes | WSDOT Crash Data | | Goal 2: Safe and Comfortable | Miles of bicycle infrastructure constructed | Public Works and Planning and Development Services | | Goal 3: Environmentally Sustainable and Healthy | Transportation GHG emissions | Environmental Services (Climate Action Plan) | | Goal 3: Environmentally Sustainable and Healthy | Quantity of trees per linear feet of ROW (preserved and newly planted) | Public Works and Environmental Services | | Goal 4: Partnerships | Complete 100% of TMP Tier 1 projects by 2050 | TMP performance tracking | | Goal 5: Transparent Decision-Making | Number of dashboards and projects with fully documented information online | Public Works, Environmental Services, Planning and Development Services | | Goal 6: Connect the Community | Number of special events in the public ROW | Citywide Community Survey | | Goal 7: Maintain and Upgrade | Tacoma's overall Pavement Condition Index (PCI) | Public Works | | Goal 8: Thriving Economy | % of Tacoma households within a 10-minute walk of 15 minute or better transit service (6 AM to 7 PM) | Planning and Development Services and Pierce Transit | (blank page) # APPENDIX A – KEY TERMS # Table of Contents | | Page | | :--- | :--- | | Acronyms ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 | | Key Terms ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 | # ACRONYMS AADT | Average Annual Daily Traffic --- | --- ADA | Americans with Disabilities Act APS | Accessible Pedestrian Signals CAP | Climate Action Plan FTN | Frequent Transit Network GMA | Washington State Growth Management Act GSI | Green Stormwater Infrastructure ITS | Intelligent Transportation Systems LPI | Leading Pedestrian Interval MIC | Manufacturing and Industrial Center PROWAG | Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines PSRC | Puget Sound Regional Council TDM | Transportation Demand Management TMP | Transportation and Mobility Plan WSDOT | Washington State Department of Transportation # KEY TERMS **Bicyclist:** a person riding bicycles, tricycles, adaptive bicycles, and e-bikes **Climate Action Plan:** Tacoma’s plan to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 **Greenroads:** a rating system to measure and manage the sustainability of transportation projects **High-Risk Network:** intersections and corridors with the highest risk of fatal and severe injury crashes for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists, as identified by the Vision Zero plan **Home in Tacoma:** the City’s affordable housing strategy to grow the housing supply, affordability, and choice for current and future residents **One Tacoma Plan:** a Comprehensive Plan that establishes the City’s future vision and policy direction to guide growth and development over the next 25 years **ORCA:** an electronic fare payment system that allows riders to pay for public transportation in the Puget Sound Region **Pedestrian:** a person walking, using assistive mobility devices, or using human-powered travel modes like skateboards, roller skates, or scooters. Throughout this Plan, the terms “pedestrian” or “walking and rolling” are used to encompass all these active ways of traveling. **Tacoma Equity Index:** the City’s data-driven tool to see where projects, policies, programs, or services can have the largest impact on addressing inequity and where investment can provide the biggest improvement factors that impact life outcomes **Transit:** bus, light rail, streetcar, trolley, and ferry systems available to the general public. In Tacoma, transit providers include Pierce Transit, Sound Transit, Amtrak, and Washington State Department of Transportation. **Vision Zero:** a strategy to eliminate all traffic fatalities, while increasing safe, healthy, and equitable mobility for all. Tacoma’s Vision Zero goal is to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2035. **Woonerf:** translated as “living street,” a road design that encourages multimodal transportation and blends vehicle traffic and pedestrians # APPENDIX B – MODAL AND FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS PURPOSE AND CONTEXT # Table of Contents | | Page | | :--- | :--- | | **Pedestrian Element** .................................................................................................................... **2** | | | **Bicycle Element**......................................................................................................................... **14** | | | **Transit Element**.......................................................................................................................... **24** | | | **Freight Element** ......................................................................................................................... **39** | | | **Auto and Streets Element** ......................................................................................................... **49** | | | **Curb Management Element**....................................................................................................... **64** | | | **Public Realm and Activation Element**........................................................................................ **75** | | # Table of Figures | | Page | | :--- | :--- | | Table 1 Arterial Missing Link Sidewalk by Equity Index Opportunity Area.................................. 8 | | | Figure 1. Tacoma’s Missing Link Sidewalks (as of 2023) ............................................................... 9 | | | Figure 2. Pedestrian Crossing Infrastructure ............................................................................... 10 | | | Figure 3: Bicycle Facility Types ................................................................................................... 18 | | | Figure 4: Tacoma’s Existing and Funded Bicycle Network (as of January 2025) .......................... 19 | | | Table 2. Public Transportation Operators in Tacoma .................................................................. 25 | | | Table 3 Mode of Travel to Work (2022 ACS Data)....................................................................... 29 | | | Figure 5 Pierce Transit Routes at PM Peak Service Levels ........................................................... 30 | | | Table 4. Pierce Transit Annual Ridership .................................................................................... 31 | | | Figure 6. Data used to identify priority capital investments ......................................................... 38 | | | Figure 7. WSDOT Roadway Freight Corridor Classifications for the City of Tacoma.................... 45 | | | Figure 8. National Highway System Routes.................................................................................. 54 | | | Figure 9. Functional Classification .............................................................................................. 56 | | | Figure 10. Vision Zero High-Risk Network.................................................................................... 58 | | | Figure 11. Tier 1 Emergency Response Routes ............................................................................ 60 | | | Figure 12. Example of Downtown Parking Occupancy Study (2017)............................................. 70 | | # PEDESTRIAN ELEMENT ## Purpose ### Walking and Rolling in Tacoma Tacoma envisions a pedestrian-friendly future – with a complete, accessible and connected pedestrian network that welcomes people of all ages and abilities to walk and roll. In this future, Tacomans choose to walk and roll for most of their short trips – because it allows people to connect with their neighbors and community and offers a comfortable and convenient way to get to school, work, transit, parks, and our favorite local businesses. Tacoma is committed to this vision, but the City still has a long way to go to make it a reality. The pedestrian network is far from complete and significant barriers exist. Barrier curbs, missing link sidewalks, and unimproved and inaccessible crossings make Tacoma’s pedestrian network difficult to navigate, particularly for people with disabilities, youth, and older adults. Additionally, not all neighborhoods face the same challenges when walking and rolling. Many neighborhoods do not have easy access to everything they need to thrive, both because things like grocery stores, schools, parks, and local businesses may not be in close proximity and the routes to get there are not safe or accessible. | Walking and Rolling | | :--- | | Pedestrians include people: | | • Walking | | • Using assistive mobility devices, like wheelchairs | | • Using human-powered modes, like skateboards, roller skates, or scooters | | Throughout this plan, the terms “pedestrian” or “walking and rolling” will be used to encompass all these active ways of traveling. | Building a complete pedestrian network with connected sidewalks, accessible curb ramps, and frequent safe crossings will help Tacoma meet some of our most important goals as a community: those relating to safety, equity, access, and climate. When pedestrians are prioritized through infrastructure design and investments, policies and programs, the City is helping build a healthy, livable, and thriving Tacoma. # The Importance of Walking and Rolling ### What role does walkability have in people’s daily lives? We are all pedestrians. Whether pushing a stroller, using a mobility device, skateboarding to school with friends, or walking from a parking spot to a store entrance – we all rely on pedestrian infrastructure to get where we’re going. * **Equity and Accessibility:** Walking and rolling are the most accessible and affordable modes of transportation – available to people of all ages and abilities – no driver’s license, bike purchase, or transit pass required. There cannot be an equitable transportation system that does not center the needs of pedestrians. * **Safety:** When a community is safe and accessible for pedestrians – it opens up the city. Young people gain independence as they are able to walk and roll to school, their first job, or to visit friends and family. Seniors are able to maintain social connections, meet their daily needs, and better age in place. * **Connectivity:** Pedestrian networks connect to key destinations, including transit stops, neighborhood retail centers, daily necessities like work and school, and other amenities. Frequent safe and accessible crossings connect across roadways and complete sidewalk networks knit together neighborhoods, making the choice to walk and roll convenient for addressing daily needs. * **Social Fabric:** When people walk and roll, they chat with neighbors, look out for each other, notice the poster for an upcoming event, or call 311 to request that the overgrown bush blocking the sidewalk gets trimmed. These small acts of connection strengthen the social fabric and improve social and emotional well-being. * **Economy:** Local businesses thrive when customers and employees can easily access them – and when they are located in places where people want to linger. It is easier to be enticed by the smells of a bakery or drawn in by a shop’s window display when walking or rolling. * **Climate:** Transportation is the leading contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in Tacoma. In the Puget Sound region, 23% of trips are one mile or less.[^p89-1] When there is safe, accessible, and connected pedestrian network – people are able to walk and roll for more of these short trips. [^p89-1]: Puget Sound Regional Council. 2021 Household Travel Survey. https://psrcwa.shinyapps.io/travel-study-stories/. **What are specific outcomes that emerge from this element done well?** As Tacoma plans for a future as a walkable city, the vision is of a safe, equitable, connected, and inviting community, with spaces for people to walk and roll throughout the city. * **Safer Streets:** A well-designed pedestrian network improves safety by reducing traffic crashes involving pedestrians, with features like well-marked crosswalks, adequate lighting, and traffic calming measures. Prioritizing neighborhoods with the greatest safety and access disparities ensures a more equitable transportation system. * **Improved Mental and Physical Health:** A safe, connected pedestrian environment enhances physical health by encouraging regular walking, which reduces the risk of chronic diseases such as obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. Additionally, walking in a well-designed pedestrian-friendly area can improve mental health by reducing stress, increasing social interactions, and providing access to green spaces, which are known to have calming effects. * **Enhanced Quality of Life:** Pedestrian-friendly streets are visually interesting and inviting, with a public realm that features a mixture of different building facades, integrated art features, and spaces to stop and rest; land uses support interesting retail and amenity destinations. Special events and permanent car-free spaces help to re-imagine how typical auto-dominated spaces can be more people centered. Walkable environments also promote a healthier lifestyle and a greater sense of well-being among residents, contributing to a more vibrant and livable community * **Environmental Benefits:** Walking is zero emission. Reduced reliance on cars in a walkable city leads to lower air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. This contributes to a healthier environment and supports sustainable urban development practices. As Tacoma experiences the impacts of climate change, streets and trails have green features like tree cover and green infrastructure, providing shady and cool places to walk during extreme heat and benefiting our ecosystems. * **Economic Growth:** Pedestrian supportive environments attract more foot traffic to local businesses, boosting the local economy. Increased pedestrian activity can lead to higher sales, more job opportunities, and attract further investment and tourism to the area. The Urban Land Institute found that half of Americans rate walkability as a high, or their top, priority when choosing where to live. * **Greater Inclusivity:** An accessible pedestrian network ensures that all residents, including those with disabilities or mobility issues, can navigate the city safely and comfortably. Features like ADA-compliant curb ramps, tactile paving, and audible crossing signals make public spaces more inclusive. This inclusivity fosters a sense of belonging and ensures that everyone can participate fully in community life. # Universal Design The City of Tacoma works to incorporate Universal Design principles into the way we design the transportation network. Universal Design is about creating an environment that is accessible for all thus ensuring that what we design for the built environment is not only equitable but empowers people to participate in their community. There are seven basic principles to Universal Design, developed by the Center for Universal Design at North Carolina State. The principles are summarized below. (Official wording can be found at https://design.ncsu.edu/research/center-for-universal-design) * Equitable Use: Same access for all users; equal access at a minimum * Flexibility in Use: The design accommodates a wide range of abilities * Simple and Intuitive Use: Use of the design element is easy to understand and use regardless of ability and experience * Perceptible Information: The design element effectively communicates information using a variety of formats to all users * Tolerance for Error: The design minimizes hazards and provides fail-safe features * Low Physical Effort: The feature can be used efficiently and comfortably * Size and Space for Approach and Use: A feature is usable and accessible regardless of a person mobility, size, and ability. ## What groups or communities have specific needs and/or require special consideration? * **People with Disabilities:** Accessible infrastructure is crucial for individuals with mobility, vision, or cognitive impairments. Features like curb ramps, tactile paving, and audible signals help ensure safe and independent navigation of sidewalks and crossings. * **Children:** Children are more vulnerable due to their smaller stature and developing awareness of traffic risks. Well-designed sidewalks and crossings with clear visibility and shorter crossing distances can improve safety for young pedestrians. * **Older Adults:** Seniors may have slower walking speeds and limited mobility, making extended crossing times and smooth, obstacle-free sidewalks essential. Accessible design enhances both their safety and independence. * **Caregivers with Strollers:** Parents or caregivers pushing strollers require wider sidewalks and smooth surfaces to navigate safely. Curb ramps and crosswalks with longer signal times also make crossings easier for this group. * **Nighttime Pedestrians:** Individuals walking after dark require well-lit sidewalks and crossings to ensure visibility and safety. Street lighting and reflective markings help reduce the risk of crashes in low-light conditions. * **Frequent Transit Users:** Many transit users rely on safe and convenient pedestrian routes to access bus stops and stations. Well-maintained sidewalks and easily accessible crossings near transit hubs improve their overall transit experience. * **Low-Income Residents:** Many low-income individuals rely on walking as their primary mode of transportation. Safe, accessible, and well-maintained sidewalks and crossings are critical for equitable access to essential services like public transportation, schools, and healthcare. * **Non-English Speakers:** Language barriers can make it harder to understand traffic signals or signage. Clear visual cues, consistent signage, and universally recognized symbols can improve safety for non-English-speaking pedestrians. * **Unhoused Individuals:** Unhoused individuals often rely on walking as their primary mode of transportation and may use sidewalks as temporary living spaces. Ensuring sidewalks are accessible, safe, and free of obstructions is critical. Additionally, improvements should consider how to balance pedestrian safety and access with the needs of those using public spaces for shelter, offering humane solutions that don't criminalize unhoused populations. * **People most at risk of street harassment or targeted violence due to their race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion or other elements of their identity:** Many community members face greater threats of street harassment or targeted violence while walking or rolling. Good street design can support community safety from interpersonal violence by enhancing visibility, increasing the number of people who use public space, and strengthening community connections. ### Specific Needs to Support Individuals with a Disability **People with Reduced Mobility:** Sidewalks must be wide, smooth, and free of obstructions to ensure accessibility for those with mobility issues. Curb ramps are essential for navigating street crossings and changes in elevation, making movement safer and more manageable. Shorter crossings reduce the distance and time needed to cross streets, thereby enhancing safety. Clear and predictable pathways help individuals using mobility devices navigate the area efficiently, promoting independence and ease of movement. **People Who are Blind or Have Low Vision:** For people with low vision, tactile paving provides sensory cues that assist with navigation. Audible and vibrotactile signals at crosswalks offer sound and vibration-based indicators for safe crossing. High-contrast markings improve the visibility of pathways and signage, making it easier to distinguish important features. Consistent lighting throughout the area reduces shadows and enhances visibility, ensuring a safer and more navigable environment at all times. **People who are Deaf-Blind:** Tactile wayfinding, braille signage, and route finding and other information that can be converted to refreshable displays and screens are crucial for effectively communicating with people who are deaf-and blind and aiding their navigation. Vibrating signals at crosswalks deliver tactile cues indicating when it's safe to cross, enhancing safety. Guide paths that are clearly defined and can be navigated by touch offer a reliable means for moving through the environment. **People who are Hearing Impaired:** For individuals with hearing impairments, visual signals such as flashing lights at crosswalks and pedestrian signals that display ‘walk’ and ‘don’t’ walk symbols are essential. Clear signage provides visual information about routes and safety instructions, ensuring they can navigate safely. **People with Cognitive Disabilities:** Simple and clear signage is vital for individuals with cognitive disabilities, as it provides easily understandable information about routes and destinations. Predictable routes, clearly marked and easy to follow, help reduce confusion and enhance navigation. **People with Mental Health Conditions:** Creating calm environments with minimal loud noises and chaotic elements can significantly reduce stress for people with mental health conditions. Safe spaces where individuals can rest and feel secure provide necessary respite. Clear, consistent wayfinding with well-marked paths reduces confusion and anxiety, making navigation less stressful and more intuitive. **Neurodiverse Individuals:** Predictable patterns and clearly marked pathways help reduce unpredictability, making the environment more navigable. Inclusive design that considers various sensory and cognitive needs enhances comfort and accessibility for all users, ensuring a welcoming and accommodating space. Examples of a low-stress environment include soft lighting as opposed to harsh florescent lighting, avoiding the use of redundant signage or elements that may create confusion or stress, minimizing street noise with landscaping separating pedestrians and vehicles, and providing resting places that offer a reduction in sensory input where people can regroup and recuperate. # Context ## Tacoma Context A complete pedestrian network allows people walking and rolling to safely and accessibly travel along and across streets. While Tacoma has almost 1,002 miles of existing sidewalk, the City’s existing pedestrian network is disjointed and challenging to navigate due to the poor condition of existing sidewalks, missing link sidewalks, and limited safe and accessible crossing opportunities. These issues are particularly stark for people with disabilities as well as the youngest and oldest members of our community. The City has a long-time policy foundation prioritizing pedestrians, and there is strong community support for building safe and accessible places to walk and roll. As Tacoma looks to the emerging opportunities, trends, and challenges, there is an opportunity to prioritize the build out of the pedestrian network and do so in a way that centers safety and equity. ### Missing Link Sidewalks The City of Tacoma envisions a complete network where, with very few exceptions, every street in Tacoma has sidewalks on both sides of each street.[^p94-2] Tacoma has approximately 371 miles of missing link sidewalks. Of these, approximately: * 20.2% of missing link sidewalks are along arterials * 78.3% of missing link sidewalks are along residential streets The below table is an equity analysis of current arterial sidewalk gaps as of 2023. Table 1 Arterial Missing Link Sidewalk by Equity Index Opportunity Area | Equity Index | Miles of Missing Sidewalk | Percentage of Total Missing Sidewalk | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Very Low** | 12 miles | 20% | | **Low** | 28 miles | 45% | | **Moderate** | 5 miles | 8% | | **High** | 11 miles | 17% | | **Very High** | 19 miles | 30% | [^p94-2]: Exceptions include limited access roads and on and off ramps (where pedestrian infrastructure must be planned across, but not necessarily along every route) and areas with significant engineering and environmental challenges where pedestrian access may be focused on one side of the corridor (i.e. Schuster Parkway). Figure 1. Tacoma’s Missing Link Sidewalks (as of 2023) <
> # Frequent, Safe and Accessible Crossings To be safe and accessible – a pedestrian crossing must have curb ramps, signals must be ADA-compliant, and the type of crossing must be appropriate for the traffic speeds and volumes. Crossing frequency also matters. When there are long distances between accessible or improved crossings – pedestrians must choose between crossing somewhere less safe or going significantly out of their way. Pedestrian crossing treatments are summarized in Figure 2. **Figure 1. Pedestrian Crossing Infrastructure** <
> ### Unfit or Unsafe Sidewalks When a section of sidewalk has been identified as unfit or unsafe, the City inspects the sidewalk and sends a letter to the adjacent property owner asking them to fix any unfit or unsafe sidewalk. While funding has been limited, the City has been working to support property owners by offering cost-sharing and fully covering the cost of sidewalk repair for low-income residents. ### What are key opportunities for Tacoma to advance walking and rolling? * **Many short trips and more to come:** In the Puget Sound region, 23% of trips are one mile or less.[^p97-3] As Tacoma continues working towards a housing and land-use context that supports 15-minute neighborhoods through initiatives like Home in Tacoma, this percentage will continue to increase. * **Transit investments:** In Tacoma, 85% of transit trips start as pedestrian trips.[^p97-4] Sound Transit is making significant investments in improving active transportation access to existing and planned high-capacity transit, including the South Tacoma Sounder Station, Tacoma Dome Station, and planned Portland Avenue Tacoma Dome Link Extension Station – with over $65 million in planned investments. * **Regional collaboration:** There is a growing commitment to regional collaboration on projects that enhance pedestrian safety and accessibility – from the multi-jurisdictional partnership that spurred the spuyaləpabš trail to the interagency agreement that has led to a preliminary design for continuous sidewalks and bike improvements on Orchard Street. Pedestrian trips don’t start and end at jurisdiction borders. * **ADA Self Evaluation and Transition Plan:** The City of Tacoma received a federal Safe Streets and Roads for All Grant which will support the update of Tacoma’s ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan. This plan will offer a significant opportunity for data collection and prioritization of Tacoma’s accessibility needs. * **Community Support:** Community engagement consistently demonstrates community interest in walking and rolling in Tacoma. In nearly all recent city engagement efforts – such as Home in Tacoma, Vision Zero, neighborhood planning efforts – improving walkability is often a top priority. [^p97-3]: Puget Sound Regional Council. 2021 Household Travel Survey. https://psrcwa.shinyapps.io/travel-study-stories/. [^p97-4]: Puget Sound Regional Council. 2023 Household Travel Survey. What emerging trends will affect pedestrians today and in the future? * **Advances in ADA best practices:** Best practices for designing streets that are safe and accessible for people with disabilities are continually evolving. Designers are increasingly prioritizing accessibility from the outset, integrating innovative solutions such as a broader range of tactile pavers. However, the lack of clear guidance on implementing new treatments, including those outlined in the Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG), can result in inconsistencies across the region and nation. * **Emergent sidewalk policy models:** Communities across the US are grappling with how to pay for the construction and maintenance of sidewalks. From the “Denver Deserves Sidewalks” ordinance in Colorado to Oakland’s point-of-sale sidewalk repair program, the City can learn from the experiences of other jurisdictions as we seek solutions for sustainably funding the construction and maintenance of pedestrian infrastructure. * **Growth and Re-development:** Tacoma remains poised for significant new residential growth, and many new pedestrian facilities (sidewalks, curb ramps, and multi-use trails) will be developed as part of these projects. * **Technology:** Cities are increasingly adopting smart technology to enhance walkability. This includes using sensors and data analytics to monitor pedestrian traffic, adaptive traffic signals that respond to real-time conditions, and apps that help residents navigate urban spaces. These technologies can make walking more convenient and safer by improving infrastructure management and user experience. Technology-based solutions must be carefully implemented to ensure equitable access and safety benefits. * **Equitable Transit-Oriented Development:** ETOD incorporates pedestrian-friendly infrastructure such as wide sidewalks, safe crossings, and mixed-use developments that integrate residential, commercial, and recreational spaces, making daily amenities accessible by walking and rolling. What challenges will affect walking and rolling today and in the future? * **Larger Vehicles:** In the U.S., vehicles are becoming heavier and taller, with SUVs, trucks, and vans being approximately 45% more likely to cause pedestrian fatalities. These larger vehicles pose an even greater risk to children and shorter individuals. Additionally, freight vehicles, which are also increasing in size, introduce further safety challenges in urban areas, particularly at intersections and corridors shared with pedestrians and cyclists.[^p99-5] * **Systemic Underinvestment:** Tacoma's pedestrian network has experienced decades of underinvestment, resulting in a fragmented system that will require over $1 billion to fully complete. This substantial backlog places considerable pressure on current budgets as the city works to address years of neglect and bring the network up to modern standards. * **Safety:** Between 2019-2023, there have been 105 pedestrians killed or seriously injured in traffic collisions in Tacoma. Eighty-one percent of these collisions took place on arterials. Seventy percent took place in low or very low opportunity areas, according to the City's equity index. While Tacoma has a Vision Zero goal to eliminate collisions that cause serious injuries or deaths by 2035, significant resources will be needed to achieve this goal. * **Cost of Improvements:** An increasing number of grant programs are centering safety, equity, and multimodal projects, but funding pedestrian-focused projects remains difficult. The high cost per mile of sidewalk projects makes it challenging to successfully compete for grant funds, particularly for spot improvements or small sections missing link sidewalk that are not contiguous. * **Right-of-Way:** Sidewalks and curb ramps frequently require work within the right-of-way, such as removing improperly placed private fences, obtaining easements for construction, or acquiring right-of-way for necessary infrastructure. While essential for ensuring projects are executed correctly, these processes increase the cost, complexity, and duration of the work. * **Sidewalk Responsibility:** Unlike the funding model for road construction and maintenance, the City of Tacoma places the responsibility for building and maintaining sidewalks on individual property owners. This approach has resulted in inconsistencies in sidewalk coverage across the city and has contributed to a significant maintenance backlog, as many property owners lack the financial resources to adequately maintain their sidewalks. * **Topography:** Tacoma has a diverse terrain with many steep hills. Steep hills present challenges for pedestrians, making walking physically demanding, particularly for the older adults, people with disabilities, and those with health issues. The increased effort required to walk or roll up or down steep inclines can deter individuals from choosing walking or rolling as a mode of transportation, reducing overall walkability. [^p99-5]: “Vehicles with higher, more vertical front ends pose greater risk to pedestrians.” Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. 11/14/23. https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/vehicles-with-higher-more-vertical-front-ends-pose-greater-risk-to-pedestrians # BICYCLE ELEMENT ## Purpose ### Bicycling in Tacoma Tacoma is committed to becoming a bike-friendly city, where safe, comfortable, and connected bike routes support community cohesion, enhance well-being, and enable community members of all ages and abilities to meet their needs. In Tacoma's bike-friendly future, choosing this affordable, healthy, and environmentally friendly mode of transportation is seamless, supported by robust infrastructure, comprehensive programs, and forward-thinking policies that ensure bicycling is both accessible and enjoyable. Bicyclists include people riding: * Bicycles * Tricycles * Adaptive bicycles * E-bikes Throughout the TMP the term “bicycle” is used to include all of these active ways of getting around. In Tacoma people using electric motorized foot scooters and electric personal assistive mobility devices (EPAMDs) are also allowed to use bicycle facilities and paved shared use paths. While not bicycles, they benefit from many of the policies and projects in this section Tacoma has made notable progress toward realizing a bike-friendly vision, yet there remains significant work ahead. The current bicycle network is fragmented. Many neighborhoods and key destinations lack provisions for bike travel altogether. To meet Tacoma's safety, equity, and climate goals, it is essential to develop a connected bike network that is safe and accessible for individuals of all ages and abilities, alongside implementing supportive policies and programs to address disparities within the transportation system. # The Importance of Bicycling ## What role does bikeability have in people’s daily lives? For some Tacomans, bicycling serves as a critical lifeline, providing the only means of reaching work, school, or services. For others, it offers an opportunity to connect with friends and their neighborhood while enjoying the outdoors. Some choose to ride out of a commitment to health or environmental sustainability. Whether riding by choice or necessity, people need a bikeable city to experience safety, mobility, exploration, and a sense of community. * **Advancing Safety:** Creating a safe environment for bicyclists ensures that individuals can safely reach their destinations while meeting their daily needs. . Prioritizing bicyclist safety advances Tacoma’s Vision Zero goals, ultimately saving lives. It also allows youth and other vulnerable groups to ride safely, fostering community and enjoyment. * **Equity and Access:** Cars often come with higher costs for purchase, maintenance, and operation, making bicycling a practical and more affordable alternative. Residents in low and very low opportunity neighborhoods in Tacoma face limited access to diverse transportation options. In Tacoma, the median household income for zero-vehicle households is $23,400, compared to the citywide median income of $79,085. In the Puget Sound region, lower-income households are more likely to rely on active transportation modes and transit. Additionally, the City’s highest crash corridors are concentrated in these same neighborhoods, presenting a dual challenge of fewer transportation options and higher safety risks. Developing bicycle infrastructure supports low-income residents, immigrants, refugees, and people of color, enabling greater access to transportation and addressing current safety disparities. * **Connectivity:** A connected, bikeable Tacoma enables residents to access jobs, school, transit, parks, and other daily destinations, maintain a healthy lifestyle, and connect with their community. * **Climate and Air Quality:** Supporting and incentivizing bicycling helps meet Tacoma’s Climate Action Plan goals to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, which is why completing the City’s bike network by 2050 is a key action of the plan. Additionally, air quality impacts communities differently. The more people are bicycling on the streets, the more they can contribute to reducing pollution from transportation. * **Community Cohesion:** Bicycling through a neighborhood brings many rewards in regard to recreation, community connections, and mental health. Bicycling with family and friends can invoke happiness that is critical in making Tacoma a joyous place to be. **What are specific outcomes that emerge from this element done well?** A bikeable Tacoma is one where people ride because bicycling feels safe, convenient, comfortable, and joyous. * **Low Stress Infrastructure:** Tacoma constructs context-appropriate, low-stress bicycle infrastructure treatments on each identified street, creating a network of shared use paths, separated bicycle lanes, and neighborhood greenways. Safe bicycling infrastructure recognizes people bicycling as vulnerable road users and supports their mobility not just along a block, but through challenging intersections. * **Safety and Equity Prioritized:** Tacoma builds out the bicycle network using a data-based approach that prioritizes equity and safety. This prioritization invests safety infrastructure where people bicycling are most at risk of injury often due to historical redlining-based disinvestment and recognizes that people of diverse identities bicycle. * **Convenient:** People use the well connected and maintained network to get from where they live to their everyday destinations, from commuting to work or school, connecting to transit, getting to parks and libraries, to running errands, heading to social engagements, and recreating. The convenience of these facilities, and the land use that supports it, has kept up with the growing demand to bicycle around Tacoma. This convenience makes it easier for Tacomans to live out their values and contribute to a healthier environment. * **Comfortable:** From a three-year old on a scoot bike with their adult, to the 12-year-old riding to school with a friend, to the eighty-year-old on their e-bike or trike, people of all ages and abilities feel comfortable bicycling in Tacoma. Bicycles, tricycles, and adaptive bicycles can easily maneuver between each other and other road users. * **Intuitive:** All people on bicycles can comfortably navigate the network with the support of intuitive signage and facility design. People on bicycles are provided clear direction on their priority and movements at intersections and along corridors. * **Joyous and Vibrant:** Art and community spaces weave through and connect bicycle routes in Tacoma that celebrate bicycling, invite social connection through bicycling, and promote bicycling as a joyful, healthy, and community-endorsed way to move around Tacoma. What groups or communities have specific needs and/or require special consideration? * **People with Disabilities:** Inclusive bike infrastructure must accommodate individuals with disabilities, including those using adaptive bikes or handcycles. This involves designing wider lanes, providing accessible bike parking, and ensuring bike-sharing programs offer adaptive options. Additionally, parked bikes and scooters need to remain clear of accessible pedestrian routes to keep them ADA-compliant and unobstructed, ensuring safe and equitable access for all users. * **BIPOC Communities:** Black, Indigenous, and People of Color who ride bikes may face unique challenges, including concerns about safety and discrimination. Ensuring equitable access to bike infrastructure in communities of color, addressing racial disparities in bike safety and enforcement, and fostering inclusive bicycling programs can help create a more welcoming and supportive environment for all bicyclists. * **Families with Children:** Families with children need safe, separate bike lanes that provide a secure environment for young riders. Additionally, routes should connect to schools, parks, and recreational areas, encouraging family-friendly biking and promoting physical activity from an early age. Consideration should also be given to infrastructure and bike parking that accommodates cargo bikes and bike trailers. * **Commuters:** Daily commuters, including those who bike to work or school, require safe, connected, and efficient routes that link residential areas to major employment and education centers. Employers and educational institutions need to provide secure and covered bike parking is essential to protect bikes from theft and weather, ensuring convenience and reliability for daily use. * **Youth and Older Adults:** Youth and older adults need special consideration for biking due to their unique physical and skill-related needs. Youth often require new skill development for safe cycling, including learning traffic rules and handling bikes confidently, while older individuals may need training to adapt to e-bikes, which can help support accessiblity. Both groups benefit from separated bike lanes, shared use paths, and low volume, traffic-calmed streets to ensure a safe riding environment. Promoting physical health through biking is crucial, as it supports cardiovascular health and mobility in older adults and fosters fitness and independence in youth. * **Unhoused Individuals:** Unhoused individuals often rely on active transportation modes, such as biking, as their primary means of mobility due to limited access to other transportation options. Constructing bike infrastructure with their needs in mind creates safe, accessible routes that connect them to essential services, shelters, and employment opportunities. Additionally, considering secure and convenient bike parking and storage is crucial, as their possessions are often transported by bicycle. # Context ## Tacoma Context A safe and comfortable bike network relies on connected bikeways that enable cyclists of all ages and abilities to navigate streets and reach desired destinations seamlessly. While Tacoma has made progress in accelerating the development, improving the design quality, and strategically prioritizing bikeways with a focus on safety, equity, and connectivity, significant work remains to fully achieve this vision. Many areas still lack the infrastructure necessary to provide comprehensive, safe, and accessible routes throughout the city. ### Existing Bikeways As of January 2025, Tacoma has approximately 60 miles of on-street bikeways and 22 miles of shared-use path. Best practices in bikeway design have evolved rapidly with an increased focus on creating all ages and abilities facilities with greater separation from vehicles. Most of Tacoma’s existing bike routes were built ten or more years ago and the quality of these older facilities varies widely. In order to create a safe and comfortable bike network Tacoma will need to both expand the existing network, while looking for opportunities to improve existing facilities. Figure 3: Bicycle Facility Types <
> | Bikeway Type | Existing Mileage | Definition | Example Photo | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Shared Use Paths | 22 | Paved trails provide shared space for people walking, rolling, and bicycling. They are fully separated from vehicular traffic, but may be adjacent to roads. | | | Separated Bike Lanes | 1 | These bike lanes include vertical separators (concrete curbs, plastic curbs with delineators, or parked cars) between bicyclists and moving traffic. They can be one-way or two-way and can be at street or sidewalk level. | | | Neighborhood Greenways | 12 | Streets with traffic calming to reduce traffic speeds and volumes. Safety improvements make it easier for pedestrians & bicyclists to cross busy streets. Bikes and cars use the full lane. | | | Bike Lanes | 41 | Painted bike lanes delineate on-street space for bikes. A painted buffer can be used to provide additional horizontal separation from moving traffic. | | | Sharrows | 6 | Shared lane markings (also known as sharrows) reiterate that bikes and cars both use the full lane. “Sharrows” can be used as wayfinding to help connect bike routes | | Figure 4: Tacoma’s Existing and Funded Bicycle Network (as of January 2025) <
> ### Wrap-Around Supports A safe and connected bike network is vital for enabling Tacomans to ride safely and comfortably, but infrastructure alone is not enough. Complementary measures, such as education and encouragement programs and secure bike parking at destinations, are essential. Tacoma is committed to providing these comprehensive supports to facilitate and enhance bicycling for its residents. * **Education:** Tacoma’s Safe Routes to School program provides bicycling education for youth and their families through events such as bike rodeos and the installation of traffic gardens, where children can practice riding safely. The "Tacoma Mobility" social media channels inform the community about existing and planned bike routes, available resources, upcoming events, and opportunities for involvement. Education and outreach at community events further publicize the City's active transportation initiatives, collect community feedback, and provide educational resources. * **Encouragement:** The City supports a variety of programs that celebrate existing riders and encourage all Tacomans to give bicycling a try, from annual Bike Month events each May to Walk & Roll to School days at local schools. * **Bike Parking:** The City installs free bike racks in the public right-of-way and has installed over 360 bike racks citywide through this program. Secure bike parking is required as part of new developments, and these requirements were recently strengthened to better align with best practices. While there are many successes to celebrate, limited funding and staffing have created challenges in developing the type of sustainable, high-impact programs needed to significantly move the needle on reducing barriers to bicycling. Programs like e-bike incentives, adult learn-to-ride programming, and grants to retrofit existing buildings with high-quality long-term bike parking would make a significant difference in addressing the barriers that prevent some people from bicycling. ### What are key opportunities for Tacoma to advance biking? * **Tacoma has a bikeable footprint to support short trips:** The city spans roughly 10 miles in both width and length, encompassing numerous neighborhood business districts, libraries, community centers, parks, and schools, creating a diverse network of community amenities. In the Puget Sound region, 23% of trips are one mile or less and 63% are five miles or less.[^p106-2] As Tacoma continues working towards a housing and land-use context that supports 15-minute neighborhoods through initiatives like Home in Tacoma, we expect this percentage to continue to increase. * **Transit investments:** Regional and local transit agencies are working to grow transit service in Tacoma. Sound Transit is investing a planned $65 million dollars in significant active transportation access improvements to existing and planned high-capacity transit, including the South Tacoma Sounder Station, Tacoma Dome Station, [^p106-2]: and Portland Avenue Tacoma Dome Link Extension stations. These planned improvements will enhance bike access to transit to help Tacomans and visitors go further by combining bikes and transit. * **Tacoma is a growing city:** With projected growth, new and existing residents will increase the demand to get around by bicycling. As the city grows to welcome more residences and businesses, development can bring in additional improvements such as improved bike parking per the updated Tacoma Municipal Code and impact fee revenues to support active transportation capital projects. * **Creating a bike culture:** In Tacoma, 21% of residents report having ridden a bike in the last 30 days.[^p107-6] However, 41% of Tacoma residents said they would bike if there were protected bike lanes or shared use paths that connected them where they need to go.[^p107-7] This interest shows an immense opportunity to create safe and convenient routes throughout the city. * **Building the next generation of bike riders:** The City of Tacoma, Tacoma Public Schools, WSDOT, and community partners are investing in teaching youth how to get around safely by bike. The WSDOT funded statewide Let’s Go in-school bike education is being piloted within Tacoma Public Schools and the city’s Safe Routes to School program funds and implements dozens of events each year with partners about bicycling safety and fun. The city’s Safe Routes to School program funded the first on-school traffic gardens in 2024 to incorporate creativity and traffic safety education into play and support the Let’s Go lessons. * **Bike infrastructure supports a local economy:** Tacoma’s neighborhood business districts and downtown are working hard to recover from economic recession. As these business districts employ various strategies to support local business owners and enhance vitality, a well-connected and thoughtful bike network can boost local sales and support a more resilient economy.[^p107-8] * **Rapidly evolving field:** Bikeway and facility design has rapidly evolved since Tacoma’s 2015 Transportation Master Plan. Numerous design guides endorsed by WSDOT have emerged with recommendations for context appropriate facilities, including the WSDOT Active Transportation Programs Design Guide. These resources [^p107-6]: Puget Sound Regional Council. 2021. Household Travel Survey. https://psrcwa.shinyapps.io/travel-study-stories/ [^p107-7]: Puget Sound Regional Council. 2021. Household Travel Survey. https://psrcwa.shinyapps.io/travel-study-stories/ [^p107-8]: Liu, Jenny H. and Shi, Wei. Understanding Economic and Business Impacts of Street Improvements for Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility – A Multicity Multiapproach Exploration. NITC-RR-1031/1161. Portland, OR: Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC), 2020 can support city practitioners in planning and designing innovative and recommended bicycle facility design. * **Expanding state and federal funding:** More agencies are requiring multimodal, safety-focused projects that consider the needs and modes of the most vulnerable road users. Tacoma has been competitive in such applications and should continue to pursue grants that incorporate active transportation safety. Additionally, WSDOT will launch an e-bike incentive program, providing cash rebates to purchase e-bikes in the coming years. ## What emerging trends will affect biking today and in the future? * **Growth of E-bikes:** The rapid rise of e-bikes has opened up bicycling for more people, especially in hilly cities like Tacoma. However, the high purchase cost and safe storage of these expensive (and often heavy) bikes are barriers to ensuring e- bikes are accessible to everyone. * **Bike Share and Micromobility:** Tacoma first piloted a shared micromobility and bike share program in 2018 and between 2018-2023, riders travelled over 750,000 miles on shared e-scooter and bikes. While shared micromobility brought mobility benefits, it also brought challenges, from property damage to equitable distribution across the city. The City of Tacoma does not currently have a bike or scooter share program as it assesses next steps for shared micromobility. * **Green Biking Routes:** Incorporating green infrastructure, such as neighborhood greenways and bike paths through parks and natural areas, promotes biking by offering scenic and pleasant routes. These green corridors not only improve the biking experience but also contribute to urban sustainability by reducing heat islands and improving air quality. * **Decline in Youth Obtaining Driver's License:** Data is showing that fewer young people are obtaining driver's licenses. This decline is influenced by factors such as the high costs of car ownership, increased availability of alternative transportation options, and environmental concerns. As a result, more young people may turn to bicycling as a convenient, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly mode of transportation. # What challenges will affect biking today and in the future? * **Interstate-5 and State Routes:** Interstate-5 has divided Tacoma, creating significant challenges for bike connectivity, especially in the southern areas. Existing crossings prioritize vehicle travel, with high speeds, multiple lanes, inadequate ADA-accessible routes, missing pedestrian crossings, and no protected bike facilities. State routes contribute similarly, featuring high-speed, multilane configurations that lack essential bike and pedestrian infrastructure. Addressing these gaps is vital for creating a safe, connected bike network in Tacoma. * **Cost of All Ages and Abilities Infrastructure:** Safe all ages and abilities bikeways provide a cost-effective solution to some of our community's most pressing challenges. While building these bikeways often requires securing significant funding before construction can start, the costs of our current transportation system are frequently embedded in existing practices or borne directly by families and individuals affected by traffic injuries and fatalities. * **Underinvestment:** Tacoma has a rich bicycling history going back to the late 1800s. The City has not consistently prioritized safety and access for people bicycling in the years since then. Less than one third of the full bikeway network envisioned in the 2015 Transportation Master Plan has been built, and much of the City's existing infrastructure would need upgrades to be considered all ages and abilities facilities. * **Re-Allocating Space:** Devoting space for safe bike lanes frequently requires repurposing existing auto-dominated space, which can lead to a reduction in parking spots and vehicle lanes. While these bike projects enhance mobility, improve safety, and align with Tacoma's goals and policies, changing the status quo can be hard. Integrating bike infrastructure with built environment, including navigating driveways and mail delivery routes can be complex as well. * **Maintenance:** Constructing new all ages and abilities bikeways presents a significant funding challenge, as does maintaining both existing and new infrastructure. The City's maintenance budgets have not kept pace with growing needs. Infrastructure that supports biking, such as traffic diverters and protected intersections, poses additional maintenance challenges and often requires specialized equipment. # TRANSIT ELEMENT ## Purpose ### Transit in Tacoma Transit plays an essential role in Tacoma’s transportation system. To deliver its transportation goals, Tacoma needs a frequent and reliable transit network that provides access to jobs, schools, healthcare, and essential non-work destinations. Transit is the backbone of Tacoma’s multimodal transportation system and helps to mitigate the impacts of automobile travel as the city grows, improve air quality and reduce emissions, and to ensure all travelers have a reliable, affordable means to traverse the city and connect to the region. Pierce Transit delivers local bus service in Tacoma and surrounding Pierce County communities. Sound Transit is the regional provider of express bus, commuter rail, and light rail services. The City of Tacoma plays a critical role in ensuring transit is reliable and accessible through management of streets and signal systems, provision and maintenance of safe pedestrian and bicycle access to bus stops, rail stations, and transit centers, and through a range of other programs that encourage use of transit and non-motorized travel. Tacoma collaborates with its transit agency partners to ensure service offerings align with the city’s current needs and to plan for transit that supports planned land use, population, and job growth. Tacoma has a diverse and layered set of transit offerings designed to respond to its natural setting and local and regional land use patterns. In addition to Pierce Transit’s multiple countywide services, Sound Transit, Amtrak, and WSDOT all provide transit services connecting Tacoma with other cities in the region. Table 2. Public Transportation Operators in Tacoma | Operator | Service | Description | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Pierce Transit | Fixed Route Bus | 29 bus routes on set schedules, plus additional regional express bus routes | | | SHUTTLE | SHUTTLE is a ride-request transportation service providing door-to-door rides for qualifying persons with disabilities anywhere within ¾-mile of a bus route | | | Rideshare | Provides vehicles for three or more occupants to share a commute, reducing travel by single-occupancy-vehicles | | | Runner | On-demand public transportation that allows customers to book rides from a smartphone within dedicated microtransit zones, providing flexible rides and transit connections in the areas of Joint Base Lewis McChord, Parkland/Spanaway/Midland, Ruston Way, and Port of Tacoma Tideflats | | Sound Transit | Sounder Commuter Rail | Commuter rail from Seattle to Tacoma | | | T Line | Street running light rail that connects downtown Tacoma to the Tacoma Dome Station and the Hilltop Neighborhood | | | 1 Line (Future) | Tacoma Dome Link Extension will extend light rail to Tacoma with an expected opening of service in 2035 | | WSDOT/Washington State Ferry System | Point Defiance - Tahlequah Ferry | This passenger and auto ferry connects Point Defiance to Tahlequah, WA on the southern tip of Vashon Island | | Amtrak | Amtrak Cascades | Runs from Vancouver, BC to Eugene Oregon, connections Tacoma to Portland and Seattle | ### The Importance of Transit **What role does transit play in people’s daily lives?** Transit can make it easier for all residents to move around Tacoma and is the backbone of a multimodal transportation system that provides a choice of travel options, safe and reliable journeys, and optimizes the use of limited street space. * **Supports a Connected City:** A mix of transit services including fixed route, high-capacity, on-demand and shuttles help people travel throughout the city no matter what context their trip begins or ends in. Seamless transfers between modes expand the reach of the network and the travelers who rely on it to get where they need to go. * **Eases Congestion:** Transit is the most space efficient mode that offers safe, reliable, weather protected mobility for people of all abilities. Transit can get a higher number of people where they need to go and ease congestion from single-occupancy vehicles. An effective transit network will ensure ease of movement for customers and give people a reliable way to get to their destination on time. * **Access for all Community Members:** A robust transit network gives everyone in the city the ability to move freely, including people who don’t drive or have limited access to a vehicle, young people and older adults, and low-income households. Reducing barriers to movement for different users of the system makes for more equitable mobility outcomes. * **Connects to Jobs and Key Destinations:** Transit connects people to local businesses, employees to their jobs, and residents of Tacoma to the broader region. It gets people to where they need to go to meet their daily needs, like grocery stores, schools and daycare centers, and to destinations that bring people together to create community, like parks, places of worship, and cultural centers. * **Reduces Cost Burden:** Having good alternatives to driving can help reduce household transportation costs, alleviating transportation cost burden. That is, money not spent on car ownership can go towards meeting other household needs and is more likely to be invested in the local economy. * **Built Environment that is Better for People:** Transit-oriented communities are friendlier for people, with development at a more human-scale, improved walkability, better connections to other modes, and support a more vibrant public realm. Transit investment can also spurn more housing development, which can improve housing affordability. * **Healthcare Access:** Transit plays a big role in connecting people to care. On-demand paratransit gets people to doctors’ appointments, transit connects people to hospitals, clinics, and urgent care facilities. * **Better Health Outcomes:** Social determinants of health are non-medical factors which influence health outcomes. Transit-usage and living in a community that is more transit oriented can contribute to better health outcomes. People that use transit will most likely take an active trip to and from the stop or station. Transit-oriented communities are more walkable, bikeable, and help people live a more active lifestyle. * **Improved Air Quality:** Reduced drive-alone trips and the electrification of transit vehicles contributes to better environmental quality. Reduced GHG emissions and improved air quality have significant health benefits for Tacoma residents. # What are specific outcomes that emerge from this element done well? Transit supports a thriving community, delivering better economic outcomes and a more people-centered built environment. It contributes towards making Tacoma a healthier and more sustainable place to live. * **Frequent, Reliable Network:** A network of frequent and reliable services that gets people to where they need to go, when they need to travel. Streets that prioritize transit travel, particularly where travel demand is high and the most people are impacted if buses are stuck in traffic. * **Ease of Movement:** Improved affordability, accessibility and reliability for all travelers in Tacoma. All residents in Tacoma can get to where they need to go, regardless of whether they have access to a car or not. * **Reduced Environmental Impact:** Reduced congestion, vehicle miles travelled (VMT), a lower single-occupancy vehicle trip rate, lower greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). * **Transportation Behavior and Mode Shift:** People in Tacoma use transit. The transit systems have healthy and growing ridership, with an increased uptake in transit use as the system becomes an increasingly attractive option, especially for shorter, local trips. * **Affordable, Connected Community:** Transit that helps accommodate planned land use growth and infill development, while helping to ease pressures created by job and population growth, like traffic congestion or housing affordability. * **Safe and Enjoyable Experience:** Safe, affordable and reliable transit, which allows people across the city, no matter where their trip begins or ends. Safe and comfortable transit waiting areas, where people are protected from the weather, have readily accessible and easy to understand information about their trip. More walkable urban realm, spaces that people can enjoy and be proud of. What groups or communities have specific needs and/or require special consideration? * **Individuals with a Disability:** People with reduced mobility, including those using wheelchairs or other mobility devices. People with reduced mobility depend on transit vehicles that can accommodate their needs, and various ways to access information on their transportation options. * **Low-Income Households:** Low-income households may be eligible for reduced fare travel. However, people without access to traditional banking will need options to purchase fare that with cash. * **Elders and children:** Young people, children and older adults are more likely to rely on transit to make essential trips. Making transit easy and safe for them to understand and use helps make the system better for everyone. * **People with limited English proficiency and people with low technology literacy:** These users of the transit system need access to information that is not limited by language or technology barriers (e.g., doesn't require use of a smart phone or personal computer). * **Marginalized Communities:** People living in equity priority neighborhoods and those who have been harmed by transportation projects in the past. * **Transit-Dependent Riders:** People who rely on transit to get where they need to go have a greater stake in transit connecting them to the destinations they access for work and to meet daily needs. # Context ## Transit In Tacoma Transit plays a vital role in connecting people to opportunities while maximizing travel capacity on the city of Tacoma’s streets. In 2022, transit made up 5.3 percent of all commute trips in the City of Tacoma (American Community Survey, US Census), making it the fourth most popular mode of commuting in the city. A majority (69 percent) of people commuted via drive alone, followed by 12 percent working from home, and 9 percent carpooling. Tacoma’s level of commuting is higher than both the county and state. More people work from home and drive less than the rest of the county, however, the city has slightly lower levels of work from home and higher levels of drive alone trips than the state. **Table 3 Mode of Travel to Work (2022 ACS Data)** | | Drive Alone | Carpool | Transit | Taxi | Motor-cycle | Bicycle | Walk | Other | Work From Home | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **City of Tacoma** | 69.2% | 9.2% | 5.4% | 0.03% | 0.16% | 0.45% | 2.4% | 1 % | 12.1% | | **Pierce County** | 72.7% | 9.9% | 2.9% | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.3% | 2.2% | 0.9% | 10.9% | | **Washington State** | 65.9% | 8.9% | 4.6% | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.7% | 0.9% | 0.9% | 15.5% | Funding for public transit in Pierce County comes in part from sales tax revenue authorized by voters in 2002, 0.6 percent of sales tax in the county goes toward transit. In 2011 Pierce Transit put forward a ballot measure to raise this tax to 0.9 percent to maintain transit service levels as the cost of operations grew. The ballot measure failed, resulting in service cuts and a contraction of the service area boundary the following year. In 2022 the sales tax revenue covered about half of Pierce Transit’s operating budget, with most of the rest coming from regional transit service agreements (22.9 percent), operational grants (19.4 percent), and passenger fares (2.9 percent). Figure 5 shows peak and midday transit headways in Tacoma displayed over the City’s equity priority areas map, illustrating that relatively few parts of the city have high-frequency service throughout the day. The inability for Pierce Transit funding sources to keep up with continuous increases in operational costs is a major challenge for transit in Tacoma. Figure 5 Pierce Transit Routes at PM Peak Service Levels <
> Despite these challenges, Pierce Transit ridership has increased in recent years, growing from around 5.5 million trips in 2022 across all services (bus, Rideshare, SHUTTLE, and Runner)[^p117-9] to nearly 6.8. million trips in 2023 but still have not rebounded to pre-pandemic levels (Table 4Error! Reference source not found.). **Table 4. Pierce Transit Annual Ridership** | Annual Ridership | Bus | Rideshare | SHUTTLE | Runner | Total | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 2024 | 6,769,493 | 362,661 | 308,021 | 52,379 | 7,492,554 | | 2023 | 6,096,759 | 412,042 | 262,611 | 15,787 | 6,787,199 | | 2022 | 4,946,334 | 382,751 | 211,890 | 5,620 | 5,546,595 | | 2019 (Pre-Pandemic) | 8,376,889 | 712,437 | 291,142 | (no service) | 9,380,468 | While the City does not run the buses or light rail trains in Tacoma, it does play an important role in ensuring transit is a safe, reliable, and viable mode of travel. Among the ways Tacoma supports transit today or plans to support transit through the implementation of this plan are: * **Transit capital projects:** Tacoma owns and operates many of the streets that transit runs on and can play a role in delivering transit spot improvement projects, such as bus lane markings, traffic signal upgrades, improved access to transit stops and stations, better lighting, and enhancements to bus stops. * **Transit funding:** Tacoma does not directly fund transit services or transit capital projects today, but it can look to peer cities in the Puget Sound region for examples of how local funding measures are helping to bolster transit service levels through funding partnerships. * **Improving transit access:** Tacoma supports access to transit by prioritizing bicycle and pedestrian improvements near transit stations, bus stops, and multimodal hubs. * **Transit reliability:** Tacoma can grow its role in planning, designing, and implementing bus priority treatments, an increasingly common practice for peer agencies in the Puget Sound region. * **Station Area Planning and Permitting:** Tacoma works with transit partners, such as Sound Transit, on access and land use planning, development review, and permitting for Link light rail station areas. [^p117-9]: Pierce Transit, 2022 Annual Report * **Regional transit coordination:** Tacoma partners with Pierce Transit, Sound Transit, and other neighboring agencies to track that regional investments benefit Tacoma, and that local investments align with regional travel needs. # What are key opportunities for Tacoma to improve transit? * **Define a clear vision, goals, and guidelines for transit in the city of Tacoma that set expectations for and help gain commitments from partners:** These could include aspirational service goals (e.g., every resident live within a quarter mile of high frequency transit service), policies defining transit modal priority (e.g., establishing a multimodal level of service standard), guidelines for operating on the city’s right-of-way, and transit-supportive evaluation criteria for future projects. * **Identify and pursue new sources of funding for transit:** Tacoma can play a key role in funding transit, including use of local funding sources for transit-supportive capital improvements and new opportunities to consider local measures that support increased service levels. * **Create transit-oriented, walkable neighborhoods that include affordable housing.** The City of Tacoma’s Affordable Housing Action Strategy, including initiatives like Home in Tacoma (HIT)—which updates city zoning to allow for middle housing by replacing single-family zoning with Urban Residential zoning—should generate transit-supportive densities while also increasing affordability within the city. * **Service integration and restructuring that leverage catalytic high-capacity transit projects** like the Tacoma Dome Link Extension, Tacoma Community College extension of the T Line, and potential future High Speed Rail investments. These investments will create opportunities to restructure Pierce Transit bus services, redeploying duplicative services to improve headways – the amount of time between transit vehicles at a stop – in Tacoma. Tacoma’s Frequent Transit Network helps guide the city in working with Pierce Transit on future service changes. * **Broader access improvements to system: connecting people to transit and ensuring safe, easy connections between transit modes.** * **Climate initiatives:** Build on increasing public awareness of climate change to educate and excite people about the role transit can play in reducing transportation emissions and promoting sustainable travel. * **Collaborate with transit partners on strategic long-range planning:** as well as project-level visioning, engagement, environmental review, construction, and crucially, all phases of design to advocate for Tacoma’s desired transit vision, goals, and guidelines. * **Cultivate a culture of transit:** acknowledging that Tacoma’s current travel options favor cars, through education regarding co-benefits, experiential opportunities, and TDM programs. * **Increase City staff capacity and expertise around transit:** which may include supporting educational opportunities or hiring new staff. ## What emerging trends will affect transit today and in the future? * **Changing travel needs:** Where, when, and how people travel is changing due to increases in telecommuting, e-commerce, and distance learning. This may require transit agencies to change the way they provide service (e.g. expanding midday service and providing more on-demand options), to match the needs of their riders. * **Integration of people-centered transportation policies:** in the last decade, initiatives like Vision Zero, an initiative to end traffic related deaths, Complete Streets, which envisions a balanced use of streets, fare free transit for youth, and creating walkable, dense places, all work to help create transit-friendly communities and streetscapes. * **Growing momentum for change around climate and housing policy:** Better transit service supports renewed efforts to decarbonize the transportation sector and reduce individual vehicle miles traveled. In addition, WA House Bill 1181 and new city housing policies could lead to transit-supportive land uses that could increase transit mode share. * **Increasing costs for U.S. infrastructure projects:** As policies like Buy America (which requires certain federally funded capital projects to source materials and labor from American vendors when realistically possible), supply chain issues, and rapid inflation, drive up costs for new capital investments, Tacoma and its partners will have to think critically and strategically about how to implement and fund future capital transit investments. * **Reducing gas tax revenue:** As passenger vehicles become more fuel efficient, the gas tax will become less lucrative. The state of Washington is exploring replacing or supplementing this tax with other price-based or mileage-based mechanisms and tools. * **Zero-emission transportation technology:** Across the transportation sector, vehicle manufacturers are exploring zero-emission technology. Challenges associated with supply and costs of technology could impact fleet electrification. * **High Speed Rail planning:** Long term talks about a potential high speed rail line connecting Portland, Oregon, to Vancouver, British Columbia, may influence station locations and other transit amenities in Tacoma. - **Accommodating population and job growth trends:** Explore creating capacity through mode-shift instead of roadway capacity to accommodate this growth. - **Focusing growth along transit-oriented neighborhoods:** There is a tremendous opportunity to link new transit investment with housing and economic development. Increasing awareness of the need for mixed-use development, elimination of parking minimums, and more demand to live in vibrant, walkable communities creates momentum for more transit-oriented neighborhoods. ## What challenges will affect transit today and in the future? - **Interagency collaboration:** The City of Tacoma has many partners it must coordinate and align with to successfully implement a quality transit system. Interagency and jurisdictional collaboration between city, county, state, and transit agencies can delay projects as multiple players may have competing priorities or interests. Tacoma’s primary transit provider is mandated to provide service across the county. However, as the largest city in the county, Tacoma sometimes has different needs than the rest of the county. Tacoma should work with transit agencies to provide enhanced service where the city would like to grow. - **Workforce shortages:** Staff constraints on both Tacoma and transit agencies make it hard to plan for and deploy quality transit services. Nationwide, recruitment for new bus operators and mechanics has been challenging. In addition, an ever-aging transit workforce has only compounded the problem, resulting in unwanted service cuts. - **Limited revenue and funding:** Local transit funding has not kept pace with increasing service delivery costs and population growth. With limited funds, trade-offs and decisions have to be made about where to invest transit funding to have the biggest impact. For example, balancing demand for resources for electrification verses need to expand transit presents a challenging trade-off between two, goal-aligned areas of investment. - **Undefined role of city leadership in transit planning:** The City of Tacoma would like to play a stronger role in shaping transit within its jurisdiction and needs a clearer path forward. - **Need for coordinated strategy on long range transit planning:** In tandem with the interagency collaboration, clearly defined roles and responsibilities are needed to help shepherd a unified and coordinated strategy for a long-range transit vision in the region. This would provide a “north star” for all agencies to work toward and help with prioritizing limited funds. - **Lack of density near high-capacity transit corridors:** Existing land uses are not conducive to high-capacity transit. High-capacity transit should align with areas where Tacoma wants to grow and should be the go-to mode of transportation for higher density, transit-oriented areas. # Tacoma’s Frequent Transit Network Vision Methodology Frequent, reliable transit service is the foundation of a mobility system that ensures Tacoma travelers have a safe, reliable, and affordable option to move about the city and connect to the region. A frequent bus network with expanded hours of operation is essential if Tacoma is to meet its climate goals and address transportation-related inequities. This section describes Tacoma’s vision for a Frequent Transit Network that would provide freedom for people moving around the city to simply “show-up and go.” However, meeting this vision requires substantially more operating resources (e.g., funding, bus operators, mechanics, and coaches) than are available to Pierce Transit today. The goal is to present a vision that Tacoma can work toward by partnering with Pierce Transit and potentially developing local source funding. The Frequent Transit Network has two primary components: (1) aspirational frequency targets and (2) targets for service span (hours of operation). These aspirational targets are illustrated by arterial street segments and don’t relate directly to the current Pierce Transit Route network (that is to say FTN service levels could be achieved through various future service configurations). FTN corridors are classified into three categories: * **10-Minute Headways:** Service every 10 minutes from before 6 AM to 7 PM on weekdays, and 15-minute or better service in the evenings with continued service every 30 minutes until midnight. These corridors would be prime candidates for future night owl (all night services). The vision is for Tacoma’s best transit corridors to allow people to “show up and go” throughout the day and into the late evening. This is a target level for Stream BRT corridors. * **15-Minute Headways or Better:** 15-minute service from before 6 AM to 7 PM and 30 to 60-minute service until midnight every day. This is a high frequency category for critical local corridors. * **20-Minute Headways or Better:** 20-minute service from 6 AM to 7 PM, with 60-minute service through 10 PM every day. The FTN was developed using a data-driven approach to prioritize where Tacoma invests and advocates for improved transit frequency. Segments of the street network where Pierce Transit buses and Sound Transit light rail operate were assigned a Frequent Transit Network target based on various data inputs, including: * **Current Land Use and Travel Patterns (2023)** * Population Density * Employment Density * **Transit Ridership Propensity Factors** * Future Population and Employment Density (2050, Aligned with Comprehensive Plan) * Future Population Density * Future Employment Density * Future Pop/Emp by Centers and Corridors * **Transit Service and Performance (2023 for Pierce Transit and Sound Transit)** * Annual Transit Boardings * Daily Weekday Boardings * Average and Peak Loads * Future Ridership Potential * Ratio of Service Deployed to Land Use Density * **Transit Expansion and Connectivity** * Connections to Link Light Rail and Sounder Commuter Rail * Center-to-Center Connections * **Equity Index Score based on Tacoma Equity Index** # Transit Capital Investment Corridors Along with frequent service, reliable travel and arrivals are among the most important factors when people choose whether to use transit services. Today, most Pierce Transit buses operate in mixed traffic along their routes. As the City grows and traffic congestion worsens, buses are increasingly delayed. As the street owner and operator, the City has the authority to create dedicated lanes for transit and to adjust operation of the signal systems to give buses priority at congested intersections. Organized along a corridor as a series of investments, these types of strategies can improve the transit customer experience and bolster transit mode share. Combined with branded buses and enhanced stations, these improvements can shape Bus Rapid Transit corridors (such as the Stream system envisioned by Pierce Transit). But those broader investments are not needed to bring meaningful travel time savings and reliability improvements to customers. This section prioritizes corridors where Tacoma and its transit partners should consider capital investments that prioritize transit reliability. Corridors are tiered by investment level based on the extent of identified transit priority needs and importance of supporting transit performance, climate, and equity goals. These corridors were identified because they: * Support access and integration with regional investment, such as future Link light rail (Tacoma Dome Station service opens in 2035) * Function as the most critical to support climate targets * Support access to opportunity * Improve transit reliability on key corridors included in the Frequent Transit Network * Provide key connections between designed growth centers and corridors identified in the Comprehensive Plan and Home in Tacoma initiative. Priority Transit Corridor Classifications designations are: * **Tier 1 Transit Corridor:** Highest-level arterial transit need, continuous transit priority, potential future light rail corridor * **Tier 2 Bus Corridor:** Merits corridor-level investment programming, significant transit priority need * **Tier 3 Bus Corridor:** Incremental or spot-location improvements Priority transit corridors were developed though a data-driven assessment that included evaluation of existing transit performance, corridor travel conditions, and projections of future land uses, transit need, and corridor congestion. **Figure 6. Data used to identify priority capital investments** | Data | | | :--- | :--- | | **Ridership** | Average Weekday Boardings
Project Future Ridership Demand | | **Existing Service and Conditions** | Service Levels (Weekday Peak, Weekday Midday, Saturday Midday)
Span of Service (Weekday, Weekend)
Daily Transit Trips
Best-Case Weekday Headway
Midday Weekday Headway
Daily Service Hours/Mile
Midday and Peak Congestion/Delay | | **Demographics** | Population Density (Existing)
Population Density (Future)
Employment Density (Existing)
Employment Density (Future)
Zero Vehicle Households
Transit Propensity Index
Tacoma Equity Index (Access to Opportunity) | # FREIGHT ELEMENT ## Purpose ### Goods Movement in Tacoma Tacoma's identity as "Grit City" is deeply tied to its industrial heritage and freight movement, which have been integral to the city's economic success and cultural fabric. From its origins as a key port city in the late 19th century to its position today as a hub for global trade, Tacoma's freight network has supported local industries and connected the city to the world. As Tacoma continues to grow and evolve, the city's freight system remains a vital component of the economy, ensuring that essential goods reach businesses and residents efficiently. The vision for Tacoma’s freight network is one that balances economic vitality with the health, safety, and well-being of the community. While freight is essential to Tacoma’s economy, it also presents significant challenges that must be addressed to maintain community livability. Traffic congestion from large trucks can strain the city's roadways, contributing to delays and reducing safety for all road users. Noise and air pollution from freight vehicles disproportionately affect neighborhoods near industrial areas, especially those with vulnerable populations. These challenges highlight the need to plan and manage freight movement in a way that supports economic activity without compromising the quality of life for Tacoma’s residents. The objective of the Freight Element is to ensure that freight movement continues to support the city's economy while minimizing negative impacts on the community and environment. By promoting sustainable practices, optimizing routes, and incorporating advanced technologies like Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), Tacoma seeks to create a system that is efficient, safe, and environmentally responsible. This element will guide Tacoma’s approach to balancing freight needs with community health and livability, ensuring that as the city grows, it remains a place where both industry and residents can thrive. # The Importance of Freight Delivery ## What role does mode/element have in people's daily lives? Freight and goods delivery support Tacoma's economy and everyday life, ensuring that essential items, ranging from food and medicine to consumer goods and raw materials, reach businesses and residents. As Tacoma continues to grow and evolve, managing freight and goods delivery in ways that prevent harm will protect community health and vitality while supporting the City's economic strength. * **Employment:** As a major port city, the import and export of goods provide jobs to residents of Tacoma who work to deliver these products. This includes positions in shipping, logistics, warehousing, and truck driving, creating a significant employment sector in the local economy. * **Retail and Groceries:** Trucks and rail deliver fresh produce, groceries, clothing, electronics, and other consumer goods to local stores and supermarkets. This ensures that shelves are stocked with a variety of products for consumers to purchase daily, contributing to the convenience and variety that residents enjoy. * **E-commerce Deliveries:** With the rise of online shopping, freight transportation, particularly through trucks and delivery vans, plays an important role in getting purchased items to consumers' doorsteps quickly and reliably. * **Manufacturing:** Freight networks support local industries by delivering raw materials to factories and transporting finished products to distribution centers and markets. This logistical support is crucial for the smooth operation and economic viability of manufacturing businesses in Tacoma. * **Urban Development:** Land use planning and development shape the need for freight by determining the placement of warehouses, distribution centers, and transportation hubs. These decisions influence traffic patterns, economic opportunities, and the overall layout of the city. * **Noise and Pollution:** Freight activities can lead to increased noise levels and air pollution, affecting residents' quality of life. Addressing these environmental impacts is essential for creating a livable urban environment while maintaining the benefits of a robust freight network. **What are specific outcomes that emerge from this element done well?** Efficient and reliable goods movement, reducing transportation costs for businesses and enhancing economic competitiveness. The success of freight does not come at the expense of safety or livability. * **Safe Integration with Other Modes:** Freight safely intersects with and/or shares the road with other modes in Tacoma, reducing the risk of crashes and ensuring safe traffic flow for all road users. * **Strong Economy:** The movement of goods to support local and national economies, helps businesses operate efficiently and maintain their supply chains, thereby boosting economic activity. * **Employment Opportunities:** Developing and maintaining infrastructure that supports jobs in logistics, warehousing, and transportation contributes significantly to the local economy and job market, providing stable employment for residents. * **Attracting Investment:** Integrating freight considerations into urban planning leads to better-designed infrastructure that accommodates the needs of residential, commercial, and industrial zones which improves overall urban efficiency and makes Tacoma an attractive place to run a business that relies on logistics. * **Minimizing Environmental Impact:** Lower emissions through the use of green technologies, optimized routing, and consolidation of freight leads to a reduction in the urban carbon footprint. * **Balanced Industrial Sector:** A strong industrial sector balances economic growth, environmental stewardship, and safety by mindfully interfacing with all modes of travel, keeping people, goods, and services moving efficiently while preserving quality of life. ### What groups or communities have specific needs and/or require special consideration? * **Puyallup Tribe of Indians:** The Puyallup Tribe of Indians has historical and cultural ties to the land and waterways of Tacoma, which are often impacted by freight activities. Including them in freight planning ensures that their rights, environmental concerns, and cultural heritage are respected and protected. * **Environmental and Public Health Organizations:** Environmental and public health organizations advocate for sustainable practices and the well-being of the community. Their involvement helps to prevent and mitigate the environmental and health impacts of freight activities, such as pollution and noise, working towards a balanced approach to economic development and public health. * **Low-income and Marginalized Communities:** These communities often face disproportionate impacts from freight activities, including higher exposure to pollution and noise. Including these communities in freight planning helps to develop equitable solutions that address their specific needs and improve their quality life. * **Port of Tacoma:** The Port of Tacoma is a central hub for freight activities, playing a pivotal role in the local and regional economy. Their involvement is essential to align freight planning with operational realities and to ensure efficient, sustainable, and coordinated logistics and transportation systems. * **Surrounding Jurisdictions and WSDOT:** Surrounding jurisdictions are affected by freight traffic and infrastructure developments that extend beyond Tacoma's borders. Collaborative planning with these areas ensures coherent regional strategies, reduces traffic congestion, and optimizes the use of shared resources and infrastructure. # Context ## Tacoma Context Freight transportation plays a pivotal role in the City of Tacoma's economic landscape. The Port of Tacoma, a major hub for international trade, significantly contributes to the region’s economy by handling millions of tons of cargo annually, supporting over 43,000 jobs in Pierce County alone. Tacoma also boasts over 10 million square feet of warehouse and distribution space. Additionally, much of the area is part of the ancestral lands of the Puyallup Tribe and is an important location for cultural traditions, the practice of tribal treaty rights, and essential government facilities. Land use guides where freight travels in Tacoma and the region. Tacoma has two designated regional manufacturing/industrial centers (MICs): * **Port of Tacoma MIC:** The Port of Tacoma MIC includes about 2,400 acres of land in the Tacoma Tideflats, a hub of manufacturing, warehouse, and maritime operations that’s also home to various nonport companies. * **South Tacoma MIC:** The South Tacoma MIC includes about 650 acres of land zoned for industrial uses. Types of businesses operating in the South Tacoma MIC include food-processing, metal-working and finishing, painting and coating, plastics, general manufacturing, auto sales, vehicle maintenance and repair, retail and commercial and businesses associated with rail maintenance and operation. ### Port of Tacoma The Port of Tacoma is a critical component of the Northwest Seaport Alliance, a partnership with the Port of Seattle, making it one of the largest container ports in North America. It handles between 9 and 13 million tons of cargo annually, with significant trade links to Asia, particularly China, Japan, and South Korea. The Port's operations support over 43,000 jobs in Pierce County and contribute nearly $3 billion in labor income, handling more than $25 billion of commerce, highlighting its vital role in the regional economy. While freight and delivery vehicles are accommodated on streets throughout Tacoma, a major generator of freight volumes in Tacoma is the Port which handles over 3 million TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent units) of cargo annually. The complex nature of the Tideflats area results in a variety of transportation opportunities and constraints. Transportation challenges include interactions between rail and roads, bridge conditions, and congestion. I-5 is the primary artery through the area, carrying over 190,000 daily vehicles. SR-509, which traverses the Tideflats, carries 30,000 vehicles per day. The Port is served by three main interchanges with I-5 at Port of Tacoma Road, 54th Avenue East, and Portland Avenue. Trucks rely on all three interchanges to access the shipping terminals within the Port. A key regional connection is River Road East (SR-167). This principal arterial travels along the west side of the Puyallup River and connects I-5 with the SR-167 freeway in Puyallup. The SR-167 Completion Project will close a gap in the state's highway system by completing the unfinished SR-167 between Puyallup and the Port of Tacoma, linking the Port of Tacoma and the manufacturing and industrial areas in Pierce County. *South Tacoma MIC* The South End and Nalley Valley areas of Tacoma are hubs of manufacturing and industrial activities, playing a strong role in the region's economy. This area is referred to as the South Tacoma MIC. Nalley Valley, historically known for its food processing plants and other heavy industries, has evolved to accommodate modern manufacturing facilities and large-scale distribution operations. The South End complements this industrial landscape with a mix of light manufacturing, warehousing, distribution centers, logistics, and support services, creating an economic ecosystem that contributes significantly to Tacoma's industrial output and employment. The proximity to the Port of Tacoma enhances the logistical advantages of these areas, facilitating efficient import and export activities. South Tacoma Way hosts a large commercial and retail area with many auto-related businesses and serves as a major arterial connection between South Tacoma, the Port of Tacoma, and the neighboring city of Lakewood to the south. Additionally, the presence of major transportation arteries, such as I-5 and SR-16, provides strong connectivity for freight movement. *Freight Corridors* The City has designated a network of “Heavy Haul Routes” that identifies those routes that carry the highest volumes of truck traffic . All designated heavy haul routes are located within or immediately adjacent to the Port of Tacoma. The State designates truck corridors based on the tonnage they accommodate: * T-1: more than 10 million tons per year * T-2: 4 million to 10 million tons per year * T-3: 300,000 to 4 million tons per year * T-4: 100,00 to 300,000 tons per year * T-5: at least 20,000 tons in 60 days and less than 100,000 tons per year Figure 7. WSDOT Roadway Freight Corridor Classifications for the City of Tacoma <
> # What are key opportunities for Tacoma to advance freight? * **Green Technologies:** To support climate goals, the Port is investing in green technologies, such as electrifying its fleet and optimizing logistics to reduce emissions and enhance safety. These initiatives aim to balance economic growth with environmental sustainability and community well-being. * **Community Engagement and Stakeholder Collaboration:** Engaging with the community and stakeholders can ensure that freight initiatives are well-supported and address local needs. Holding regular consultations through public meetings or stakeholder groups allows Tacoma to gather input and feedback from residents and businesses on freight-related issues and proposals. * **Data Sharing Platforms:** Data sharing platforms provides information between different stakeholders, including public agencies and private logistics companies, to enhance coordination and efficiency. * **Freight Model Development:** Tacoma is developing a long-range forecast for freight. This model will be referenced for analyzing current and future freight operational efficiencies and capital planning within and between the regional manufacturing/industrial zones in Pierce County and South Sound agencies. * **Adaptive Signals:** These signals adjust in real-time to traffic conditions, reducing congestion and minimizing delays for freight vehicles. By prioritizing freight traffic at key intersections, adaptive signals can ensure smoother and more predictable travel times, improving the reliability of supply chains. Additionally, this technology can help reduce fuel consumption and emissions by minimizing stop-and-go driving, contributing to more sustainable freight operations. What emerging trends will affect freight delivery today and in the future? * **Dynamic Routing:** Dynamic routing leverages real-time data and advanced algorithms to optimize delivery routes on the fly. Unlike traditional static routing, which relies on predetermined paths, dynamic routing continuously analyzes factors such as traffic conditions, weather, road closures, and delivery time windows to adjust routes in real-time. Dynamic routing offers cost savings and increased operational flexibility, allowing them to respond swiftly to unexpected disruptions and changes in demand. * **E-Commerce:** The rise of e-commerce is reshaping the freight industry, driving increased demand for fast and flexible logistics solutions. As consumers increasingly turn to online shopping, the volume of parcels and goods requiring transportation has surged, necessitating more frequent and smaller shipments. This trend puts pressure on freight carriers to optimize last-mile delivery, ensuring timely deliveries while navigating urban traffic and residential delivery challenges. E-commerce has also prompted the construction of more fulfillment centers in urban areas creating tension between community and freight delivery. * **Sustainability Initiatives:** Sustainability initiatives are becoming increasingly prominent in the freight industry, driven by the need to reduce environmental impact and comply with stricter regulatory standards. In 2019 the Port of Tacoma adopted a Clean Truck initiative where all trucks serving the Port’s international container terminals must have an active RFID tag and have a 2007 (or newer) engine. The Clean Truck Program requirements reduce diesel particulate matter emissions by up to 90% per truck. * **Smart Signal Systems:** These systems utilize real-time data, artificial intelligence, and interconnected sensors to optimize traffic signal timings, thereby reducing congestion and improving flow for freight vehicles. By prioritizing freight traffic at critical intersections and adjusting signals dynamically based on current traffic conditions, smart signal systems help to minimize delays and fuel consumption, leading to more predictable and faster delivery times. * **Freight and Bus Lanes:** A freight and bus lane is a dedicated lane on an arterial street that is exclusively reserved for use by transit and freight vehicles. This lane helps to streamline the movement of goods and public transportation. An example of this is in San Francisco where the city has designated bus lanes that allow for certain freight vehicles to use them during off-peak hours. What challenges will affect freight delivery today and in the future? * **Multimodal:** As Tacoma’s transportation system continues to evolve into a multimodal transportation system, integrating freight movement with active transportation and transit presents challenges. Manufacturing and industrial areas, which are often dominated by large trucks and heavy vehicles, can create physical and safety barriers to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. Additionally, the lack of multimodal infrastructure in these areas limits transportation options for workers and creates barriers for the surrounding neighborhoods, reinforcing car dependency. * **Network Impacts:** Network impacts, such as the closing of the Fishing Wars Memorial Bridge, can significantly disrupt freight operations. Such closures force freight traffic to reroute, often leading to increased travel times, higher transportation costs, and congestion on alternative routes. These disruptions can affect delivery schedules, strain logistics networks, and potentially lead to delays in the supply chain. * **Growth and Density:** Increasing urbanization can lead to more vehicles on the road, causing congestion that delays freight deliveries, complicating logistics, and impacting efficiency. As Tacoma density increases and the populations grows, the demand for goods will rise, leading to higher volumes of freight traffic in already congested urban areas. This congestion adds travel delay and increases the difficulty of navigating streets and limited parking spaces, particularly for large delivery trucks. * **Truck Staging and Parking:** As economic growth increases, the Port of Tacoma may lack sufficient space and facilities to accommodate the high volume of trucks waiting to load or unload cargo, leading to congestion and delays. The shortage of designated parking areas forces drivers to wait in unsafe or unauthorized locations, creating traffic bottlenecks and causing safety hazards. * **Freight Routes and Distribution Centers in Underinvested Communities:** Communities located near freight routes face equity challenges, particularly concerning health, environmental, and social impacts. These areas often experience higher levels of air pollution and noise due to the constant movement of trucks, leading to adverse health outcomes such as respiratory issues. These negative effects disproportionately affect low-income and minority communities, which are more likely to be situated near major transportation corridors. # AUTO ELEMENT ## Purpose ### Using Tacoma’s Street Network Streets are the backbone of the transportation system, serving all modes of travel including automobiles, trucks, transit, bicycles, and pedestrians. While the current reliance on automobiles is recognized, the city's approach is to redesign streets as spaces that support all users—creating a street system that prioritizes safety, sustainability, and multimodal transportation. By enhancing infrastructure for transit, walking, and biking, Tacoma aims to gradually shift away from automobile dependency, promoting a more connected and livable urban environment with a variety of safe and connected multimodal travel options. The prominence of automobiles in accessing work, education, healthcare, and leisure is largely due to past transportation and land use policies that prioritized car travel. Over time, this focus has shaped Tacoma’s streets and influenced how residents interact within the built environment. While automobiles can provide convenience, this approach has contributed to increased greenhouse gas emissions, heightened congestion, and compromised safety for non-vehicle users. Tacoma is committed to providing safe and reliable streets for those who need to drive—such as emergency responders, freight operators, service providers, and individuals who rely on a car—while also fostering a shift toward multimodal transportation. The Auto Element emphasizes enhancing road safety and efficiency for all modes of travel, ensuring that every journey, regardless of how it’s made, can be completed safely and without incident. Tacoma streets will be designed to be no wider or faster than necessary. Rather than aiming to eliminate congestion or provide free-flow travel conditions, Tacoma's goal is to create a safe environment for all road users, while managing congestion effectively. By achieving these goals, Tacoma aims to reduce fatalities and serious injuries, improve street conditions, lower greenhouse gas emissions through mode shift, and create a more connected community. # The Importance of Automobiles * **Access to Employment and Services:** Access to a vehicle is often necessary for reaching employment, healthcare, and shopping, especially in areas lacking local services, with limited public transportation options, or at times when personal safety could be a concern. This dependency highlights the need for improving and diversifying transportation options while addressing land use and community safety. * **Quality of Life:** The convenience and flexibility of driving contribute to the quality of life for many Tacoma residents. However, reliance on cars also leads to traffic congestion, noise pollution, and reduced community cohesion. By promoting transit and active transportation modes, Tacoma can reduce congestion, minimize environmental impacts, enhance community connectivity, and improve overall public health and quality of life for its residents. * **Social Equity:** Driving plays a role in social equity and mobility within Tacoma. Many community members cannot drive or have limited access to personal vehicles, leading to disparities in transportation options, particularly in a car-centered environment. Enhancing multimodal transportation can provide equitable access to essential services and opportunities for all community members. * **Economic Cost:** Driving entails various economic costs, including vehicle ownership, maintenance, fuel, and insurance. Reducing these costs for individuals by providing affordable and efficient alternatives to driving is important. Investing in public transportation and active transportation options will lower the overall economic burden on residents while promoting a more sustainable transportation system. * **Traffic Safety and Public Health** Driving behaviors directly affect traffic safety and public health in Tacoma. In 2023 alone, Tacoma reported over 4,000 traffic crashes with 139 of those crashes resulting in a fatality or serious injury. These crashes not only result in loss of life and severe injuries, cause emotional and financial strain on the victims and their families, but they also come with a high societal cost. **What are specific outcomes that emerge from this element done well?** * **Decrease in Fatal and Serious Injury Crashes:** By prioritizing safety of all road users, Tacoma can significantly reduce the number of fatal and serious injury crashes. This outcome is achieved through measures like improved road design and enforcement of traffic laws through automated enforcement cameras. * **Improved Air Quality:** Promoting electric vehicles, designing multimodal streets, and strengthening public transit helps decrease the amount of pollutants released into the atmosphere. Additionally, implementing commute trip reduction programs that encourage carpooling, remote work, and transit and active transportation options can further decrease the number of single-occupancy vehicles on the road. * **Land Use and Transportation:** Supporting healthy land use practices leads to enhanced community connectivity and livability. By promoting mixed-use development, compact urban growth, and accessible green spaces, Tacoma will create vibrant neighborhoods where residents live, work, and play in close proximity. This reduces the need for long commutes, encourages walking and biking, and fosters a sense of community. * **Streets That Connect Rather Than Divide:** Effective street design can transform roads into spaces that unite communities rather than creating barriers. Tacoma has many streets seen as significant barriers including SR-509, SR-7/Pacific Avenue, and Portland Avenue. By prioritizing safety and inclusivity, streets can encourage social interaction, support local businesses, and create vibrant, cohesive neighborhoods. * **Maintained:** Modernizing and maintaining streets, sidewalks, bike lanes, and bridges improves safety, accessibility, and usability for all users, including drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists. Well-kept infrastructure reduces risks such as vehicle damage, pedestrian falls, and unsafe cycling conditions, while enhancing the reliability and resilience of the transportation network. **What groups or communities have specific needs and/or require special consideration?** * **Emergency Services:** Emergency services require clear routes to respond quickly to incidents. Streets should be designed to facilitate emergency responders passing on the left or using center turn lane along with strategic placement of emergency vehicle preemption systems at traffic signals to facilitate rapid and safe passage for fire trucks, ambulances, and police vehicles. * **Transit Providers:** Streets should be 11’ wide on transit priority routes and have turning radii to accommodate buses. On routes with enhanced transit or rapid transit, dedicated lanes and prioritized signal timing supports timely and efficient public transportation. * **Refuse:** Refuse collection services require streets that can accommodate large garbage trucks with access to residential and commercial areas either by curb or alley. Adequate turning space is also necessary. * **Commercial Drivers:** Road infrastructure should support the weight and size of commercial vehicles, with reinforced pavement and ample turning radii to accommodate larger trucks when necessary to support the land use. Delivery and freight drivers need designated loading zones and routes to efficiently transport goods. * **Vulnerable Road Users:** Pedestrians and bicyclists require streets designed with their safety in mind. Features like frequent and well-marked crosswalks, lighting, separated bike lanes, and pedestrian refuge islands help improve safety and reduce crashes. Traffic calming measures, such as speed humps and curb extensions, help to slow down drivers. # Context ## Tacoma Context Tacoma's transportation landscape is shaped by a classification of streets, traffic patterns, and infrastructure characteristics. Understanding how the existing street network functions and supports various modes of transportation is crucial for planning. By examining current conditions and data, present usage, and projected growth, we can see the critical role of streets in connecting communities, facilitating commerce, and supporting mobility for all. ## National Highway System and Functional Classification The National Highway System (NHS) is a network of highways within the United States, including the Interstate Highway System and other roads necessary for the nation's economy, defense, and mobility. For Tacoma, the NHS includes major routes such as Interstate 5, which is integral for regional connectivity, economic activities, and access to the Port of Tacoma. The WSDOT operates and maintains the regional freeway system and shares jurisdiction on state routes, such as SR-7/Pacific Avenue. ### Interstates and State Routes * Interstate-5 (I-5): This major north-south route runs through Tacoma, connecting the city with Seattle to the north and Portland, Oregon, to the south. * Interstate 705 (I-705): A spur route that branches off from I-5, providing direct access to downtown Tacoma, the Tacoma Dome, and the waterfront area. * State Route 16 (SR-16): This route begins in Tacoma, connecting the city to the Kitsap Peninsula via the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. It is a key westbound corridor for traffic heading towards Gig Harbor and beyond. * State Route 167 (SR-167): Also known as River Road within Tacoma, this route connects the city to Puyallup and the broader Kent Valley, serving as an important arterial for both commuter and freight traffic. * State Route 509 (SR-509): This route runs parallel to I-5 on the east side of Tacoma, providing an alternate north-south connection and serving industrial areas and the Port of Tacoma. * State Route 7 (SR-7, Pacific Avenue): This route connects downtown Tacoma with Spanaway and other communities to the south. SR-7 serves as a major arterial for local traffic and regional connectivity. * State Route 163 (SR-163, Pearl Street): This route begins at an interchange with SR 16 in Tacoma and travels north through Ruston to Point Defiance, where the designation continues onto the MV Chetzemoka ferry to Tahlequa on Vashon Island. Tacoma Transportation and Mobility Plan Appendix B ### Figure 8. National Highway System Routes <
> National Highway System Routes — Interstate Highway T Transit Centers 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) Parks --- City of Tacoma — Railroad 54 *Functional Classification* Tacoma has a mature and well-connected street network. The City classifies streets according to a hierarchy of function, from most intensive uses to least intensive uses called functional classification. Functional classification groups streets and highways into classes according to their role in the network. The functional classification of each roadway guides the roadway design and cross section. More information about Tacoma’s functional classification can be found in the City’s Right-of-Way Design Manual. There are five main classes of streets in Tacoma: * **Principal Arterial:** Accommodate higher volumes of traffic for extended distances throughout the City and have a high level of access control. * **Minor Arterial:** Similar to principal arterials but are not expected to accommodate as much use and therefore permit more access options than principal arterials. * **Collector Arterial:** Connect commercial, industrial, and residential areas to other arterials of all types and have some restrictions on access control. * **Non-classified Arterials:** Have features, or an intended function, that do not align with, or span various elements of, the other classifications. * **Local Streets (Non-Arterials):** Provide direct access to abutting land uses and are designed to convey non-arterial traffic, including active transportation modes, to higher classification streets. # Figure 9. Functional Classification <
> 56 *Vision Zero High-Risk Network* In 2020, the Tacoma City Council passed Resolution 40559, committing to Vision Zero and the goal of eliminating traffic fatalities and serious injuries in the City of Tacoma by 2035. A Vision Zero Action Plan was created in 2022 that included a High-Risk Network Map – streets where improvements should be prioritized based on the prevalence of past crashes as well as risk of future crashes. Figure 10. Vision Zero High-Risk Network <
> *Tacoma Emergency Response Routes* Analysis from the Tacoma Fire Department has identified Tier 1 streets – those used to reach more than 300 responses per year or provide critical connectivity to hospitals. Redesign of Tier 1 streets should consider impacts to emergency response times with designs that support the ability of emergency response vehicle to navigate around or through vehicular traffic. Figure 11. Tier 1 Emergency Response Routes <
> What are key opportunities for Tacoma to advance safety and sustainability with the street network? * **Land Use:** Almost half of vehicle trips are less than five miles, but many people choose to drive even short distances due to a lack of safe alternatives for walking or biking. By promoting 15-minute neighborhoods—where daily needs like groceries, schools, and parks are within a short, safe walk or bike ride—cities can reduce the reliance on cars and create safer, more accessible environments. Thoughtful land use planning that shortens distances between homes, work, and services helps people feel comfortable using active transportation, improving safety and reducing exposure to crashes. * **Prioritizing the High Risk Network:** By focusing Tacoma’s Vision Zero High Risk Network and streets included in the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Safety Plan, Tacoma can make substantial progress in reducing injuries and fatalities, creating a safer environment for all road users. These corridors are often characterized by high traffic volumes, speeds, and crash rates. Improving, and sometimes completely redesigning, these corridors reduce the likelihood of crashes and encourages safer driving behaviors. * **People-Centered Streets:** A people-centered street system prioritizes the safety, comfort, and convenience of pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit users. Elements include wide sidewalks, separated bike lanes, and dedicated bus lanes to ensure safe and efficient movement for all users. Features like curb extensions, raised crosswalks, and pedestrian islands enhance safety at intersections, while street trees and green spaces improve the aesthetic and environmental quality of the street. * **Upgrading Traffic Signals:** Intersections are critical points in the street network where various modes of travel converge. Upgrading traffic signals with Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS), Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI), bicycle signals, and bicycle detection can significantly enhance safety and efficiency. APS ensures accessibility for visually impaired pedestrians, while LPIs reduce conflicts with turning vehicles by giving pedestrians a head start. Bicycle signals and detection improve safety and flow for cyclists, creating a more inclusive intersection for all users. * **Transportation Demand Management:** Effective transportation demand management (TDM) strategies can optimize the use of existing transportation infrastructure and reduce congestion. This involves promoting transit and active transportation modes, as well as implementing policies like carpooling incentives and congestion pricing. TDM helps balance the demand and supply of transportation resources, improving overall system efficiency. * **Green Infrastructure:** The integration of natural elements into the street system can help to manage stormwater, reduce urban heat islands, and enhance biodiversity. The City of Tacoma became the first "Green Roads Community" in June 2014. With an average pavement rating index that is well below the average for an equivalent city of its size, the City of Tacoma must look at a sustainable approach to rebuilding its roads. ## What emerging trends will affect driving today and in the future? * **Autonomous Vehicle:** Autonomous vehicles (AVs) require precise road markings and signage and signage to operate safely. Their integration into Tacoma’s transportation system could impact vulnerable road users necessitating enhanced safety measures. Additionally, while AVs may reduce congestion through optimized traffic flow, they could also increase vehicle miles traveled, posing new challenges for urban mobility. * **Vehicle to Vehicle Communication:** Vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication is a growing trend aimed at improving road safety and traffic efficiency by allowing vehicles to exchange information such as speed, position, and road conditions in real-time. To prepare and support this technology, Tacoma will need to invest in advanced infrastructure and 5G networks. * **Video Analytics:** Video analytics provide real-time data and insights into traffic patterns, behaviors, and incidents. This technology helps identify dangerous intersections, monitor compliance with traffic laws, and detect near-miss collisions. By analyzing video footage, Tacoma can implement targeted interventions, such as adjusting signal timings or adding traffic calming measures, to enhance safety. Tacoma has begun piloting its use through the Vision Zero program. * **Safety Over Speed:** As part of Vision Zero, Tacoma lowered the residential speed limit from 25 MPH to 20 MPH, and the speed limit in four neighborhood business districts from 30 MPH to 25 MPH. When the opportunity is presented, Tacoma will redesign streets for a lower posted speed limit, and construct traffic calming measures and improve signal operations to encourage compliance to the posted speed limit. ## What challenges will affect driving today and in the future? * **Rise in Fatal and Serious Injury Crashes:** Despite Tacoma's adoption of Vision Zero in 2020, fatal and serious injury crashes have continued to rise. The community frequently voices concerns about speeding and aggressive driving behaviors, with traffic calming requests being among the most common submissions in the City's 311 system. Although modifying the built environment to influence driver behavior is the most effective and proactive solution, it is both costly and time-consuming to implement. * **Connected Street Network:** Tacoma's fragmented street network and limited east-west corridors in South and East Tacoma hinder travel flow and multimodal connections. This connectivity limitation was highlighted in the Tacoma Mall Sub-Area Plan that included the goal of having a maximum 600-by-600 foot-block scale in area that have limited to no street connectivity. Balancing property owner negotiations and neighborhood concerns with the need for better connectivity will be a challenge. * **Climate Impacts:** Climate change will bring more frequent flooding, heat-related damage, and rising sea levels, impacting Tacoma’s roads. Additionally, increased greenhouse gas emissions will continue to degrade air quality. According to Tacoma’s 2030 Climate Action Plan, transportation accounted for 19% of Tacoma’s energy use and 44% of its emissions, resulting from the use of gasoline and diesel for personal vehicles, commercial vehicles, city buses, and freight. * **Cost of Maintenance and Modernization:** Aging infrastructure requires costly maintenance and modernization. Upgrades to signal equipment and rising material costs will further strain budgets, while equitable funding distribution remains a challenge. Cities in Washington, including Tacoma, rely heavily on gas tax revenues for infrastructure improvements. However, the shift to electric vehicles and more fuel-efficient cars is reducing these revenues. The WTSC has recommended transitioning from gas taxes to per-mile assessments, but this change presents complexities and has not yet been fully implemented. * **Heavier and Bigger Autos:** The average size and weight of vehicles have increased significantly. The average weight of passenger vehicles has risen to about 4,300-4,500 pounds, reflecting the trend towards larger and heavier vehicles, especially SUVs and trucks. Larger vehicles cause more road wear and tear, increasing maintenance demands, and cause more damage when striking a fixed object. They also pose greater safety risks to pedestrians and bicyclists. * **Trade-Offs In Transitioning to a Multimodal Transportation System:** Transitioning from an autocentric transportation system to a multimodal one can be challenging for a community. Reducing on-street parking will limit available parking options and may lead to unsafe parking situations. Increased congestion and traffic diversion to residential streets can frustrate drivers and neighborhoods. However, these growing pains are necessary for the city's health, safety, and well-being. # CURB MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ## Purpose ### Curb Space in Tacoma The curb is where mobility and access intersect. Curb management balances overlapping demands in a way that aligns with people’s needs as well as citywide goals: separating vehicle traffic and pedestrians, providing ADA accessibility, allowing transit passengers to depart and arrive comfortably, reserving areas for loading of passengers and goods, providing parking for autos and bikes, creating space for shared mobility, and making space for public interaction and human connection. Curb management policies ensure these transitions are seamless and optimized for the diverse needs of specific communities and neighborhoods. Traditionally, decisions on how best to manage the curb space, such as parking designation and time regulations, have been based on the adjacent building and road segment, assuming cars are the primary mode of transportation. Past policy and program elements reflect the complex and deeply entrenched system of automobile dependence. This approach often results in inefficient management and overbuilding of parking supply, leading to increased single-occupancy vehicle ownership, traffic growth, higher housing costs, and barriers to smart growth and efficient transit services. As Tacoma grows in population and accommodates different forms of transportation, the need for strategic curb management becomes increasingly important. Additionally, the pandemic has shifted consumer preferences, increasing demand for curbside pickup, outdoor dining and gathering places, and other services. To meet these evolving needs, Tacoma must adopt flexible and innovative curb management strategies that balance the diverse demands on curb space and ensure that a wide variety of users can safely coexist on Tacoma’s streets. This will ensure the efficient and equitable use of public spaces, enhancing mobility and supporting the city's growth and development. # The Importance of Curb Management ## What role does curb management have in people’s daily lives? The everyday interactions with curb space highlight its vital role in supporting the routines and well-being of the community, ensuring that urban environments are functional, accessible, and enjoyable for all residents. Proper curb management not only enhances efficiency and safety for users, supports area businesses, and economic development efforts, but it can also foster a sense of community and belonging. * **Parking:** Finding a convenient curbside parking spot near a destination reduces the stress of parking, making errands and visits to local businesses smoother and efficient. * **Loading and Unloading:** When delivery trucks have designated curb zones, it facilitates packages and groceries arriving on time without causing congestion or safety issues. * **Public Transportation:** Accessible bus stops and rideshare pick-up/drop-off points at curbsides means people can catch a ride to work, school, or appointments, making commutes more affordable and reducing the need for a personal car. * **Pedestrian Access:** Sidewalks and crosswalks for safe and efficient walking and rolling routes. * **Bicycling:** Dedicated bike lanes and bike-sharing stations at curbs make it easy and safe to bike to work, run errands, or enjoy a leisurely ride. * **Outdoor Activities:** Curbside areas for outdoor dining, community events, and pop-up markets provide inviting spaces for people to enjoy meals, socialize, and participate in local activities, enriching their daily urban experience. **What are specific outcomes that emerge from this element done well?** Curb space influences the character of the community by shaping how people interact with their environment. Efficiently managed curbs can foster vibrant, accessible, and safe public spaces, supporting economic vitality and social activities, which in turn promotes a sense of community and livability. * **Better Compliance:** Implementing regulations to enhance safety and compliance is crucial. Ensuring access to fire hydrants and adopting measures like intersection daylighting (restricting parking near intersections) improve sightlines for pedestrians and roadway users, reducing crashes and enhancing safety. * **Economic Development:** Promoting access and activity at the curb supports economic development. Well-managed curb space draws more customers, clients, and visitors, benefiting local businesses and enhancing the area's economic vitality. * **Equitable Access:** Offering more equitable access among different users results in an improved level of service for everyone. This includes bus stops, passenger loading zones (pick-ups and rideshare), parking spots, pedestrian walkways, and bike lanes, ensuring that all users can efficiently and safely utilize the curb space. * **Designated Spaces:** Identifying designated spaces for different modes of transportation ensures efficient use of curb space. This helps reduce conflicts between different users and promotes a smoother flow of traffic and activity. * **Public Space Activation:** Creating activity spaces such as parklets, open streets, and streeteries enhances community engagement and vibrancy. These spaces encourage social interactions and provide additional amenities for residents and visitors. * **Improved Mobility:** Improving pedestrian crossings and increasing safety for all users is a key outcome of effective curb management. This includes making intersections safer and more accessible, thereby enhancing overall mobility in the area. **What groups or communities have specific needs and/or require special consideration?** * **ADA Community:** Individuals with disabilities require accessible parking for both their personal vehicles and shuttle services. They also need safe, unobstructed access and crossing points. * **Rideshare Users:** Passengers using rideshare services need safe and convenient zones for pick-up and drop-off. * **Delivery Personnel:** Workers delivering small packages, such as e-commerce and food goods, as well as those handling large freight, need specific areas to load and unload efficiently. * **Customers, Clients and Visitors:** Visitors to downtown and business districts benefit from consistent and easy to understand parking regulations which supports area businesses. * **Micro-Mobility and Bicycle Users:** Riders of e-scooters, e-bikes, and bicycles need designated lanes and parking spaces for safety and convenience. * **School Bus and Transit Users:** Students and public transit passengers require safe loading zones for school buses. * **Special Event Attendees and Mobile Retail Customers:** Community members attending special events or patronizing food trucks and mobile retailers need designated spaces for these activities. * **Emergency Responders:** Firefighters, paramedics, and police officers need access to curb space during emergencies. * **Service Providers:** Various workers, including delivery and maintenance personnel, need dedicated zones to carry out their tasks effectively. # Context ## Tacoma Context An effectively managed curb is one that maximizes the use of available space while minimizing congestion, safety hazards, and conflicts between users. A coordinated system relies on a suite of tools and plans that outline operating concepts, techniques, and practices, enabling continuous access for people between land use and the transportation network. Shortly after the adoption of the 2015 Transportation Master Plan, Tacoma recognized the value in leveraging parking management as a tool to advance the sustainability goals of Tacoma 2025 and set the foundation for strategically managing the parking supply in the downtown area. Over time the downtown parking system has matured and tools for managing the curb has broadened outside of the downtown area. ### Setting the Foundation In the mid-2000s, Tacoma recognized a need to align parking policy and practices with the goals of the Destination Downtown Plan (2001) and the Downtown Tacoma Economic Strategic Plan (2008) to be progressive in establishing an economic and cultural center of the South Sound. At that time Downtown Tacoma was experiencing a renaissance period; a cultural and economic rebirth recovering from a long period of disinvestment. Between 2001 and 2008, more than 4,000 new residents made Downtown their home. The area also saw an increase in private commercial investment in Class ‘A’ office spaces which brought an increase of employment population. Congestion also grew. In the space-limited downtown urban area, Tacoma perceived the proliferation of allocating space to on-site parking hindered investments in higher and better uses. Therefore, a key strategy for advancing the rebirth of downtown Tacoma was to reduce dependency on the single occupancy vehicle while maintaining access and mobility through alternative transportation options. The Downtown Element of the Comprehensive Plan (2008) established the goal of adopting flexible parking management strategies to mitigate the amount of capital investment necessary for automobile infrastructure and leverage opportunities for economic development. The vision set forth the motion to adopt best practices for municipal parking management. As a result, Tacoma developed an effective parking management strategy that would allow decision makers to avoid building or requiring new parking until the existing parking inventory was efficiently used. An integrated parking plan was developed in 2008. A key consideration of the plan was consolidating the management of off-street, on-street and parking enforcement elements under one centralized workgroup. Typically, management of various components of parking exists across several departments in other municipalities. This often presents a challenge for the management system and strategies to be viewed comprehensively. <
> Tacoma was at the forefront of following best practices by restructuring the management of the parking system, establishing the Integrated Parking Plan and incorporating community stakeholders into decisions regarding the operations of the public parking supply. The Parking Services work group was fully integrated in 2010 with the roll out of the on-street parking meter system. Currently the Parking Services workgroup is a fully embedded section within the Transportation Division of the Public Works Department. As part of the 2010 on-street meter implementation, the City established a stakeholder work group that helped inform the City on various perspectives throughout downtown and how to best align best parking practices to support economic development. The Parking Technical Advisory Group, or PTAG, is instrumental in assisting the City in developing parking policies to better manage the City’s public parking supply. In 2012, the PTAG approved the implementation of an Integrated Parking Plan, emphasizing the interconnected nature of various elements within the Parking System. Among other things, the plan underscored the role of the on-street meter system in regulating curb usage to prioritize downtown's primary users—customers, clients, and visitors. The plan continues to guide the City's parking system in both operational and strategic approaches to downtown parking management. Over the last several years, the performance results of the parking system have been monitored and strategies have been adjusted on an ongoing basis. Occupancy data is used as a key indicator to determine the practical capacity. Practical capacity is the occupancy level or number of vehicles that can be parked in an area before it becomes difficult for a driver to a find a space. Different thresholds are used to determine what types of decisions should be made. * 85%: When occupancies routinely reach or exceed 85 percent in the peak hour, the supply is said to have reached practical capacity. * 70-85%: This is the ideal threshold where there is a greater chance of being able to find one or two stalls on a block. Anything below that level conveys something is not working, such as rates driving away users, the controls are too restrictive, or the demand just is not there. **Figure 12. Example of Downtown Parking Occupancy Study (2017)** <
> **Looking Forward: The Future of Parking and Community Collaboration:** City curbs have never been busier. In the wake of the pandemic, urban areas have seen the number of home deliveries and associated transportation vehicles skyrocket. As people have started travelling again, more people are on the roads with more options for means of transport. More vehicles, from last mile delivery trucks to e-scooters to on-demand shuttle services are fighting for curb space. Over a decade ago the Integrated Parking Plan was set up with the scope of maximizing the use of the right of way under the vein of efficiently managing vehicle storage within dedicated parking space. The scope needs to be broadened to look beyond vehicle storage and view the entire curbside area alongside streets, including managing different uses depending on the location and time of day. The urban landscape of Tacoma is under a major transformation. Curb management will continue to play a vital role in the future of community engagement opportunities as well as the success of important modern amenities and sustainability efforts. However, in the coming years, the utilization of parking spaces and how the adjacent curb could be used differently will continue to evolve, driven by partnerships that prioritize sustainability, innovation, and community well-being. **Diversifying Uses Beyond Vehicle Storage:** This calls for leading the charge on making curb space more productive, diverse and recreational in order to provide the greatest amount of access to serve the highest number of people. The Integrated Parking Plan’s approaches may be outdated with terminologies referring to parking terms (stationary, act of leaving vehicles), however the concept of active regulation and allocation of all uses of the curb space is still relevant. **Broadening the Application of Parking Management:** The parking management tools established over a decade ago were set up with a focus on being applied to the downtown environment. The demand is growing for applying managing tools as a solution to the competing needs outside of the downtown such as business districts, commercial nodes and mixed-use areas. Tacoma is diverse with 54 square miles of landscape composed of various neighborhoods and districts where no two are alike. Tacoma recognizes that curb management is not a one-size-fits all model. Every area is unique with its own set of challenges, demand and profile of travelling behaviors. Therefore, management for area calls for tailored approaches that are flexible to the needs # What are key opportunities for Tacoma to advance curb management? * **Curb Management Framework:** A proper curb management framework balances competing needs while focusing on activating and maximizing use of the right-of-way. By implementing dynamic and adaptive strategies, Tacoma can improve traffic flow, enhance safety for all users, and reduce congestion and emissions, leading to more sustainable and efficient urban environments * **Equitable Transit Oriented Development:** Equitable Transit Oriented Development (ETOD) creates a connection between neighborhoods, resources, and transit. ETOD encourages the use of public transit, theoretically reducing the need for parking as residents, shoppers, and employees opt for transit, commute by single-occupancy vehicles less often, and own fewer vehicles. However, ETOD can also increase density, potentially putting pressure on parking facilities. Strategic curb management can address these tensions by providing more access and options, ensuring that the increased density does not compromise mobility and accessibility. * **Sustainable Practices:** Designate specific curb areas for different transportation modes, such as bike lanes, bike and micro-mobility parking, transit stops, rideshare zones, and delivery spots, to enhance accessibility and safety. Installing EV chargers at curbside locations presents an opportunity to promote sustainable transportation. EV chargers should be placed in locations that do not compromise the city’s commitment to public transit and cycling, promoting a balanced and eco-friendly curb management approach. * **Dynamic Curb Use:** Implementation of flexible curb zones that change function based on real-time demand and time of day. These zones can serve as loading/unloading areas during peak hours, convert to parking spaces during off-peak hours, and transform into pedestrian plazas or parklets when needed, maximizing the utility of curb space. * **Updated Land Use Codes:** Revise and update codes to promote concepts such as adaptive reuse, parking in-lieu of fees, shared parking, level of service requirements and contingency planning. * **Integrated Parking Approach:** Off-street parking access and availability have a strong interplay with how the curb space in the area can function. Strategies on how to leverage existing built supply and how to properly manage that supply will allow for more options to be considered at the curbside. What emerging trends will affect curb management today and in the future? What emerging trends are expected to influence policy or require new types of programs or investments? * **E-Commerce and Freight:** There continues to be an increased demand for curb space due to the rise of e-commerce and last-mile delivery services. Allocating dedicated loading zones and utilizing technology for scheduling and managing deliveries can reduce double-parking and improve traffic flow. * **Remote Work:** With fewer daily commuters, the demand for long-term employee parking new workplaces has decreased. Curb space can be repurposed for more dynamic uses such as outdoor dining, temporary retail spaces, and multimodal needs. Conversely, there has been an increase in residential parking and delivery activity, prompting a shift in curb space usage from commuter parking to residential delivery and service zones. * **Autonomous Vehicles, Robot and Drone Deliveries:** These technologies will require designated zones for drop-offs, pick-ups, and deliveries, and potential investment in smart infrastructure and adaptive curb management strategies to accommodate these advancements. Additionally, policies will need to address social equity and safety to support an efficient and inclusive urban environment. * **Smart Technology Integration:** Implement smart parking meters and sensors to monitor curb usage in real-time, facilitate dynamic pricing, optimize space allocation, and improve enforcement. Utilize payment apps, QR codes, permits, and occupancy sensors to enhance efficiency, and increase the efficacy of ticketing through parking reservations and automated enforcement systems. * **Focused Data Collection and Evaluation:** Data informs policy makers of the efficacy of the policies and how behaviors may or may not be changing. Strong curb side management policies should include not only hard data, but end user perspective so that that treatments implemented align with the needs of the community and have the desired results. Data should be collected not only from the curbside activities, but also existing off-street parking supply. * **Vehicle Electrification:** With over 80 makes and models of electric vehicles now available and more jobs in clean energy than fossil fuels nationwide, transportation electrification is rapidly advancing. The City of Tacoma encourages increase electric vehicle (EV) use City-wide as part of its commitment to address climate change. Infrastructure support for EV charging stations in public parking areas is essential, along with incentives for businesses to install them. # What challenges will affect curb management today and in the future? **What challenges must the TMP policies, programs, and project investments address?** * **Finite Resource:** Curb space in urban areas is a limited and highly sought-after resource, creating significant challenges in its allocation and management. With the rise of e-commerce and food delivery services, the demand for curbside loading and unloading zones has increased dramatically, often exceeding the available space and creating unsafe situations. Balancing the diverse needs of various users, such as public transit, cyclists, pedestrians, and utilities, complicates curb space management further. * **Cultural changes and consumer preferences:** Curbside activities and the need to support businesses and user needs evolves over time. Creating a framework that allows for the curb space to be adapted to the changing needs of consumers and businesses will be increasingly important as new products and technologies become available. * **Behavior Change:** Changing long-established habits and routines of drivers and businesses can difficult and is often met with resistance. Many users are accustomed to convenient curbside access and may challenge changes that limit parking or alter loading zones. Encouraging compliance with new regulations, such as designated loading times or areas, can be difficult without extensive education and enforcement efforts. * **Parking Minimums:** Reducing and/or eliminating parking minimums for new developments creates an increase pressure on-street as often those tenants/residents are not immediately shifting to a different travel mode and are still driving their cars. This can result in a challenging and unsafe parking environment. * **Idling:** Curbside congestion leads to higher emissions from idling vehicles, contributing to air pollution. The environmental impact of poorly managed curbside areas is a growing concern, as increased vehicle emissions negatively affect air quality and contribute to climate change. Addressing these environmental impacts is a critical challenge in curbside management # PUBLIC REALM AND ACTIVATION ELEMENT ## Purpose ### Tacoma’s Public Realm The City of Tacoma aims to inspire social interaction, build community, and reimagine a city where streets can be safely shared by pedestrians, multimodal forms of transportation, art, and new forms of placemaking that celebrate Tacoma's unique heritage and creative community. As the population in Tacoma continues to grow, public spaces become increasingly important. The Public Realm and Activation Element focuses on activating streets, sidewalks, alleys, and trails as a way to create vibrant, inclusive, and safe spaces for people to experience. **Public Realm:** Areas that are open and accessible to everyone, such as streets, sidewalks, and trails. **Activation:** The process of transforming underutilized or passive spaces into vibrant, engaging areas that encourage social interaction, economic activity, and community engagement. A commitment to activation embraces strategies that range from the planned and sanctioned to the informal and ephemeral. Tacoma’s public right-of-way already faces multiple and sometimes competing demands including vehicle traffic, bicycle lanes, transit facilities, pedestrians, parking, street trees, utilities, sidewalk cafes, and public art. Balancing these demands with community uses will be challenging and may require new approaches to street design and management. Additionally, opportunities for people to access the public realm beyond functional and utilitarian purposes are limited, with most of these spaces concentrated in Very High or High Opportunity Areas as identified by Tacoma’s Equity Index Map. This uneven distribution leaves many communities without accessible and inviting public spaces for recreation, social interaction, and community gathering. The public right-of-way is a valuable asset which operates as a network of transportation conduits, primarily used for human movement. The City of Tacoma’s objective is to strike a balance between the many needs of the right-of-way while committing to connect people to people and people to places. When reimagined with community-building in mind, these spaces can serve as multifunctional plazas, festival streets, farmers markets, cafes, block parties, and places where people freely and openly congregate together. # The Importance of Public Realm and Activation ## What role do public spaces have in people’s daily lives? Public spaces are essential to the urban form of every city. They serve as a social utility promoting democracy, inclusion, and social cohesion. * **Social Interaction Opportunities:** The public realm serves as gathering points for daily social interactions, where people can connect, participate in community events, eat outside, and listen to music. These spaces provide opportunities to connect with neighbors and build stronger community bonds. * **Safe and Accessible Transportation:** Well-designed public spaces provide safe and accessible pathways for walking, rolling, and cycling. This makes it easier for individuals to commute, run errands, and enjoy leisurely walks without relying on cars. * **Comfortable Spaces:** Comfort in the public realm is enhanced by features like trees that provide shade, benches that offer places to rest, and well-placed lighting that improves visibility and safety. Well-designed spaces foster a sense of security and relaxation, making the public realm a welcoming part of daily life. * **Placemaking and Public Art:** Public spaces are beautified with art installations that reflect the community's culture and history. Public art and placemaking help build a sense of belonging and make everyday experiences in the city more meaningful and enjoyable. Features, such as murals, sculptures, and interactive installations, create visual interest, foster a sense of pride, and invite people to pause, gather, and connect with their surroundings. * **Economic Life:** The public realm provides spaces where people can grab coffee at a local café, enjoy a meal outside, or pick up fresh produce at a farmers market. Street fairs and bustling sidewalks offer convenient opportunities to shop for unique gifts and connect with local vendors and businesses, turning everyday errands into enjoyable experiences. **What are specific outcomes that emerge from this element done well?** * **Increased Physical Activity:** Activation encourages more walking and cycling, reducing sedentary lifestyle-related issues like heart disease and diabetes. Physical activity also boosts mental health by lowering stress and anxiety, improving mood, and leading to a more physically and mentally healthy community. * **Improved Safety:** Activated spaces and multimodal options encourage more people to walk, bike, and gather, increasing visibility and passive monitoring in public areas. This heightened presence of people helps improve safety, deter crime, and create a sense of security, making streets feel more welcoming and lively for everyone. * **Economic Benefits:** Vibrant public spaces boost local business revenues by attracting more customers. Increased foot traffic helps support local economies and can lead to further business investments in the area. * **Enhanced Social Interaction:** Activating public spaces fosters stronger community identity and bonds, reduces feelings of loneliness, and supports resilience urgently needed for community health. These areas become hubs for community events, gatherings, celebrations, as well as enhancing social cohesion and community spirit. * **Climate Resilient Streets:** Increased tree canopy in right-of-way helps to improve air quality, reduce urban heat islands, and increase urban biodiversity, contributing to a healthier environment. Green infrastructure manages stormwater by absorbing rainwater, reducing runoff, and enhancing groundwater recharge, creating more resilient and sustainable urban spaces. * **Expanded Public Realm:** Streets are transformed for use in farmers markets, block parties, and festivals, providing dynamic and engaging community spaces. Restaurants and cafes benefit from expanded outdoor dining experiences, enhancing urban livability. **What groups or communities have specific needs and/or require special consideration?** * **Unhoused Neighbors:** Public spaces provide a space for rest for individuals experiencing homelessness. Public spaces should have access to water, restrooms, and shade. Events in public spaces can include support and resources to provide assistance. * **Children, Young People, and Seniors:** Designing inclusive public spaces fosters intergenerational interactions and enhances community well-being. Additionally, considering the needs of children, young people, and senior citizens promotes equity, as these age groups are more likely to rely on public spaces for recreation, socialization, and daily activities. * **Individuals with a Disability:** Feeling safe is crucial for all users, including individuals with disabilities. This entails providing smooth, level surfaces for easy navigation, wide sidewalks, curb cuts, tactile paving for the visually impaired, and ramps that are thoughtfully integrated with the design of any stairs. Additionally, it is important to consider individuals with a service animal by creating public spaces that are accessible and accommodating for dogs, providing facilities such as designated relief areas and safe pathways that allow for comfortable and independent movement throughout the public realm. * **Marginalized Communities:** Marginalized communities require special considerations due to historical exclusion and resource disparities. Additionally, marginalized communities may face higher levels of targeted violence or police surveillance, which can impact their comfort and willingness to engage in public spaces. Addressing safety concerns through community-driven solutions is essential. # Context ## Tacoma Context Tacoma, like many urban cities, faces the challenge of creating a public realm that fosters community and prioritizes people over vehicles. In many cities, a significant portion of the public realm is dedicated to automobiles. According to the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), streets and parking lots often occupy up to 30-50% of urban land. Reallocating even a fraction of this space to pedestrians, cyclists, and public activities can have profound benefits. Cities that have implemented such changes report increased foot traffic, higher retail sales, and improved public health. For example, the Newark Avenue Pedestrian Plaza in Jersey City saw a significant boost in local business and community engagement after a $7 million transformation into a permanent pedestrian-friendly space. Effective public spaces serve as "third spaces," distinct from home (first space) and work (second space), which are crucial for community building and mental health. According to Project for Public Spaces, these third spaces are essential for community engagement, providing venues for socializing, cultural activities, and civic participation. Tacoma and Pierce County have been facing a significant youth mental health crisis, particularly exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. A report from the Tacoma-Pierce County Department of Health highlights a troubling increase in emergency department visits for anxiety and depression among youth. The data showcases the need for sustained support and innovative solutions to support the mental well-being of Tacoma's youth. Enhancing public spaces through placemaking can be one way to contribute to improving youth mental health by providing safe, engaging, and supportive environments. Additionally, Tacoma's urban tree canopy currently covers about 20% of the city's land area, one of the lowest in the Puget Sound region. The City aims to increase this to 30% by 2030, recognizing the multiple benefits trees provide, such as cooling urban areas, improving air quality, and enhancing the livability of neighborhoods. Programs like Grit City Trees and the recent Urban Forestry Ordinance are crucial steps toward achieving these goals, and while continued densification and redevelopment are themselves important climate mitigation and transportation demand management strategies, the relative importance of the public right-of-way for increasing tree canopy becomes more urgent. By planting more streets trees and climate resilient vegetation, Tacoma can enhance its tree canopy, contributing to a healthier, more sustainable urban environment Activating streets involves transforming them into lively, pedestrian-friendly areas. This can include pop-up markets, street fairs, public art installations, and outdoor performances. It may involve design considerations and provision of infrastructure elements necessary to support street activations. Programs like Tacoma’s Downtown to Defiance event that closed Schuster Parkway and Ruston Way to cars exemplify successful street activation by temporarily closing streets to cars, allowing pedestrians, cyclists, and community activities to flourish. Such transformations encourage physical activity, reduce pollution, and enhance the overall quality of urban life. Community building is at the heart of placemaking. When residents actively participate in shaping their environment, it fosters a sense of ownership and belonging. Tacoma’s Neighborhood Planning Program and Neighborhood Councils play a critical role in this process by engaging residents in the planning and improvement of their communities. By involving community in decision-making, these programs help create spaces that reflect the community’s identity and needs. Enhancing Tacoma’s public realm through street activation and placemaking is much more than aesthetic improvements; these design approaches improve the very function of our streets to support a healthier, more connected community. By prioritizing people over vehicles and fostering inclusive, vibrant public spaces, Tacoma can build a city where residents feel more connected, engaged, and mentally healthy. This vision requires collaboration among city staff, local organizations, and the community to ensure that every resident benefits from a well-designed, accessible public realm. ## What are key opportunities for Tacoma to advance the Public Realm and Activation? * **Public Art:** Public Art tells the stories of neighborhoods and communities, contributing to Tacoma’s sense of collective history, placemaking, and pride. The City of Tacoma’s Municipal Art Program[^p166-10] includes artworks that are large and small, permanent and temporary, collaborative and individual, historical and contemporary - larger scale works can be incorporated via Percent for Art into major capital projects, and smaller scale pieces can engage community members in surprising and unexpected places, such as street corners and traffic medians. Multi-use public spaces encourage collaboration and provide ample opportunity for different community partners, groups, and individual artists to present performance pieces and temporary art installations. * **Business Community Partnerships:** Business groups, like the Downtown Tacoma Partnership and Neighborhood Business Districts, can collaborate with the city and organizers to coordinate event logistics, market and promote closed street events, or [^p166-10]: In March of 2000, the City of Tacoma reinstated the Municipal Art Program that dedicates 1% of construction costs from public capital projects to the creation of public art. host pop-up events and food stalls. By actively participating in and supporting public space activation, businesses can strengthen their ties to the community, fostering a sense of shared investment and collaboration in improving public spaces. Creating and supporting Business Improvement Areas can help with partnerships. * **The Community:** Tacoma's strong sense of local pride can drive enthusiastic participation and support for public realm initiatives, cultivating a shared commitment to improving and celebrating communal spaces. Tacoma's vibrant creative scene can inspire innovative approaches to designing and programming public spaces, making them more engaging, inclusive, and reflective of the community's unique character. * **Leverage private investment in private development:** Large scale private development approvals granted by the City as part of regular permit reviews and construction are often the best opportunity to newly-dedicate the “last increment” of right-of-way for pedestrian facilities and a robust public realm. Through a partnered effort of Public Works, Planning and Development Services, and Tacoma Public Utilities, those dedications of right of way for sidewalks, pedestrian space, and related proportionate investments by private development can be identified and implemented as a requirement of development approvals. * **Enhanced Public Transit Stops:** Through partnerships with Pierce Transit and Sound Transit, the City can improve bus and transit users’ experience with shelters, seating, real-time information, and beautification efforts to make public transportation more attractive, safe, and convenient. These facilities can include artistic elements and landscape to make transit more prominent, inviting and integrated into the community. * **One-Way Streets:** Converting a street to a one-way configuration can create more space for wider sidewalks, outdoor seating, street tree planting and green stormwater infrastructure, fostering a more inviting and vibrant environment in Tacoma’s Growth Centers. Additionally, it’s easier to implement other urban design features that promote community engagement and local business activity. # What emerging trends will affect Public Realm and Activation today and in the future? * **Streateries, Parklets, and Curbside Cafes:** To support Tacoma businesses in meeting physical distancing requirements during COVID-19, the City launched the Curbside Café and Market Pilot Program. These curbside cafés and markets, also known as streateries or parklets, are similar to sidewalk cafés but are located in parking spaces within the right-of-way. The program was highly successful, leading to a strong interest in making it permanent and expanding its scope. * **Shared Streets (Woonerfs):** Streets designed to prioritize pedestrians and cyclists, with cars allowed but at very low speeds. This concept, which originated in the Netherlands, has been spreading globally. While the City has not yet fully implemented traditional Dutch-style woonerfs, community engagement has shown a desire to redesign streets downtown and neighborhood business districts to prioritize non-motorized users. * **Slow Streets Initiatives:** As part of its Vision Zero program, Tacoma reduced the default residential (non-arterial) speed limit from 25 MPH to 20 MPH, recognizing that a lower speed limit is ideal in areas where pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers frequently interact. To further promote adherence to this lower speed limit, Tacoma plans to create a prioritized investment strategy for traffic calming infrastructure. Key streets for these improvements include school walking routes, greenways, and streets near parks. This initiative aligns with broader Slow Streets efforts, aiming to create safer, more multimodal-supportive environments throughout the city. * **School Streets:** Tacoma’s 2023 Safe Routes to School Action Plan includes an action of exploring School Street demonstrations to improve safety and reduce traffic congestion around schools. By creating car-free zones during drop-off and pick-up times, Tacoma aims to prioritize the safety of children and encourage walking and cycling. These initiatives help reduce air pollution, increase physical activity among students, and create a stronger sense of community. * **Night Markets and Street Fairs:** Tacoma has a rich tradition of hosting night markets and street fairs, which contribute to local economic growth and community engagement. Events like the Tacoma Night Market bring together local vendors, food trucks, and cultural performances, creating vibrant public spaces that attract both residents and visitors. These events support local entrepreneurs and artisans, strengthen community ties, and offer unique cultural experiences. As Tacoma continues to look for innovative ways to revitalize its public spaces, night markets and street fairs remain a key strategy for boosting the local economy and fostering community spirit. # What challenges will affect Public Realm and Activation today and in the future? * **Maintenance and Upkeep:** Green infrastructure, such as bioswales, rain gardens, and permeable pavements, requires regular maintenance to remain effective. Resources, processes, and commitment to enforcement of private parties’ responsibilities must be identified for ongoing upkeep to maintain these facilities in good working order and prevent these features from becoming neglected. * **Community Buy-In:** Gaining support from local residents and businesses is important. There may be resistance to change, particularly where people are accustomed to street space priority given to parking or access to their homes or business for deliveries. * **City Processes and Program Requirements:** Activating the public realm is challenged by sometimes confusing city processes, including permitting and regulatory compliance, as well as liability concerns related to safety, insurance, and legal risks. * **Accessibility Barriers:** Activating streets and the public realm can pose challenges for accessibility when temporary structures or events obstruct pathways, making it difficult for people with disabilities to navigate. Additionally, if proper accessibility features such as ramps, tactile paving, and clear signage are not incorporated, these public spaces may exclude individuals with mobility impairments or visual impairments. * **Transit and Emergency Access:** Events that fully close a street can hinder emergency services by delaying response times due to detours and reduced access to certain areas. Additionally, closing a street can disrupt transit routes and access points, potentially making it more difficult for transit users, especially those with disabilities, to reach their destinations or navigate alternative routes. * **Caring for Unhoused Neighbors:** Caring for unhoused neighbors presents challenges when activating the public right-of-way, as public spaces often become de facto shelters for those without stable housing. Balancing the need to create inviting and vibrant public spaces with compassion and support for unhoused individuals requires thoughtful design, inclusive policies, and the integration of social services. Successful activation of the right-of-way should prioritize humane solutions that consider the needs of all community members, including those experiencing homelessness. # APPENDIX C – MULTIMODAL LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS AND METHODOLOGY # Table of Contents | | Page | | :--- | :--- | | **Appendix C – Multimodal Level of Service Standards and Methodology** ..Error! Bookmark not defined. | | | State Guidance and Requirements for Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS)...........................3 | | | Pedestrian Level of Service ..........................................................................................................7 | | | Bicycle Level of Service................................................................................................................16 | | | Transit Level of Service ................................................................................................................20 | | | Auto Level of Service.....................................................................................................................7 | | | GMA Requirements and Operationalizing MMLOS .....................................................................12 | | # Table of Figures | | Page | | :--- | :--- | | Table 1 Multimodal Level of Service Standard Metrics ...................................................................3 | | | Figure 1 WSDOT Growth Management Act language relevant to MMLOS ...................................5 | | | Figure 2 Pedestrian Level of Service along roadway based on Roadway Characteristics | | | and Existing Pedestrian Facility ...................................................................................................8 | | | Figure 3 Pedestrian Level of Service at Intersections ......................................................................9 | | | Table 2 Pedestrian Level of Service ..................................................................................................9 | | | Figure 4 Pedestrian Level of Service based on Crosswalk Density................................................11 | | | Figure 6 Existing Pedestrian Intersection Level of Service (2025).................................................14 | | | Figure 7 Existing Pedestrian Crosswalk Density LOS (2022) .........................................................15 | | | Table 3 Bicycle Level of Service......................................................................................................16 | | | Figure 8 Bicycle Level of Service based on Roadway Characteristics and Existing Bicycle | | | Facility Type ................................................................................................................................17 | | | Figure 9 Existing Bicycle Level of Service (2022) ..........................................................................19 | | | Table 4 Transit Level of Service......................................................................................................20 | | | Figure 10 Transit Level of Service based on Service Frequency, Pedestrian Access, and Bus | | | Stop Characteristics .....................................................................................................................1 | | | Table 5 Transit Speed Level of Service Based on Average Speed Between Destinations .............2 | | | Figure 11 Existing Transit Access LOS (2025) ..................................................................................4 | | | Figure 12 Existing Transit Speed LOS (2022) ...................................................................................5 | | | Figure 13 Future Transit Speed LOS (2050)......................................................................................6 | | Figure 14 Auto Level of Service Definitions .................................................................................... 7 Table 6 PM Peak Hour LOS Results at State Ramp Terminals ........................................................ 9 Figure 15 Existing Auto LOS (2022 PM Peak) .............................................................................. 10 Figure 16 Future Auto LOS (2050 PM Peak)................................................................................. 11 Table 7 Existing and Future Demand for Trips by Mode .............................................................. 12 Table 8 Index of GMA Requirements............................................................................................ 12 # STATE GUIDANCE AND REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTIMODAL LEVEL OF SERVICE (MMLOS) ## Methodology To meet the requirements of the Washington State’s Growth Management Act (GMA) (Figure 1), Tacoma maintains level of service (LOS) standards for pedestrian, bicycle, transit and auto networks. The cumulative effect of the targets is to evaluate and monitor the transportation systems’ person trip capacity and its relationship to planned land use growth. Identified deficiencies in different modal networks inform the TMP’s project list as well as project prioritization. This appendix provides Tacoma’s methodology for assessing MMLOS. This methodology is guided by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) recommendations, incorporates peer reviews of other similar cities in Washington, and leverages available data to ensure that evaluating LOS remains manageable for city officials. As more data becomes available, Tacoma may reassess its LOS methodology. Each mode’s LOS is evaluated based on roadway characteristics and existing facility types using data that is currently available to the City of Tacoma (Table 1). **Table 1 Multimodal Level of Service Standard Metrics** | Mode | Level of Service Standard Metric(s) | Acceptable Level of Service in Tacoma | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Pedestrian | • Along roadways: Level of traffic stress
• As a network: Crosswalk density
• At intersections: Intersection ADA accessibility | • 1 or 2 | | Bicycle | • Level of traffic stress | • 1 or 2 | | Transit | • Access: Frequency of transit service and ability for riders to access the stations
• Speed: Transit travel between key destinations | • 1 or 2 on the Frequent Transit Vision Network
• 3 elsewhere | | Auto | • Volume capacity ratios at PM Peak time | • E or above | <
> Pedestrian and bicycle level of service standards are primarily based on traffic stress and were determined by applying WSDOT's guidance[^p174-1]. Originally developed for WSDOT's Active Transportation Plan, the guidance sets thresholds for roadway speed, number of lanes, and average daily traffic that determine the level of traffic stress a person may experience on a roadway based on existing facilities. The faster the vehicles move on a roadway and the wider that roadway is, the more traffic stress people walking, rolling, or biking experience. Dedicated space for bicyclists and pedestrians, such as sidewalks and bike lanes, lowers stress levels, while barriers between moving traffic and active transportation users further reduce it. The transit level of service metric considers frequency, access, and speed. While Pierce Transit controls frequency, supportive land use density within Tacoma can help justify and sustain higher frequency over time. Speed and reliability are service qualities the City can help support through improvements such as signal timing, bus queue jumps, and transit-priority treatments. Transit level of service is also connected to pedestrian level of service because safe, direct, and accessible walking routes are essential for people to access transit stops and stations. [^p174-1]: Development Division Multimodal Development and Delivery Design Bulletin #2022-01 **Figure 1 WSDOT Growth Management Act language relevant to MMLOS** **Mandatory elements of the Comprehensive Plan related to MMLOS per 36.70A.365:** * (ii) *Estimated multimodal level of service impacts to state-owned transportation facilities resulting from land use assumptions to assist in monitoring the performance of state facilities, to plan improvements for the facilities, and to assess the impact of land-use decisions on state-owned transportation facilities;* * *Multimodal level of service standards for all locally owned arterials, locally and regionally operated transit routes that serve urban growth areas, state-owned or operated transit routes that serve urban areas if the department of transportation has prepared such standards, and active transportation facilities to serve as a gauge to judge performance of the system and success in helping to achieve the goals of this chapter consistent with environmental justice. These standards should be regionally coordinated;* * (C) *For state-owned transportation facilities, multimodal level of service standards for highways, as prescribed in chapters 47.06 and 47.80 RCW, to gauge the performance of the system. The purposes of reflecting multimodal level of service standards for state highways in the local comprehensive plan are to monitor the performance of the system, to evaluate improvement strategies, and to facilitate coordination between the county's or city's six-year street, road, active transportation, or transit program and the office of financial management's ten-year investment program. The concurrency requirements of (b) of this subsection do not apply to transportation facilities and services of statewide significance except for counties consisting of islands whose only connection to the mainland are state highways or ferry routes. In these island counties, state highways and ferry route capacity must be a factor in meeting the concurrency requirements in (b) of this subsection;* * (D) *Specific actions and requirements for bringing into compliance transportation facilities or services that are below an established multimodal level of service standard;* * (E) *Forecasts of multimodal transportation demand and needs within cities and urban growth areas, and forecasts of multimodal transportation demand and needs outside of cities and urban growth areas, for at least ten years based on the adopted land use plan to inform the development of a transportation element that balances transportation system safety and convenience to accommodate all users of the transportation system to safely, reliably, and efficiently provide access and mobility to people and goods. Priority must be given to inclusion of transportation facilities and services providing the greatest multimodal safety benefit to each category of roadway users for the context and speed of the facility;* * (F) *Identification of state and local system needs to equitably meet current and future demands. Identified needs on state-owned transportation facilities must be consistent with the statewide multimodal transportation plan required under chapter 47.06 RCW. Local system needs should reflect the regional transportation system and local goals, and strive to equitably implement the multimodal network* # Peer Review for Developing MMLOS To help inform the approach and support meeting the spirit of the GMA, the following cities were reviewed to see how their comprehensive plans were incorporating MMLOS: * City of Bellevue * City of Burien * City of Seattle * WSDOT * City of Bellingham * Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) * City of Vancouver * City of Spokane * City of Redmond Many cities were still in the process of finalizing their MMLOS standards. All cities plan to calculate person trips (sometimes referred to as mobility units) available in their transportation system so they can determine how much capacity they needed to provide in the future. # PEDESTRIAN LEVEL OF SERVICE Tacoma’s Pedestrian Level of Service (LOS) standards consist of three elements: 1. **Along roadways:** Tacoma uses the level of traffic stress a person experiences walking or rolling in that segment. 2. **At a network level:** Tacoma ranks the LOS based on prevalence of marked (enhanced) crossings. 3. **At intersections:** Tacoma ranks the LOS based on accessibility of curbs. Using the level of stress thresholds set by WSDOT, Tacoma ranks its pedestrian network from 1 to 4, with 1 indicating the least stressful environment for pedestrians and 4 indicating the most stressful (Table 2). These rankings are applied differently to intersections where the most important factor is accessibility. At intersections, Tacoma considers the curb infrastructure to determine its LOS rating. **The City will accept a Pedestrian LOS of 1 or 2.** Combining roadway characteristics (number of lanes, posted speed limit, and average daily traffic) with the existing facility type, Figure 2 shows how Tacoma ranks its pedestrian facilities along roadways, This considers sidewalk presence and width (standard 5 feet, wide >5 feet, extra wide >5 feet with buffer). In general roadways with slower speeds require fewer facilities to be less stressful for pedestrians. For example, a neighborhood street where a small number of vehicles travel 20 MPH does not require the same level of crossing treatments or a buffer to achieve Level 1. Conversely, a very high-quality pedestrian facility, like a shared use path, will typically earn a Pedestrian LOS of 1. The Pedestrian LOS at intersections is determined using the ADA-accessibility status of the curb ramps (Figure 3). All corners of the intersection must have ADA-compliant curb ramps to be a LOS 1. Crosswalk density LOS identifies how often people have a way to cross the street using a marked crosswalk meeting the standards outlined in the City's Right-of-Way Design Manual. A high level of service allows pedestrians to access destinations without diverting their trips. The more a pedestrian must go out of their way to comfortably cross a street to reach their destination, the lower the LOS is along that corridor. Figure 4 shows how this is driven by crossing density and potential crossing distance. Land use context informs the appropriate level of crosswalk density. Regional growth centers, mixed-use centers, and streets defined in code as Pedestrian Streets should aim for a LOS of 1. Other arterial streets may target a goal of LOS 2, allowing for greater spacing between marked crossings. Figure 2 Pedestrian Level of Service along roadway based on Roadway Characteristics and Existing Pedestrian Facility | Roadway Characteristics | | | Pedestrian Facility – Along Roadways | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Lanes** | **Speed Limit (MPH)** | **ADT** | **No Ped facility with shoulder** | **5 ft Sidewalk, no buffer** | **> 5 ft Sidewalk, no buffer** | **Sidewalk with landscaped buffer** | **Sidewalk with robust buffer** | **Separated Pedestrian Pathway** | | | <=25 | 0-750 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | 20 | 750-1,500 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | 25 | 750-1,500 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | <=25 | 1,500-3,000 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 1 thru lane per direction (or 1 lane one-way street) | 20 | >3,000 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 25 | >3,000 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 30 | Any | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 35 | Any | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 40 | Any | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | 45 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | >=50 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | | <=25 | Any | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 30 | <7,000 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 30 | >7,000 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | 2 thru lanes per direction | 35 | Any | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 40 | Any | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | 45 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | 50 or more | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | 3+ thru lanes per direction | <=25 | Any | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 30 | Any | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 35 | Any | 4 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 40 | Any | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | 45 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | 50 or more | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | Figure 3 Pedestrian Level of Service at Intersections | Roadway Characteristics | | | Pedestrian Facility – At Crossing | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Lanes** | **Speed Limit (MPH)** | **ADT** | **No Ramps** | **Non-ADA ramp** | **ADA Ramp** | | 1+ thru lane per direction (or 1 lane one-way street) | <=25 | 0-750 | 4 | 3 | 1 | | | <=25 | <1,500 | 4 | 3 | 1 | | | <=25 | 1,500-3,000 | 4 | 3 | 1 | | | <=25 | >3,000 | 4 | 3 | 1 | | | 30 | Any | 4 | 3 | 1 | | | 35 | Any | 4 | 3 | 1 | | | 40 | Any | 4 | 3 | 1 | | | 45 | Any | 4 | 3 | 1 | | | >=50 | Any | 4 | 3 | 1 | Table 2 Pedestrian Level of Service | Pedestrian Level of Service | Roadway Definition | Intersection Definition | Crosswalk Density Definition | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Level 1 – Best | A level that most people would find comfortable, accessible, and safe (youth, most individuals with disabilities, older individuals) | Fully ADA accessible curb ramp | Appropriately designed marked crosswalks present every 300 feet or less. | | Level 2 | Little traffic stress, but requires more attention, especially for children | NA | Appropriately designed marked crosswalks present every 600 feet or less (based on pedestrian demand, land use, and safety considerations) | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Level 3 | Moderate traffic stress | Curb ramp present, but not fully ADA compliant | Appropriately designed marked crosswalks > 600 feet. | | Level 4 – Worst | High traffic stress, not comfortable or accessible for most people | No curb ramp | No marked crosswalks present. | Figure 4 Pedestrian Level of Service based on Crosswalk Density | Roadway Characteristics | | | Crosswalk Density | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Lanes** | **Speed Limit (MPH)** | **ADT** | **Marked crosswalk every 300 feet or less** | **Marked crosswalk every 600 feet or less** | **Marked crosswalks More than 600 feet apart** | **No marked crosswalks Present** | | | 20-25 | 0-750 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | | | 20-25 | <1,500 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | | | 20-25 | 1,500-3,000 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | | | 20-25 | >3,000 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | 1 thru lane per direction (or 1 lane one-way street) | 30 | Any | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 35 | Any | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 40 | Any | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 45 | Any | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | >=50 | Any | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 25 | Any | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 30 | <7,000 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 30 | >7,000 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | 2+ thru lanes per direction | 35 | Any | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 40 | Any | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 45 | Any | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 50 or more | Any | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ## 2.1 Existing and Future Pedestrian Level of Service The existing Pedestrian LOS analysis identifies where conditions currently fall short and helps inform investment priorities to support a safer, more connected pedestrian network. Future Pedestrian LOS considered projected changes in ADT for 2050 and did not produce major differences from existing conditions. Less than 1% of roadway segments saw a change in Pedestrian LOS along roadways (dropping from LOS 1 to 2-4) and only 0.5% of roadway segments saw a change in Crosswalk density (dropping from LOS 1 and 2 to LOS 3 and 4). Since Pedestrian LOS at intersections is based on roadway infrastructure and does not change under different levels of ADT. # Figure 5 Existing Pedestrian LOS Along Roadway (2022) <
> Figure 6 Existing Pedestrian Intersection Level of Service (2025) <
> **Pedestrian Intersection LOS** * ● 4 * ● 3 * ● 1 Mixed Use Centers Parks 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) T Transit Centers Railroad City of Tacoma Tacoma Transportation and Mobility Plan Appendix C # Figure 7 Existing Pedestrian Crosswalk Density LOS (2022) <
> City of Tacoma 15 # BICYCLE LEVEL OF SERVICE Tacoma’s Bicycle Level of Service (LOS) uses level of traffic stress as part of its ranking process. A LOS of 1 indicates a low level of traffic stress where most riders of all ages will feel comfortable. A LOS of 4 indicates high traffic stress situations where most riders will not be comfortable. The city will accept a Bicycle LOS of 1 or 2. **Table 3 Bicycle Level of Service** | Bicycle Level of Service | Definition | | :--- | :--- | | Level 1 – Best | A level that most riders of all ages and abilities feel safe using | | Level 2 | Comfortable for most adults but requires more attention, especially for children | | Level 3 | Moderate traffic stress | | Level 4 – Worst | High traffic stress, not comfortable for most riders | Bicycle LOS uses the same roadway characteristics as Pedestrian LOS, including posted speed limit, number of travel lanes, and average daily traffic. In general, greater separation between bicycle facilities and moving traffic reduces conflicts and supports more comfortable, low-stress biking conditions. Figure 6 on the following page illustrates Bicycle LOS based on roadway characteristics and facility type. A fully separated facility, like a shared use path, typically achieves a bicycle LOS of 1. On slower, lower-traffic streets, less separation may still provide a comfortable biking experience. # Figure 8 Bicycle Level of Service based on Roadway Characteristics and Existing Bicycle Facility Type | Roadway Characteristics | | | Bicycle Facility | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Lanes** | **Speed Limit (MPH)** | **ADT** | **No Treatment (with or without shoulder)** | **Neighborhood Greenway** | **5 - 7 ft Bike Lane** | **Buffered Bike Lane (with paint)** | **Separated Bike Lane (Physical Barrier)** | **Shared Use Path** | | | 20 | 0-1,500 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | 20 | >1,500 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | 25 | 0-750 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | 25 | 750-1,500 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | 25 | 1,500-3,000 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 1 thru lane per direction (or 1 lane one-way street) | 20-25 | >3,000 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 30 | <3,000 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | | | 30 | >3,000 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 35 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | 40 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | | 45 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | | >=50 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | | 20 | <7,000 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 20 | >7,000 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 25 | <7,000 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 25 | >7,000 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | 2 thru lanes per direction | 30 | <7,000 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | | 30 | >7,000 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | 35 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | 40 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | | 45 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | | 50 or more | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | | 20 - 25 | Any | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | 30 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | 3+ thru lanes per direction | 35 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | | 40 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | | 45 | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | | | 50 or more | Any | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | # 3.1 Existing and Future Bicycle Level of Service **The City of Tacoma will accept a Bicycle LOS of 1 or 2.** The existing Bicycle LOS analysis evaluates how supportive Tacoma’s street network is for people biking. Figure 9 highlights segments where these factors result in higher levels of traffic stress, helping to identify locations where improvements could reduce barriers to safe, comfortable bicycling and support a more connected low-stress network. While most of Tacoma’s residential streets provide a low-stress biking environment, arterial crossings often present significant barriers and are a common reason people may choose not to bike. Future Bicycle LOS considers projected changes in ADT and does not change significantly from existing conditions. Less than 2% of the roadway network drops to LOS 4 from the 2 and 3 categories. Tacoma Transportation and Mobility Plan Appendix C ### Figure 9 Existing Bicycle Level of Service (2022) <
> City of Tacoma 19 # TRANSIT LEVEL OF SERVICE To measure Transit Level of Service (LOS), the City of Tacoma considers two measures: transit access and travel speed between major destinations. Transit Access LOS is determined based on how people get to a transit station and how frequently service operates at that station. A Transit LOS of 1 is considered the highest LOS and must be accessible and have frequent service (15 minutes or less). Pedestrian LOS on the roadway is used to determine if a station is accessible. The ranking then considers existing transit service frequency (headways) to determine that stop’s Transit LOS. Only stops that are fully ADA accessible and have frequent service can score a LOS 1. While the City of Tacoma does not directly control or fund transit service frequency, it can support more frequent service through land use decisions, such as encouraging higher-density development near frequent transit corridors, which can help make more robust service levels viable over time. Transit Travel Speed LOS uses the average speed of buses traveling between major destinations to determine the quality of transit between these destinations. The city will accept a Transit Access and Speed LOS of 1 or 2 along their Frequent Transit Vision network and a LOS of 3 elsewhere. Table 4 Transit Level of Service | Transit Level of Service | Transit Access Definition | Transit Travel Speed Definition | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Level 1 – Best | Frequent service and easy, accessible pedestrian access to stations or stops | Travel to this destination is at or above 12 MPH (above systemwide average transit travel speeds.) | | Level 2 | Stops that have either frequent service (20 minutes or better) but may not have good pedestrian access | Travel to this destination is 10 - 12 MPH | | Level 3 | Stops with infrequent service (30 minutes or more) or stops with frequent service but poor access | Travel to this destination is less than 10 MPH | | Level 4 – Worst | Stops with very low service and poor pedestrian access to stations. Any stop that is inaccessible automatically gets a LOS of 4. | You cannot travel to this destination via transit | Figure 10 shows the City of Tacoma’s system for assigning LOS to transit stops, and Table 5 shows the thresholds for Transit Speed LOS. In the future the City may consider dedicated transit facilities (bus lanes, transit signal priority) in their assessment of Transit LOS. Figure 10 Transit Level of Service based on Service Frequency, Pedestrian Access, and Bus Stop Characteristics | Transit Service | Pedestrian Access | Bus Stop Accessibility | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Frequency of Transit Service (Peak)** | **Lowest Pedestrian LOS within 1/4 mile of station** | **Accessible stop** | **Inaccessible stop** | | | 1 | 1 | 4 | | <15 minute headways | 2 | 1 | 4 | | | 3 | 2 | 4 | | | 4 | 2 | 4 | | | 1 | 1 | 4 | | 15 - 20-minute headways | 2 | 2 | 4 | | | 3 | 2 | 4 | | | 4 | 2 | 4 | | | 1 | 3 | 4 | | 30-minute headways | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 3 | 3 | 4 | | | 4 | 3 | 4 | | | 1 | 3 | 4 | | 30 minute - 1 hour headways | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | 3 | 3 | 4 | | | 4 | 3 | 4 | | | 1 | 4 | 4 | | > 1 hour headways | 2 | 4 | 4 | | | 3 | 4 | 4 | | | 4 | 4 | 4 | Table 5 Transit Speed Level of Service Based on Average Speed Between Destinations | Average Transit Speed Between Destination | LOS | | :--- | :--- | | At or Above 12 MPH | 1 | | 10 – 12 MPH | 2 | | Less than 10 MPH | 3 | | No Transit Service Between Destinations | 4 | # 4.1 Existing Transit and Future Level of Service **The City of Tacoma will accept a Transit LOS of 1 or 2 on the frequent transit network and a LOS of 3 elsewhere.** The existing transit LOS maps highlight where transit service is currently strong or limited based on access, frequency, and travel speed. They show how well Tacoma’s transit network connects people to major destinations and where gaps in service or barriers to access may discourage transit use. These findings help inform improvements that support a more reliable and accessible system. (Figure 11 and Figure 12). Future transit travel speed LOS considers the 2050 model projections of travel speeds on Tacoma’s roadways. Only one destination pair experienced slower transit travel speeds (Downtown Commerce Street to TCC Transit Center, Figure 13) Figure 11 Existing Transit Access LOS (2025) <
> **Transit Access LOS** * ● 4 * ● 3 * ● 2 * ● 1 * ● No Data * — Bus Routes * ■ Mixed Use Centers * ■ Parks * ■ 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) * Ⓣ Transit Centers * — Railroad * [ ] City of Tacoma **Figure 12 Existing Transit Speed LOS (2022)** <
> **Transit Speed LOS (2022)** * 3: Less than 10 MPH * 2: 10 - 12 MPH * 1: At or above 12 MPH *It is expected surface transit travel in the Downtown mixed use center will be slower than connnections between mixed use centers.* * **T** Transit Centers * Ferry Terminal * Mixed Use Centers * Parks * 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) * Railroad * City of Tacoma # Figure 13 Future Transit Speed LOS (2050) <
> | Transit Speed LOS (2050) | | | :--- | :--- | | | 3: Less than 10 MPH | | | 2: 10 - 12 MPH | | | 1: At or above 12 MPH | | **It is expected surface transit travel in the Downtown mixed use center will be slower than connnections between mixed use centers.** | | | Ⓣ | Transit Centers | | ⛯ | Ferry Terminal | | | Mixed Use Centers | | | Parks | | | 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) | | | Railroad | | | City of Tacoma | # AUTO LEVEL OF SERVICE In line with WSDOT, Tacoma uses the Highway Capacity Manual and AASHTO Geometric Design of Highways and Streets to determine Auto LOS for their roadways. Auto LOS is typically based on PM peak-hour travel data on the roadway. This is used to calculate volume capacity (V/C) ratios which is a comparison of the number of vehicles using a roadway to its designed capacity. These “V/C” ratios are then used to “grade” (A through F) the operation of the roadway (Figure 14). Unlike traditional grades in school a score of an “A” is not always ideal. It may indicate a roadway that has been overbuilt for the traffic needs in the area. Efficient roadways are ones that operate near, but not over capacity. Auto LOS of E or below indicates the roadway is overused from an auto perspective and increasing capacity on the overall multimodal transportation system can help stem this congestion and preserve the overall operation of the transportation system. **Figure 14 Auto Level of Service Definitions** | Auto Level of Service | Definition | | :--- | :--- | | A | Free Flow | | B | Reasonably Free Flow | | C | Stable Flow | | D | Approaching Unstable Flow | | E | Unstable Flow | | F | Forced Flow or Flow Breakdown | # How Auto LOS will be applied The City will accept an Auto LOS as low as E on their roadways. WSDOT and the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) will set the acceptable LOS for Highways of Statewide Significance that fall inside city limits. Tacoma also recognizes elements of multimodal level of service (MMLOS) to consider their transportation network as a whole, so roadways’ Auto LOS that fall below LOS E (i.e., LOS F/volume-to-capacity ratio > 1.0) may be permissible if mitigated (with resulting V/C ratio not exceeding 1.1) by increasing people-throughput capacity via additional transit service or dedicating more roadway space to walking and biking. Methodology for calculating Auto LOS is well documented and not included here. # 5.1 Existing and Future Auto LOS **The City of Tacoma will accept an Auto LOS at or above E.** **Existing** Most miles of the city’s streets achieve a LOS of A. Segments that experience unstable flow or breakdown in flow are typically highways and bridges (Figure 15). Future Auto LOS considers projected changes in 2050 ADT and leads to slight increases in LOS of B, C, and D along Tacoma’s roadways shown in Figure 16. **LOS on State Facilities** State facilities within Tacoma were analyzed in two ways: * Existing and future volume to capacity ratios from the model were provided to the project team. * Ten high volume freeway ramp terminal intersections were analyzed. Using the forecasted 2050 turning movement volumes noted in Appendix E plus 2024 PM peak hour counts at the 10 selected intersections, Fehr & Peers completed a Synchro traffic operations intersection level of service (LOS) evaluation. All signals have been optimized for cycle lengths and splits prior to the calculation of future conditions due to the assumption that signals will be optimized within the given time frame. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 6 and all State Facility intersections are forecasted to operate at or better than LOS standard in 2050. WSDOT and the Puget Sound Region Council will set the acceptable LOS for Highways of Statewide Significance that fall inside city limits. Table 6 PM Peak Hour LOS Results at State Ramp Terminals | # | Intersection Name | Control | HCM Version | LOS Standard | Existing (2024) PM (LOS/Delay) | Future (2050) PM (LOS/Delay) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 1 | I-5 SB Ramp & S 38th St | Signal | 2000 | D | A/9 | B/10 | | 2 | I-5 NB Ramp & S 72nd St | Signal | 6th | D | B/11 | B/15 | | 3 | Tacoma Mall Blvd & I-5 SB Ramp | Signal | 6th | D | B/14 | C/21 | | 4 | Portland Ave E & E 28th St | Signal | 6th | D | C/29 | C/31 | | 5 | S Union Ave & SR 16 WB Ramp | Signal | 6th | D | C/22 | D/55 | | 6 | S Mullen St & Center St | Signal | 6th | D | C/30 | D/53 | | 7 | Portland Ave E & E 27th St | Signal | 6th | D | B/15 | C/20 | | 8 | S Union Ave & SR 16 EB Ramp | Signal | 6th | D | B/17 | C/25 | | 9 | Bantz Blvd & 6th Ave | Signal | 6th | D | B/12 | B/17 | | 10 | N Jackson Ave & SR 16 EB Ramp | Signal | 6th | D | D/38 | C/32 | Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024. In general, the City’s network has sufficient capacity to absorb the forecast growth. The most significant travel delays on the City’s network are a result of backups on the regional network, rather than local-level capacity constraints; however, only a small portion of the City’s system is expected to exceed capacity and will do so only for a small part of the day. The Transportation and Mobility Plan is moving Tacoma to a plan-based rather than arterial/intersection based concurrency system. This plan-based system is a tool to manage the pace of development while providing transportation improvements for all users including bicyclists, pedestrians, drivers, and transit riders, which may also help alleviate projected shortcomings on the State system. Tacoma Transportation and Mobility Plan Appendix C # Figure 15 Existing Auto LOS (2022 PM Peak) <
> Auto LOS (2022) - A - B - C - D - E - F Mixed Use Centers Parks 1873 Survey Area (Puyallup Tribe) Transit Centers Railroad City of Tacoma City of Tacoma 10 Tacoma Transportation and Mobility Plan | Appendix C **Figure 16 Future Auto LOS (2050 PM Peak)** <
> City of Tacoma | 11 # GMA REQUIREMENTS AND OPERATIONALIZING MMLOS The City of Tacoma uses MMLOS to help inform the development of the Project List (Appendix D) – looking at existing and projected MMLOS on a facility and future trip demand and identifying projects that enhance LOS for different modes and address deficiencies. Modeled travel demand in Tacoma compares 2022 to a future 2050 numbers assuming households to grow by 58 percent and employment to grow by 83 percent over this timeframe. The resulting change in trip by mode is shown in Table 7. **Table 7 Existing and Future Demand for Trips by Mode** | | 2022 | 2050 | Delta | Percent Change | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Households | 94,800 | 149,700 | 54,900 | 58% | | Employment | 110,600 | 202,700 | 92,100 | 83% | | Auto Trips | 17,773,900 | 23,017,500 | 5,243,600 | 30% | | Transit Trips | 779,100 | 1,495,600 | 716,500 | 92% | | Walk and Bike Trips | 2,603,000 | 4,589,200 | 1,986,200 | 76% | | Total Daily Trips | 21,156,000 | 29,102,300 | 7,946,300 | 38% | The table below summarizes the GMA requirements and how the city has responded to these requirements. **Table 8 Index of GMA Requirements** | GMA Requirements | City of Tacoma Actions | | :--- | :--- | | Establish LOS standards for all locally owned arterials, existing transit routes, and active transportation facilities | ▪ This appendix establishes level of service standards for pedestrians, bikes, transit, and autos and;
▪ Calculates existing and future MMLOS in the city | | Estimate multimodal impacts to state facilities | ▪ Modeling work has estimated impacts to state facilities (see Table 12). | | Provide forecasts of multimodal transportation demand and needs within and outside the city for at least 10 years. The project list developed through the TMP anticipates inadequacies and includes projects for those facilities/locations. | ▪ See Table 13 for existing and future trip demand by mode
▪ Projects identified in Appendix D are informed by MMLOS to help bring any deficient MMLOS facilities into alignment with the city’s standard. | | | | | :--- | :--- | | Create specific actions and requirements for bringing into compliance transportation facilities and services that are below the required LOS |
  • This appendix assigns minimum acceptable MMLOS standards for city facilities to establish where facilities need to be brought up to the required LOS
  • Use MMLOS during project development to see where multimodal projects can bring city facilities into alignment with standards and the City's Complete Streets policy
  • Add projects to the 6-year TIP that will improve LOS
  • Continue to partner with Pierce Transit and Sound Transit to identify ways to increase transit frequency and speed in Tacoma
  • Require development projects to mitigate multimodal system impacts when proposed in areas operating below the adopted level of service, consistent with the City's concurrency and mitigation standards
  • Adjust signal timing to improve flow, pedestrian crossings, or transit priority
| # APPENDIX D – PROJECT LIST # Table of Contents | | Page | | :--- | :--- | | Project Identification .................................................................................................................................... 1 | | Project List........................................................................................................................................................ 4 | # Table of Figures | | Page | | :--- | :--- | | Figure 1 TMP Goals & Scoring Criteria ........................................................................................................ 2 | | Table 1 Prioritized Project List ....................................................................................................................... 4 | # PROJECT IDENTIFICATION To advance Tacoma towards the network visions and outcomes outlined in the mode and functional elements, specific projects and programs are needed to address deficiencies while improving safety, convenience and reliability. In addition to the mode and functional element actions, which include specific project and programmatic recommendations, the City of Tacoma identifies projects through: * Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) * Existing planning documents * Staff-identified need * Resident or stakeholder input The above sources resulted in more than 400 projects. While these projects represent the City’s long-term transportation vision, not all of these projects can be funded over the next 20 years. As such, the Transportation Commission, in consultation with City staff and the Consultant team, prioritized the list to identify those projects that are most likely to be funded within the 20-year planning horizon of the Comprehensive Plan. The prioritization process that was based on the Goals and Policies is described in Chapter 7 of the TMP. # DEVELOPMENT OF TIERED PROJECT LIST To determine which projects fit within the 20-year project list, the Consultant considered the following information: 1. Project prioritization – as provided by the Transportation Commission and City staff 2. City budget forecasts 3. Cost estimation – to understand approximately how many projects could be funded Figure 1 TMP Goals & Scoring Criteria | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Goal 1 Criteria:**
Equity and Livability
• Located in Very
Low or Low Areas of
Opportunity
• Reduce physical
barriers for people
with disabilities | **Goal 2 Criteria:**
Safe and Comfortable
Experience
• On the High Risk
Network
• Improves traffic
safety | **Goal 3 Criteria:**
Environmentally
Sustainable and
Healthy
• Improves air
quality by reducing
greenhouse gas
emissions
• Strengthens
land use and
transportation
connection | **Goal 4 Criteria:**
Partnerships
• Supports local
partners: Pierce
Transit, Parks
Tacoma, Tacoma
Public Schools,
Sound Transit,
Puyallup Tribe of
Indians, Port of
Tacoma | | **Goal 5 Criteria:**
Transparent Decision-
Making
• In a Sub-Area Plan or
Neighborhood Plan | **Goal 6 Criteria:**
Connect the Tacoma
Community
• Improves the
public realm
• Transforms arterial
streets from barriers
to safe, accessible
corridors | **Goal 7 Criteria:**
Maintain and Upgrade
• Improves the
condition of existing
assets | **Goal 8 Criteria:**
Thriving Economy
• Improves transit
speed and reliability
• Improves access in
employment dense
areas | # CITY BUDGET FORECASTS The City’s transportation expenditures vary from year to year based on discretionary contributions from the general fund, grants, and other sources. The revenue forecasts for the 20-year project list are based on the adopted 2019-2024 budgets using City funds only and are conservative compared to the 2013-18 estimates from the Transportation and Mobility Plan. This approach follows recommendations from the Tacoma Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and Public Works (PW). OMB and PW estimates $22 million per year for transportation capital projects, which amounts to $440 million over the life of the 20-year comprehensive plan or $528 million over the life of the 20-year comprehensive plan factoring in 20% increase in other revenues. Regular maintenance of the City’s transportation system promotes safety, efficiency, infrastructure preservation, and a livability. Funding maintenance and preservation on the City’s system today can prevent spending more dollars on replacing components of the system later. This is equally important for pavement, sidewalks, traffic-signal infrastructure, bridges, signage, pavement markings, curb ramps, and physical bike separation. Based on the adopted 2017-2026 budgets using license fees and sales tax allocations, PW estimates $9 million per year for street maintenance projects, which amounts to $221 million over the life of the 20-year comprehensive plan. To allow flexibility for outside grants, new revenue sources, or additional discretionary contributions, the financial constraint for the 20-year project list was factored up by 20%. The financial constraint for the 20-year project is therefore estimated to be $528 million. # COST ESTIMATION Planning-level cost estimates were completed for the highest-priority projects. Project cost estimates are composed of typical planning level costs including soft costs, and contingencies for staff coordination, design services, agency coordination, construction management, etc. For projects without detailed cost estimates available, unit costs based on length or quantity were applied. Planning level cost estimates are based on planning descriptions and do not include site specific cost estimate work. In some cases, no cost item is shown. These are projects (primarily transit, rail, and freeway/highway projects) that would be led and funded by other agencies but are priorities for the City to support. # FINAL TIERED PROJECT LIST The tiered Project List (which is considered the City's financially constrained 20-year plan) results from these previous steps. The tiered list includes $528 million of projects that scored highly based on the prioritization criteria. | Project ID | Name | Short Description | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Overall Score | Total ($) | Cumulative Total ($) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | TMP_001 | 38th St Multimodal & Safety Corridor Study | Safety improvements, HCT corridor enhancements, active transportation, access management planning and engineering study - S Tacoma Way to Portland Ave | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.25 | $ 300,000.00 | $ 300,000.00 | | TMP_002 | Yakima Ave Multimodal & Safety Corridor Study | Safety improvements, transit corridor enhancements, active transportation, access management planning and engineering study 6th to Center city limits | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.25 | $ 225,000.00 | $ 525,000.00 | | TMP_003 | MLK Mixed Use Center Complete Sts Improvement Project | Complete Streets including bike facilities, sidewalks, street bulb outs, transit improvements, signalization improvements, channelization, stormwater improvements, utilities and more. | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.25 | $ 11,782,000.00 | $ 12,307,000.00 | | TMP_004 | Pacific Avenue Multimodal & Safety Corridor Study | Safety improvements, HCT corridor enhancements, active transportation, access management planning and engineering study full extent - S 7th St to 96th St | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.19 | $ 450,000.00 | $ 12,757,000.00 | | TMP_005 | Dome District Multimodal Improvements | Improve multimodal safety and access in the Dome District. Potential projects include sidewalk, adding/upgrading pedestrian crossings, ADA improvements, bike connections, quiet zones, and rail crossing improvements. | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.19 | $ 450,000.00 | $ 13,207,000.00 | | TMP_006 | S 38th St - S Tacoma Way to I-5 | Improved roadway to arterial / complete street standards | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.13 | $ 3,782,000.00 | $ 16,989,000.00 | | TMP_007 | South Tacoma Way Multimodal Improvement | Asphalt overlay, transit stop improvements, replace hazardous sidewalks, missing link sidewalks, streetlighting, landscaping, a mid-block pedestrian signal, bulb outs, separated bike lanes, curb ramps, and signal upgrades - Pine to S 60th St. | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.13 | $ 11,882,000.00 | $ 28,871,000.00 | | TMP_008 | 47th/48th St Multimodal & Safety Corridor Study | Safety improvements, transit corridor enhancements, active transportation, access management planning and engineering study - S Tacoma Way to Pacific Ave | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.13 | $ 225,000.00 | $ 29,096,000.00 | | TMP_009 | Tacoma Mall Blvd - S 38th to 56th Sts | Grind and overlay, ADA, driveways, sidewalks, video detection, street lights, APS, center landscape median, and potential ROW acquisition. | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.06 | $ 23,801,000.00 | $ 52,897,000.00 | | TMP_010 | Brewery District Roadway Improvement | Brewery District reconstruction to include bike lanes, sidewalks, street bulb outs, transit improvements, signalization improvements, channelization, stormwater improvements, utilities and more to transform several arterial streets into a multimodal network that improves efficiency for all modes of transportation. | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.06 | $ 3,911,000.00 | $ 56,808,000.00 | | TMP_011 | Portland Ave Multimodal & Safety Corridor Study | Safety improvements, transit corridor enhancements, active transportation, access management planning and engineering study - Puyallup Ave to south city limits | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 1.06 | $ 225,000.00 | $ 57,033,000.00 | | TMP_012 | 56th St Multimodal & Safety Corridor Study | Safety improvements, transit corridor enhancements, active transportation, access management planning and engineering study | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.06 | $ 375,000.00 | $ 57,408,000.00 | | TMP_013 | 72nd/74th St Multimodal & Safety Corridor Study | Safety improvements, transit corridor enhancements, active transportation, access management planning and engineering study | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 1.06 | $ 375,000.00 | $ 57,783,000.00 | | TMP_014 | Center St Multimodal & Safety Corridor Study | Safety improvements, transit corridor enhancements, active transportation, access management planning and engineering study | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.06 | $ 225,000.00 | $ 58,008,000.00 | | TMP_015 | Pacific Ave Tier 1 Future Transit Network - 13th Ave to south city limits | ADA transit stops, access to transit, ITS, transit supportive infrastructure, BRT corridor | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.06 | $ 7,917,000.00 | $ 65,925,000.00 | | TMP_016 | Pine Street Tier 1 Future Transit Network - 38th St to 48th St | Bus rapid transit corridor | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.06 | $ 1,890,000.00 | $ 67,815,000.00 | | TMP_017 | S 47th St - Pine St to South Tacoma Way | Bus rapid transit corridor | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.06 | $ 1,500,000.00 | $ 69,315,000.00 | | TMP_018 | Pacific Ave - 7th to 96th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.06 | $ 10,000,000.00 | $ 79,315,000.00 | | TMP_019 | Cedar/Pine/Oakes St - 19th to 74th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.06 | $ 16,800,000.00 | $ 96,115,000.00 | | TMP_020 | 38th St - S Tacoma Way to Portland Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.06 | $ 21,600,000.00 | $ 117,715,000.00 | | TMP_021 | 19th St Tier 1 Future Transit Network - S Jackson Ave to Market St | Bus rapid transit corridor | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.00 | $ 13,800,000.00 | $ 131,515,000.00 | | TMP_022 | Yakima Ave Tier 1 Future Transit Network - 6th Ave to 25th St | ADA transit stops, access to transit, ITS, transit supportive infrastructure | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.00 | $ 2,879,000.00 | $ 134,394,000.00 | | TMP_023 | Portland Ave - E 56th St to E 72nd St | Street rehabilitation project including new asphalt overlay, new pavement markings, signal upgrades, ADA, missing link sidewalks | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.94 | $ 3,662,000.00 | $ 138,056,000.00 | | TMP_024 | 6th Ave Multimodal & Safety Corridor Study | Safety improvements, transit corridor enhancements, active transportation, access management planning and engineering study - S Tacoma Way to Pacific Ave | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 375,000.00 | $ 138,431,000.00 | | TMP_025 | Downtown Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (80k linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 24,594,000.00 | $ 163,025,000.00 | | TMP_026 | Tacoma Central Mixed Use Center Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (2000 linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 615,000.00 | $ 163,640,000.00 | | TMP_027 | Tacoma Mall RGC Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (41k linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 12,605,000.00 | $ 176,245,000.00 | | TMP_028 | I-5 Crossings between Portland Ave and S 84th St Safety & Access | Over/underpass or shared-use path project as part of any WSDOT new or reconstruction project | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 1,625,000.00 | $ 177,870,000.00 | | TMP_029 | 38th St Tier 1 Future Transit Network - Pine St to McKinley Ave | Queue jumps, bus islands, bus bulbs, and ITS | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.94 | $ 4,678,000.00 | $ 182,548,000.00 | | TMP_030 | Puyallup Ave Tier 2 Future Transit Network | ADA transit stops, access to transit, ITS, transit supportive infrastructure | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.94 | $ 2,159,000.00 | $ 184,707,000.00 | | TMP_031 | Yakima Ave - 6th to Center St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 10,800,000.00 | $ 195,507,000.00 | | TMP_032 | South Tacoma Way - Pacific Ave to S 84th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 19,200,000.00 | $ 214,707,000.00 | | TMP_033 | Center/Jefferson Ave - Orchard to S 19th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 13,200,000.00 | $ 227,907,000.00 | | TMP_034 | Warner St - 38th to 48th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 2,400,000.00 | $ 230,307,000.00 | | TMP_035 | Tacoma Mall Blvd - Steele to 56th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 4,800,000.00 | $ 235,107,000.00 | | TMP_036 | McKinley Ave - I-5 to 96th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.94 | $ 8,400,000.00 | $ 243,507,000.00 | | TMP_037 | S 25th St Bike Lane/Separated between Scott Pierson Trail - Hood St | Seperated Bike Lane/Bike Lane between Scott Pierson Trail and Hood St | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.94 | $ 1,865,000.00 | $ 245,372,000.00 | | TMP_038 | Roosevelt Ave - Wright Ave to E 44th St | Improved roadway to arterial/complete street standards | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.88 | $ 5,857,000.00 | $ 251,229,000.00 | | TMP_039 | S 72nd St between I-5 and Pacific Ave | Improved roadway to arterial/complete street standards | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.88 | $ 5,555,000.00 | $ 256,784,000.00 | | TMP_040 | E 72nd St from Portland Ave to East City Limit | Improved roadway to arterial/complete street standards | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.88 | $ 2,561,000.00 | $ 259,345,000.00 | | TMP_041 | Mildred St - N 9th to S 19th Sts | Street rehabilitation, sidewalk, separated bike lanes, and utility upgrades. | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.88 | $ 4,808,000.00 | $ 264,153,000.00 | | TMP_042 | 6th Avenue Tier 1 Future Transit Network - Mildred St to Yakima Ave | ADA transit stops, access to transit, ITS, transit supportive infrastructure | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.88 | $ 6,477,000.00 | $ 270,630,000.00 | | TMP_043 | South Tacoma Way Tier 1 Future Transit Network - S 47th St to S 72nd | Bus rapid transit corridor | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.88 | $ 4,800,000.00 | $ 275,430,000.00 | | TMP_044 | 56th St Tier 2 Future Transit Network - Orchard St to Portland Ave | Queue jumps, bus islands, bus bulbs, and ITS | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.88 | $ 6,477,000.00 | $ 281,907,000.00 | | TMP_045 | South Tacoma Way Tier 2 Future Transit Network - Pine St to M St | Bus rapid transit corridor | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.88 | $ 3,420,000.00 | $ 285,327,000.00 | | TMP_046 | Pearl St Tier 2 Future Transit Network - Park Ave to 6th Ave | ADA transit stops, access to transit, ITS, transit supportive infrastructure | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.88 | $ 3,959,000.00 | $ 289,286,000.00 | | TMP_047 | Center - Jefferson Tier 2 Future Transit Network - M St to S 17th St | Bus rapid transit corridor | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.88 | $ 3,944,000.00 | $ 293,230,000.00 | | TMP_048 | N 26th St - Narrows to Alder St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.88 | $ 8,400,000.00 | $ 301,630,000.00 | | TMP_049 | S 19th St - Sprague to Jefferson Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.88 | $ 8,400,000.00 | $ 310,030,000.00 | | TMP_050 | S 74th St - Lakewood Dr W to I-5 Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.88 | $ 9,600,000.00 | $ 319,630,000.00 | | TMP_051 | 47th/48th St - S Tacoma Way to A St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.88 | $ 10,800,000.00 | $ 330,430,000.00 | | Project ID | Name | Short Description | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Overall Score | Budget | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :--- | :--- | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Total ($) | Cumulative Total ($) | | TMP_052 | Portland Ave - Lincoln Ave to 72nd St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.88 | $ 15,600,000.00 | $ 346,030,000.00 | | TMP_053 | E 28th St - L to Bay St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.88 | $ 2,400,000.00 | $ 348,430,000.00 | | TMP_054 | Fishing Wars Memorial Bridge Phase 2 | This project replaces four of the six Fishing Wars Memorial Bridge (formerly Puyallup River Bridge) segments. | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.88 | $ 310,000,000.00 | $ 658,430,000.00 | | TMP_055 | S 56th St and Cirque Drive Corridor Improvements | Construct curbs, gutters, sidewalk and bike lanes filling in the gaps where none exist. Streetlighting on both sides. | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.88 | $ 20,627,000.00 | $ 679,057,000.00 | | TMP_056 | SR509 Non-motorized Trail Feasibility Study | Feasibility study for a non-motorized trail along SR509 right-of-way to connect NE Tacoma neighborhoods to Downtown Tacoma | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.88 | $ 11,625,000.00 | $ 690,682,000.00 | | TMP_057 | Portland Ave Active Transportation Access between Puyallup Ave - E 72nd St | Separated bike lane and sidewalk | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.88 | $ 37,000,000.00 | $ 727,682,000.00 | | TMP_058 | 19th St Multimodal & Safety Corridor Study | Safety improvements, transit corridor enhancements, active transportation, access management planning and engineering study - Jackson to Market St | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 375,000.00 | $ 728,057,000.00 | | TMP_059 | S 21st St New Signal Corridor - Yakima, Tacoma, Jefferson | New signals and ITS | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 4,110,000.00 | $ 732,167,000.00 | | TMP_060 | S 38th St Improvement - Pacific Avenue and I-5 | Improved roadway to arterial/complete street standards | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.81 | $ 5,579,000.00 | $ 737,746,000.00 | | TMP_061 | Missing Link Sidewalks Adjacent to Schools, Parks, Libraries, Community Facilities | Complete the sidewalk gap in prioritized locations | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 104,301,000.00 | $ 842,047,000.00 | | TMP_062 | Lincoln Mixed Use Center Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (300 linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.81 | $ 28,000.00 | $ 842,075,000.00 | | TMP_063 | Lower Portland Mixed Use Center Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (4600 linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.81 | $ 416,000.00 | $ 842,491,000.00 | | TMP_064 | Commerce St - 9th to 15th St | Queue jumps, bus islands, bus bulbs, and ITS | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.81 | $ 3,959,000.00 | $ 846,450,000.00 | | TMP_065 | 74th St/ 72nd St Tier 2 Future Transit Network - Lakewood Dr to E Portland Ave | Queue jumps, bus islands, bus bulbs, and ITS | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 6,837,000.00 | $ 853,287,000.00 | | TMP_066 | Portland Ave Tier 2 Future Transit Network - Puyallup Ave to 72nd St | Queue jumps, bus islands, bus bulbs, and ITS | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 4,318,000.00 | $ 857,605,000.00 | | TMP_067 | Union Ave Tier 2 Future Transit Network - 21st to Warner St | ADA transit stops, access to transit, ITS, transit supportive infrastructure | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.81 | $ 2,519,000.00 | $ 860,124,000.00 | | TMP_068 | I St Tier 2 Future Transit Network - Steele St to Division Ave | ADA transit stops, access to transit, ITS, transit supportive infrastructure | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.81 | $ 720,000.00 | $ 860,844,000.00 | | TMP_069 | S 12th St Tier 2 Future Transit Network - Union Ave to Yakima Ave | ADA transit stops, access to transit, ITS, transit supportive infrastructure | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 3,239,000.00 | $ 864,083,000.00 | | TMP_070 | 6th Ave - Jackson to Stevens St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.81 | $ 9,600,000.00 | $ 873,683,000.00 | | TMP_071 | Mildred St - 6th to 19th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.81 | $ 3,600,000.00 | $ 877,283,000.00 | | TMP_072 | G St - 17th to 27th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ - | $ 877,283,000.00 | | TMP_073 | Tacoma Ave - 1st to Delin St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 10,800,000.00 | $ 888,083,000.00 | | TMP_074 | E/S 56th St - Oakes to East City Limits Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.81 | $ 14,400,000.00 | $ 902,483,000.00 | | TMP_075 | E/S 72nd St - I-5 to East City Limits Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.81 | $ 13,200,000.00 | $ 915,683,000.00 | | TMP_076 | E/S 84th St - Alaska to Mckinley Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.81 | $ 3,600,000.00 | $ 919,283,000.00 | | TMP_077 | E 32nd St - N to Grandview Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.81 | $ 1,200,000.00 | $ 920,483,000.00 | | TMP_078 | E 27th St - L to Bay St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.81 | $ 2,400,000.00 | $ 922,883,000.00 | | TMP_079 | Market St - S 9th to S 17th St | Vaulted sidewalk and sidewalk repair, bike connections, street rehabilitation, landscaping, utility improvements, mid-block crossings, and street light upgrades. | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 4,924,000.00 | $ 927,807,000.00 | | TMP_080 | Pacific Ave Separated Bike Lane between S 7th St - S 24th St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 488,000.00 | $ 928,295,000.00 | | TMP_081 | South Tacoma Way Separated Bike Lane between S Pine St - S 47th St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 496,000.00 | $ 928,791,000.00 | | TMP_082 | S 48th St Separated Bike Lane between Tacoma Mall Transit Center - S Bell St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 681,000.00 | $ 929,472,000.00 | | TMP_083 | 11th St Bridge Rehabilitation | Bridge reconstruction | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.81 | $ 180,000,000.00 | $ 1,109,472,000.00 | | TMP_084 | Union Avenue / S Warner St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.75 | $ 1,050,000.00 | $ 1,110,522,000.00 | | TMP_085 | Tacoma Ave - 4th to S 25th | Improved roadway to arterial / complete street standards | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.75 | $ 6,225,000.00 | $ 1,116,747,000.00 | | TMP_086 | Lower Pacific Ave Mixed Use Center Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (500 linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.75 | $ 46,000.00 | $ 1,116,793,000.00 | | TMP_087 | McKinley Mixed Use Center Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (1500 linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.75 | $ 136,000.00 | $ 1,116,929,000.00 | | TMP_088 | Proctor Mixed Use Center Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (250 linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.75 | $ 23,000.00 | $ 1,116,952,000.00 | | TMP_089 | South Tacoma Way Mixed Use Center Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (3000 linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.75 | $ 272,000.00 | $ 1,117,224,000.00 | | TMP_090 | 26th St Tier 2 Future Transit Network - Pearl St to Alder St | ADA transit stops, access to transit, ITS, transit supportive infrastructure | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.75 | $ 2,159,000.00 | $ 1,119,383,000.00 | | TMP_091 | S 25th St - Cushman to Portland Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.75 | $ 12,000,000.00 | $ 1,131,383,000.00 | | TMP_092 | S 66th St - Lakewood Dr W to Wapato St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.75 | $ 2,400,000.00 | $ 1,133,783,000.00 | | TMP_093 | Alaska St - 48th to 64th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.75 | $ 2,400,000.00 | $ 1,136,183,000.00 | | TMP_094 | Bay St - R to River Rd Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.75 | $ 1,200,000.00 | $ 1,137,383,000.00 | | TMP_095 | E 26th St - G to Bay St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.75 | $ - | $ 1,137,383,000.00 | | TMP_096 | SR 509/Frontage Rd - Port of Tacoma to Alexander Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.75 | $ 2,400,000.00 | $ 1,139,783,000.00 | | TMP_097 | Marine View Dr - Taylor Way to Norpoint Way Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.75 | $ 2,400,000.00 | $ 1,142,183,000.00 | | TMP_098 | Orchard - 6th to S 16th | Arterial roadway section with complete streets to include curb and gutter, separated bike lanes, pedestrian islands, sidewalk, paving, signal and crossing improvements, storm drainage, streetlighting, landscaping, and traffic control. | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.75 | $ 11,271,000.00 | $ 1,153,454,000.00 | | TMP_099 | Union Avenue - S 23rd St to S 35th St | Street rehabilitation project including new asphalt overlay, new pavement markings, signal upgrades, ADA, missing link sidewalks | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.75 | $ 3,097,000.00 | $ 1,156,551,000.00 | | TMP_100 | Portland Ave Separated Bike Lane between E 25th St - E 72nd St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.75 | $ 687,000.00 | $ 1,157,238,000.00 | | TMP_101 | Safe Routes to Schools Safety Improvements | Implementation of the Safe Routes to Schools Action Plan Project Prioritization | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.75 | $ 78,000,000.00 | $ 1,235,238,000.00 | | TMP_102 | Cedar St / Pine St Corridor Improvement Project | Signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 210,000.00 | $ 1,235,448,000.00 | | TMP_103 | S 38th St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 1,260,000.00 | $ 1,236,708,000.00 | | TMP_104 | E/S 84th St New Signal Corridor Project - Alaska, McKinley | New signal and ITS | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 2,670,000.00 | $ 1,239,378,000.00 | <
> | Project ID | Name | Short Description | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Overall Score | Total ($) | Cumulative Total ($) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | TMP_105 | N 21st St Proctor to Pearl - Complete St | Improved roadway to arterial / complete street standards | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 17,626,000.00 | $ 1,257,004,000.00 | | TMP_106 | Pedestrian Access to Transit Projects | Missing link sidewalks within 1 block of bus stops (160k linear feet) | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 14,467,000.00 | $ 1,271,471,000.00 | | TMP_107 | Upper Pacific Mixed Use Center Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (4000 linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 362,000.00 | $ 1,271,833,000.00 | | TMP_108 | Upper Portland Mixed Use Center Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (550 linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 50,000.00 | $ 1,271,883,000.00 | | TMP_109 | S 19th St and Sprague Ave Queue Jump Signal | Upgraded signal equipment and install bus queue jump | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 15,000.00 | $ 1,271,898,000.00 | | TMP_110 | Pearl St - N 51st to 6th Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors, HCT Corridor enhancements, active transportation, andaccess magagement | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 12,000,000.00 | $ 1,283,898,000.00 | | TMP_111 | Sprague Ave - Division to SR16 Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 7,200,000.00 | $ 1,291,098,000.00 | | TMP_112 | E D St - E 15th to McKinley Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 4,800,000.00 | $ 1,295,898,000.00 | | TMP_113 | Delin St - G to Pacific Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ - | $ 1,295,898,000.00 | | TMP_114 | Tyler St - 19th to 74th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 6,000,000.00 | $ 1,301,898,000.00 | | TMP_115 | S 96th St - West City Limits to Sheridan Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 2,400,000.00 | $ 1,304,298,000.00 | | TMP_116 | Yakima Ave - 46th to 64th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 3,600,000.00 | $ 1,307,898,000.00 | | TMP_117 | Hosmer St - 72nd to South City Limits Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 2,500,000.00 | $ 1,310,398,000.00 | | TMP_118 | E R St - 28th to Fairbanks St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 1,200,000.00 | $ 1,311,598,000.00 | | TMP_119 | J St Bicycle Boulevard - N 3rd St to S 27th St | Bicycle Boulevard between N 3rd St - S 27th St | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 5,887,000.00 | $ 1,317,485,000.00 | | TMP_120 | Prairie Line Trail South Tacoma Way - S 25th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ - | $ 1,317,485,000.00 | | TMP_121 | Tacoma Mall Connector Shared Use Path between S Pine St - S Steele St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 3,322,000.00 | $ 1,320,807,000.00 | | TMP_122 | S Steele St Shared Use Path between S 35th St - Tacoma Mall | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 7,400,000.00 | $ 1,328,207,000.00 | | TMP_123 | S 48th St Shared Use Path between I-5 crossing | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 2,800,000.00 | $ 1,331,007,000.00 | | TMP_124 | Neighborhood Greenways Residential Program | Neighborhood Greenway - safe walking/rolling, traffic calming | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 0.69 | $ 144,991,000.00 | $ 1,475,998,000.00 | | TMP_125 | Neighborhood Greenways Downtown Program | Neighborhood Greenway - safe walking/rolling, traffic calming | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 4,593,000.00 | $ 1,480,591,000.00 | | TMP_126 | S 56th St Separated Bike Lane between S Orchard St - S Durango St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 0.69 | $ 1,856,000.00 | $ 1,482,447,000.00 | | TMP_127 | S 47th St Separated Bike Lane between South Tacoma Way- Tacoma Mall Transit Center | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 205,000.00 | $ 1,482,652,000.00 | | TMP_128 | S Pine St Separated Bike Lane between Center St - S 47th St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 756,000.00 | $ 1,483,408,000.00 | | TMP_129 | E 56th St Separated Bike Lane between A St - E Q St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 473,000.00 | $ 1,483,881,000.00 | | TMP_130 | Yakima Ave Separated Bike Lane between 6th Ave - I-5 | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 783,000.00 | $ 1,484,664,000.00 | | TMP_131 | S 74th St Separated Bike Lane between Lakewood Dr - I-5 | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.69 | $ 900,000.00 | $ 1,485,564,000.00 | | TMP_132 | Tyler St Separated Bike Lane between S 19th St - S 74th St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.69 | $ 6,725,000.00 | $ 1,492,289,000.00 | | TMP_133 | E D St / Puyallup Ave | Change signal phasing and add left turn pocket to SB approach | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 0.69 | $ 24,000.00 | $ 1,492,313,000.00 | | TMP_134 | S 56th and Washington St | Vertical separation of RXR and Roadway | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 30,496,000.00 | $ 1,522,809,000.00 | | TMP_135 | S 74th/72nd St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 1,330,000.00 | $ 1,524,139,000.00 | | TMP_136 | Portland Ave Signal Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications, including new signal at St Paul | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 2,140,000.00 | $ 1,526,279,000.00 | | TMP_137 | Prairie Line Trail Grade Separation | S 21st St grade separated crossing | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 9,725,000.00 | $ 1,536,004,000.00 | | TMP_138 | Pine St and S Tacoma Way | Vertical separation of RXR and Roadway | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 30,496,000.00 | $ 1,566,500,000.00 | | TMP_139 | S 74th St and S Tacoma Way | Vertical separation of RXR and Roadway | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 30,496,000.00 | $ 1,596,996,000.00 | | TMP_140 | Amtrak Station Pedestrian Bridge | Construct a grade-separated bridge to connect the new Amtrak station with the Sound Transit garage and the new passenger platform and lot near the Tacoma Dome. | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 9,725,000.00 | $ 1,606,721,000.00 | | TMP_141 | N 21st St Tier 2 Future Transit Network - Alder St to Steele St | ADA transit stops, access to transit, ITS, transit supportive infrastructure | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 360,000.00 | $ 1,607,081,000.00 | | TMP_142 | Westgate/21st - Jackson to Proctor St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 6,000,000.00 | $ 1,613,081,000.00 | | TMP_143 | S 12th St - Cedar to Sprague Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 3,600,000.00 | $ 1,616,681,000.00 | | TMP_144 | S 15th St - Yakima Ave Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 4,800,000.00 | $ 1,621,481,000.00 | | TMP_145 | Yakima Ave - 82nd to 92nd St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 2,400,000.00 | $ 1,623,881,000.00 | | TMP_146 | River Road / Bay St / E 26th St Shared Use Path between Portland Ave - Tacoma City Limits | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 9,160,000.00 | $ 1,633,041,000.00 | | TMP_147 | S Warner St Bike Lane between S 40th St - S 47th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 66,000.00 | $ 1,633,107,000.00 | | TMP_148 | E D St Separated Bike Lane between Thea Foss Esplanade - Puyallup Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 96,000.00 | $ 1,633,203,000.00 | | TMP_149 | E 38th St Separated Bike Lane between A St - E I St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 246,000.00 | $ 1,633,449,000.00 | | TMP_150 | S Thompson Ave Separated Bike Lane between S 48th St - S 48th St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 507,000.00 | $ 1,633,956,000.00 | | TMP_151 | S 84th St Separated Bike Lane between S Hosmer St - McKinley Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 798,000.00 | $ 1,634,754,000.00 | | TMP_152 | N Pearl St / SR 163 Separated Bike Lane between N 46th St - N 11th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 845,000.00 | $ 1,635,599,000.00 | | TMP_153 | S 56th St Separated Bike Lane between S Washington St- A St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 1,021,000.00 | $ 1,636,620,000.00 | | TMP_154 | Yakima Ave Separated Bike Lane between S 48th St - E 96th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 1,199,000.00 | $ 1,637,819,000.00 | | TMP_155 | S 72nd St Separated Bike Lane between I-5 - Eastern City Limits | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 783,000.00 | $ 1,638,602,000.00 | | TMP_156 | 34th St Bridge - Pacific Avenue to B St | This project will rehabilitate this existing bridge. The bridge was constructed in 1937 and many elements have deteriorated. This bridge is the smaller of the two 34th St. bridges. | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 8,220,000.00 | $ 1,646,822,000.00 | | TMP_157 | I-705 Assessment | Capacity assessment for future land use in Downtown Tacoma | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 1,950,000.00 | $ 1,648,772,000.00 | | TMP_158 | S 38th St Shared Use Path between S Tacoma Way - S Puget Sound Ave | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 900,000.00 | $ 1,649,672,000.00 | | TMP_159 | Hilltop Festival Street on L St - 10th to 12th St | Festival street/open street | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.63 | $ 2,187,000.00 | $ 1,651,859,000.00 | | TMP_160 | Madison St/SERA Park Connector - S 56th to Adams St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 1,855,377.00 | $ 1,653,714,377.00 | | TMP_161 | Missing Link Sidewalks on Arterials | Pedestrian | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.63 | $ 208,602,000.00 | $ 1,862,316,377.00 | | TMP_162 | E D St Separated Bike Lane between E 21st St - Wright Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.56 | $ 337,000.00 | $ 1,862,653,377.00 | | TMP_163 | Tideflats Area ITS Strategic Plan Implementation | Study for entire area is ongoing | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 11,515,000.00 | $ 1,874,168,377.00 | | TMP_164 | S 12th St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 1,120,000.00 | $ 1,875,288,377.00 | | TMP_165 | S 6th St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 1,260,000.00 | $ 1,876,548,377.00 | | TMP_166 | S 15th St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 700,000.00 | $ 1,877,248,377.00 | | Project ID | Name | Short Description | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Overall Score | Total ($) | Cumulative Total ($) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :--- | :--- | | TMP_167 | E D St Corridor Improvements between E 11th and north | Install/improve sidewalks, freight access, parking, and bike facilities per East Thea Foss Study | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 3,993,000.00 | $ 1,881,241,377.00 | | TMP_168 | Light Rail Corridor - Downtown Tacoma to Tacoma Mall | Corridor identified in the updated Sound Transit Long Range Plan | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.56 | $ - | $ 1,881,241,377.00 | | TMP_169 | Orchard St - 6th to 19th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.56 | $ 4,800,000.00 | $ 1,886,041,377.00 | | TMP_170 | Orchard St - Center to 70th St W Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.56 | $ 4,800,000.00 | $ 1,890,841,377.00 | | TMP_171 | Norpoint Way - Marine View Dr to 29th St NE Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.56 | $ 2,400,000.00 | $ 1,893,241,377.00 | | TMP_172 | Proctor Business District Open/Shared Street | Create festival street and/or woonerf in Proctor NDB | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 1,752,000.00 | $ 1,894,993,377.00 | | TMP_173 | Cedar St Underpass | Overpass or shared-use path project as part of any WSDOT new or reconstruction project | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 9,725,000.00 | $ 1,904,718,377.00 | | TMP_174 | Taylor Way Shared Use Path between E 11th St - SR 509 | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 23,500,000.00 | $ 1,928,218,377.00 | | TMP_175 | S Adams St Shared Use Path between S 60th St - S 64th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 2,600,000.00 | $ 1,930,818,377.00 | | TMP_176 | A St Shared Use Path between Puyallup Ave - S 25th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 540,000.00 | $ 1,931,358,377.00 | | TMP_177 | Shared Use Path between S 11th - Waterway Park | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 16,330,000.00 | $ 1,947,688,377.00 | | TMP_178 | Yakima Ave Bike Lane between 6th Ave - I St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 14,000.00 | $ 1,947,702,377.00 | | TMP_179 | 6th Ave Bike Lane between G St - St Helens Ave | Bike Lane | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 32,000.00 | $ 1,947,734,377.00 | | TMP_180 | Tacoma Ave Bike Lane between N 3rd St - Division Ave | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 37,000.00 | $ 1,947,771,377.00 | | TMP_181 | E 30th St Separated Bike Lane between Portland Ave - E R St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 61,000.00 | $ 1,947,832,377.00 | | TMP_182 | Delin St Separated Bike Lane between S C St - Tacoma Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 114,000.00 | $ 1,947,946,377.00 | | TMP_183 | S 11th St Separated Bike Lane between J St - E Cliff Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 265,000.00 | $ 1,948,211,377.00 | | TMP_184 | S 12th St Separated Bike Lane between S Jackson Ave - S Ferry St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 1,365,000.00 | $ 1,949,576,377.00 | | TMP_185 | S Sprague Ave Separated Bike Lane between 6th Ave - S 17th St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 318,000.00 | $ 1,949,894,377.00 | | TMP_186 | S 66th St Separated Bike Lane between S Tyler St- Tacoma Mall Blvd | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 554,000.00 | $ 1,950,448,377.00 | | TMP_187 | S Alaska St Separated Bike Lane between S 38th St - S 72nd St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 877,000.00 | $ 1,951,325,377.00 | | TMP_188 | 6th Ave Separated Bike Lane between N Jackson Ave - State St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 1,335,000.00 | $ 1,952,660,377.00 | | TMP_189 | S Center St Separated Bike Lane between S Orchard St - S 25th St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 71,000.00 | $ 1,952,731,377.00 | | TMP_190 | S 35th St ROW Shared Use Path between S Tacoma Way - S Junett St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 820,000.00 | $ 1,953,551,377.00 | | TMP_191 | A St Separated Bike Lane between S 8th St - Prairie Line Trail | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.56 | $ 199,000.00 | $ 1,953,750,377.00 | | TMP_192 | WSDOT Tacoma Mall/I-5 Direct Access | New overpass from southbound I-5 at S 38th Street to Tacoma Mall Blvd, including structure, roadway modifications, curb and gutter, new signal, streetlightinig, storm sewer, landscaping and utility relocation work, and asphalt overlay between Steele St and S 48th St. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 22,290,000.00 | $ 1,976,040,377.00 | | TMP_193 | S 19th St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 1,330,000.00 | $ 1,977,370,377.00 | | TMP_194 | Pearl St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 0.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.50 | $ 980,000.00 | $ 1,978,350,377.00 | | TMP_195 | Browns Pt Blvd Phase I Improvements - McMurray to Nassau | Improved roadway to arterial standards/complete street standards | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 1,521,000.00 | $ 1,979,871,377.00 | | TMP_196 | Westgate Mixed Use Center Missing Link Sidewalks & Pedestrian Crossings | Missing link sidewalks (1500 linear feet) and appropriate pedestrian crossing treatments | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 136,000.00 | $ 1,980,007,377.00 | | TMP_197 | Milwaukee Way and Marshall St Safety Improvements | Vehicle/Ped/Bike safety improvements at Crossing No. 852612Y | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 1,513,000.00 | $ 1,981,520,377.00 | | TMP_198 | City-wide ITS System Architecture Plan | A planning effort to establish the overall system architecture the city will utilize for the ITS infrastructure in order to allow for additional federal and state coordination and funding opportunities | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ - | $ 1,981,520,377.00 | | TMP_199 | E I St - 64th to 72nd St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.50 | $ - | $ 1,981,520,377.00 | | TMP_200 | Scott Pierson Trail Connections | Trail connections in the City ROW along the SR16 Scott Pierson Trail | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 6,735,000.00 | $ 1,988,255,377.00 | | TMP_201 | Tacoma Mall Blvd Shared Use Path between Railroad St - S 56th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 560,000.00 | $ 1,988,815,377.00 | | TMP_202 | S Sprague Ave Shared Use Path between S 8th St - S 8th St | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 160,000.00 | $ 1,988,975,377.00 | | TMP_203 | S 40th St Shared Use Path between S Cedar St - S Pine St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 1,500,000.00 | $ 1,990,475,377.00 | | TMP_204 | S 19th St Shared Use Path between S State St - S State St | Shared-Use Path | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 300,000.00 | $ 1,990,775,377.00 | | TMP_205 | Orchard St Shared Use Path between S 12th St - S 13th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 1,000,000.00 | $ 1,991,775,377.00 | | TMP_206 | E Grandview Ave Shared Use Path between E Bay St - E 34th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 3,000,000.00 | $ 1,994,775,377.00 | | TMP_207 | E 52nd St Shared Use Path between E 52nd St - E 52nd St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 196,000.00 | $ 1,994,971,377.00 | | TMP_208 | Shared Use Path between E Dock Street - E 25th St Alley | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 2,154,000.00 | $ 1,997,125,377.00 | | TMP_209 | Shared Use Path between BPA Trail - spuyalapabs Trail | Shared-Use Path | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 24,650,000.00 | $ 2,021,775,377.00 | | TMP_210 | E 34th St - E-Street to Walters - Complete St / arterial improvement | Bike lane roadway to arterial / complete street standards | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 3,207,000.00 | $ 2,024,982,377.00 | | TMP_211 | S 35th St Bike Lane between S Pine St - S Sprague St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 72,000.00 | $ 2,025,054,377.00 | | TMP_212 | A St Separated Bike Lane between S 26th St - S 27th St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 35,000.00 | $ 2,025,089,377.00 | | TMP_213 | S 24th St Separated Bike Lane between S Holgate St - Pacific Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 46,000.00 | $ 2,025,135,377.00 | | TMP_214 | S 27th St Separated Bike Lane between S C St - A St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 65,000.00 | $ 2,025,200,377.00 | | TMP_215 | S 35th Separated Bike Lane between S Union Ave - S Tacoma Way | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 133,000.00 | $ 2,025,333,377.00 | | TMP_216 | E 64th St Phase 3 - Portland Ave - Pipeline Trail | Replace pavement and add bike lanes, sidewalks and curb ramps to meet ADA standards, stormwater system, illumination system, and lighting | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.50 | $ 8,312,000.00 | $ 2,033,645,377.00 | | TMP_217 | 66th St W Separated Bike Lane between Lakewood Dr W - S Cheyenne St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 201,000.00 | $ 2,033,846,377.00 | | TMP_218 | S Pearl St Separated Bike Lane between N 11th St - S 12th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 280,000.00 | $ 2,034,126,377.00 | | TMP_219 | N Pearl St Separated Bike Lane between N Park Way - N 46th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 295,000.00 | $ 2,034,421,377.00 | | TMP_220 | Orchard St Separated Bike Lane between S 19th St - S 56th St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 1,013,000.00 | $ 2,035,434,377.00 | | TMP_221 | S 19th St Separated Bike Lane between 91st Ave W - S Cedar St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 1,535,000.00 | $ 2,036,969,377.00 | | TMP_222 | N Pearl St Separated Bike Lane between Park Ave- Point Defiance Ferry Terminal | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 125,000.00 | $ 2,037,094,377.00 | | TMP_223 | SR-7 / S 38th St at-grade intersection conversion | Intersection modification. Evaluate the conversion of the current ramps into a signalized intersection | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.50 | $ 1,513,000.00 | $ 2,038,607,377.00 | | TMP_224 | Portland Ave on and off ramps at SR 509 | Add traffic signals and modify channelization | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.50 | $ 11,195,000.00 | $ 2,049,802,377.00 | | TMP_225 | 6th Ave Mixed Use Center Pedestrian Crossings | Improve pedestrian crossings with appropriate treatments | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 6,597,000.00 | $ 2,056,399,377.00 | | TMP_226 | James Center Mixed Use Center Pedestrian Crossings | Improve pedestrian crossings with appropriate treatments | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 4,861,000.00 | $ 2,061,260,377.00 | | TMP_227 | Bike Connection (Unspecified) between City ROW line - S 35th St | Bike Connection (Unspecified) | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 700,000.00 | $ 2,061,960,377.00 | | Project ID | Name | Short Description | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Overall Score | Total ($) | Cumulative Total ($) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | TMP_228 | S 58th St Separated Bike Lane between S Washington St - South Tacoma Way | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 7,957,000.00 | $ 2,069,917,377.00 | | TMP_229 | S 37th St Separated Bike Lane between S Steele St - S Sprague Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ 69,000.00 | $ 2,069,986,377.00 | | TMP_230 | Private ROW Bike Connection (Unspecified) between S Tacoma Way - S Union Ave | Bike Connection (Unspecified) | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.50 | $ - | $ 2,069,986,377.00 | | TMP_231 | South Tacoma Way - C to Pine St | Street rehabilitation project including grinding of the old asphalt at the gutter and match lines, new asphalt overlay, and adjusting utilities. | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 7,966,000.00 | $ 2,077,952,377.00 | | TMP_232 | Sprague Avenue Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 0.0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 490,000.00 | $ 2,078,442,377.00 | | TMP_233 | Tideflats Area Fiber Optic Infrastructure | Construct initial ITS Infrastructure needed for basic information sharing among stakeholders. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ - | $ 2,078,442,377.00 | | TMP_234 | Westgate Blvd / N 21st St / I St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 630,000.00 | $ 2,079,072,377.00 | | TMP_235 | Culvert Erdahl Ditch | Replace retaining wall to increase capacity with reconfiguration of railroad tracks | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ - | $ 2,079,072,377.00 | | TMP_236 | North Intermodal Yard Lead Track Upgrade | Replace old and worn 112-pound rail and track switches with new 115-pound components on the North Intermodal Lead Track. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ - | $ 2,079,072,377.00 | | TMP_237 | SR059 Track Rebuild Project | Project will replace approximately 4,200 feet of old and worn 85-pound rail and other components with new 115-pound rail and components. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ - | $ 2,079,072,377.00 | | TMP_238 | Taylor Way Track Rehabilitation & Expansion Project | Replace old and worn rail paralleling Taylor Way with 115-pound rail, 30% new cross ties, and extend the tracks approximately 1,200 feet. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ - | $ 2,079,072,377.00 | | TMP_239 | West Loop Track Upgrade Project | Replace existing 90-pound rail with 115-pound rail, 30% new cross ties, also encapsulates 370lf of track to function as a crossing. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ - | $ 2,079,072,377.00 | | TMP_240 | Tideflats Area Emergency Signal Preemption | Install signal preemption for existing signals on priority corridors. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 11,515,000.00 | $ 2,090,587,377.00 | | TMP_241 | SR 509 and Portland Ave Off Ramp Improvements | New signal and ITS | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 11,195,000.00 | $ 2,101,782,377.00 | | TMP_242 | Light Rail Corridor - Downtown Tacoma to Tacoma Community College | Corridor identified in the updated Sound Transit Long Range Plan with S 19th Street as the representative alignment. Includes a new operations and maintenance facility and track improvements in South Downtown to improve train frequency and reliability. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.44 | $ - | $ 2,101,782,377.00 | | TMP_243 | Trail to the Mountain | Feasibility of rail use for shared-Use path, linear park, housing, economic development between downtown and south city limits | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 500,000.00 | $ 2,102,282,377.00 | | TMP_244 | Sheridan Avenue - S64th to S 72nd St | Missing link sidewalks and shared use path, and paving | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 12,156,000.00 | $ 2,114,438,377.00 | | TMP_245 | Schuster Parkway Trail | Shared-Use Path From S 7th - Ruston Way | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 115,520,000.00 | $ 2,229,958,377.00 | | TMP_246 | Thea Foss Esplanade Completion | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 1,720,000.00 | $ 2,231,678,377.00 | | TMP_247 | S 52nd St ROW Shared Use Path between Orchard - S Verde St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 4,000,000.00 | $ 2,235,678,377.00 | | TMP_248 | S 15th St Shared Use Path between Pacific Ave - A St Ramp | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 1,000,000.00 | $ 2,236,678,377.00 | | TMP_249 | E 11th St Shared Use Path between E F St - E Portland Ave | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 5,300,000.00 | $ 2,241,978,377.00 | | TMP_250 | Port of Tacoma Rd Shared Use Path between Lincoln Ave - spuyalapabš Trail | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 16,020,000.00 | $ 2,257,998,377.00 | | TMP_251 | Pipeline Rd Shared Use Path between E 48th St - Portland Ave | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 2,800,000.00 | $ 2,260,798,377.00 | | TMP_252 | Lincoln Ave Shared Use Path between Port of Tacoma Rd - Portland Ave | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 13,900,000.00 | $ 2,274,698,377.00 | | TMP_253 | Lakewood Dr W Shared Use Path between 66th St W - 74th St W | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 5,200,000.00 | $ 2,279,898,377.00 | | TMP_254 | Portland Ave Shared Use Path between E 11th St - Lincoln Ave | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 8,800,000.00 | $ 2,288,698,377.00 | | TMP_255 | E N ST ROW Shared Use Path between E Portland Ave - E 34th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 1,460,000.00 | $ 2,290,158,377.00 | | TMP_256 | E 56th St Shared Use Path between E Q St - Pipeline Rd | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 900,000.00 | $ 2,291,058,377.00 | | TMP_257 | E 28th St Shared Use Path between E L St - E N St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 1,600,000.00 | $ 2,292,658,377.00 | | TMP_258 | E 11th St Shared Use Path between Taylor Way - Marine View Dr | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 6,000,000.00 | $ 2,298,658,377.00 | | TMP_259 | Shared Use Path between Northeast Tacoma ES and Kobetich Library | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 8,680,000.00 | $ 2,307,338,377.00 | | TMP_260 | 33rd St NE - NE 49th Ave to Nassau Ave | Arterial roadway section with complete streets to include curbs and gutter, sidewalks, asphalt paving, storm drainage, streetlighting, landscaping, bike lanes, pedestrian islands, and traffic control. | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 19,344,000.00 | $ 2,326,682,377.00 | | TMP_261 | Walters Road - S 19th to 6th Ave | Widening and replacing the existing roadway section to includes sidewalk, curb and gutter, travel lanes, ADA compliant driveways, retaining walls as needed, and new storm water system. | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 3,968,000.00 | $ 2,330,650,377.00 | | TMP_262 | S 23rd St Bike Lane between S Hood St - S C St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 11,000.00 | $ 2,330,661,377.00 | | TMP_263 | Division Ave Bike Lane between Tacoma Ave N - Stadium Way S | Bike Lane | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 14,000.00 | $ 2,330,675,377.00 | | TMP_264 | S J St Bike Lane between S 27th St - S 28th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 17,000.00 | $ 2,330,692,377.00 | | TMP_265 | St Helens Ave (NB) Bike Lane between 6th Ave - S 7th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 17,000.00 | $ 2,330,709,377.00 | | TMP_266 | Market St Bike Lane between S 9th St - S 11th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 26,000.00 | $ 2,330,735,377.00 | | TMP_267 | S 37th St Bike Lane between S Tacoma Way - S 37th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 104,000.00 | $ 2,330,839,377.00 | | TMP_268 | S 8th St Separated Bike Lane between Court A - A St | Bike Connection (Unspecified) | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 19,000.00 | $ 2,330,858,377.00 | | TMP_269 | Court A Separated Bike Lane between S 7th St - S 8th St | Bike Connection (Unspecified) | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 31,000.00 | $ 2,330,889,377.00 | | TMP_270 | S 7th St Separated Bike Lane between Pacific Ave - Court A | Bike Connection (Unspecified) | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 19,000.00 | $ 2,330,908,377.00 | | TMP_271 | S 60th St Separated Bike Lane between S Adams St - South Tacoma Way | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 3,658,000.00 | $ 2,334,566,377.00 | | TMP_272 | S 21st St Separated Bike Lane between Tacoma Ave - Pacific Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 121,000.00 | $ 2,334,687,377.00 | | TMP_273 | S M St Separated Bike Lane between S 28th St - I S | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 133,000.00 | $ 2,334,820,377.00 | | TMP_274 | Orchard St Separated Bike Lane between N 7th St - S 12th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 174,000.00 | $ 2,334,994,377.00 | | TMP_275 | Separated Bike Lane between Heidelberg Connector - Scott Pierson Trail | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 125,000.00 | $ 2,335,119,377.00 | | TMP_276 | S 54th St Separated Bike Lane between S Birmingham St - S Wapato St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 231,000.00 | $ 2,335,350,377.00 | | TMP_277 | N I St Separated Bike Lane between N Steele St - Division Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 360,000.00 | $ 2,335,710,377.00 | | TMP_278 | E 64th St Separated Bike Lane between S Alaska St - Pacific Avenue | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 488,000.00 | $ 2,336,198,377.00 | | TMP_279 | 96th St Separated Bike Lane between Western City Limits - E McKinley Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 892,000.00 | $ 2,337,090,377.00 | | Project ID | Name | Short Description | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Overall Score | Total ($) | Cumulative Total ($) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | TMP_280 | N Stevens St Separated Bike Lane between N 42nd St - S 19th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 1,236,000.00 | $ 2,338,326,377.00 | | TMP_281 | St Helens Ave (SB) Sharrows between 6th Ave - S 7th St | Sharrows | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.44 | $ 4,000.00 | $ 2,338,330,377.00 | | TMP_282 | 51st St NE from Browns Point Blvd. to Harborview Dr. | Curb and Gutter, Sidewalks, Streetlights, Storm Drainage, Asphalt Paving, bike lanes | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 2,562,000.00 | $ 2,340,892,377.00 | | TMP_283 | Northshore Pkwy from Browns Pt to east city limits | Sidewalks, speed reduction, pedestrian crossing improvements, and seperated bike lanes | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 16,802,000.00 | $ 2,357,694,377.00 | | TMP_284 | Division Ave Bike Lane between Sprague Ave - MLK Jr Way | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 90,000.00 | $ 2,357,784,377.00 | | TMP_285 | Railroad St Separated Bike Lane between S Wapato St - Tacoma Mall Blvd | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.44 | $ 118,000.00 | $ 2,357,902,377.00 | | TMP_286 | S 66th St - Oakes to Orchard St | Improved roadway to arterial standards | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 7,060,000.00 | $ 2,364,962,377.00 | | TMP_287 | WSDOT HOV program from SR16 to South City Limits | Extend HOV lanes between SR 512 and the SR 16. Reconstructs 72nd Street and 84th St interchanges to accommodate the widening and improve pedestrian and bicycle connections crossing I-5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ - | $ 2,364,962,377.00 | | TMP_288 | Direct HOV access ramps to S 47th/S 48th St (transit center) | New Capacity/Link | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ - | $ 2,364,962,377.00 | | TMP_289 | N Orchard St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 420,000.00 | $ 2,365,382,377.00 | | TMP_290 | Onboard Positive Train Control (PTC) Equipment | Equipment installed on locomotives designed to communicate with wayside signals and back office computers intended as a failsafe to avoid train head/rear end collisions, over speed derailments, or incursions into unauthorized territory. | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ - | $ 2,365,382,377.00 | | TMP_291 | S Orchard St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 420,000.00 | $ 2,365,802,377.00 | | TMP_292 | 6th Avenue - Jackson to Walters - Complete St / arterial improvement | Improved roadway to arterial / complete street standards | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 9,665,000.00 | $ 2,375,467,377.00 | | TMP_293 | Pedestrian overpass between Old Town Business District and Ruston Way | Grade separated pedestrian link over the rail lines | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 9,725,000.00 | $ 2,385,192,377.00 | | TMP_294 | Point Ruston Mixed Use Center Pedestrian Crossings | New pedestrian crossings with appropriate treatments | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 3,125,000.00 | $ 2,388,317,377.00 | | TMP_295 | Downtown Quiet Zones | Provide infrastructure to support quiet zones at East D, East C and South C. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ 2,156,000.00 | $ 2,390,473,377.00 | | TMP_296 | At-Grade Rail Crossing CCTV | Add cameras to key existing at-grade rail crossings. | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ - | $ 2,390,473,377.00 | | TMP_297 | Pierce County Terminal - Double Ending | New at-grade crossing on Alexander Ave east of PC Terminal | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ - | $ 2,390,473,377.00 | | TMP_298 | S 50th St - M to G St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ - | $ 2,390,473,377.00 | | TMP_299 | S I St - 72nd to 78th St Vision Zero Improvements | Vision Zero safety countermeasures for high priority corridors | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ - | $ 2,390,473,377.00 | | TMP_300 | S 66th St/S 64th St Ped/Bike Bridge Shared Use Path between Tacoma Mall Blvd - S Alaska St | Bridge | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ 29,175,000.00 | $ 2,419,648,377.00 | | TMP_301 | S 40th St Shared Use Path between S Union Ave - S Puget Sound | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ 800,000.00 | $ 2,420,448,377.00 | | TMP_302 | N 16th St Shared Use Path between N Cedar St (midblock) - N Junett St | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ 900,000.00 | $ 2,421,348,377.00 | | TMP_303 | E D St Shared Use Path between E 3rd St - E 11th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ 4,800,000.00 | $ 2,426,148,377.00 | | TMP_304 | E 34th St Shared Use Path between E D St - E McKinley Ave | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 3,200,000.00 | $ 2,429,348,377.00 | | TMP_305 | Orchard St Bike Lane between N 37th St - S 19th St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 439,000.00 | $ 2,429,787,377.00 | | TMP_306 | N 26th St Bike Lane between N Proctor St - N Washington St Alley | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 28,000.00 | $ 2,429,815,377.00 | | TMP_307 | S M St Bike Lane between I-5 - S 37th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 67,000.00 | $ 2,429,882,377.00 | | TMP_308 | 6th Ave Bike Lane between S Walters Rd - S Jackson Ave | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 181,000.00 | $ 2,430,063,377.00 | | TMP_309 | Pearl St Separated Bike Lane between S 12th St - S 19th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ 205,000.00 | $ 2,430,268,377.00 | | TMP_310 | S Cedar St Separated Bike Lane between N 7th St - S 15th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 269,000.00 | $ 2,430,537,377.00 | | TMP_311 | N 17th St/Westgate Blvd Separated Bike Lane between N Narrows Dr - N Highland St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 439,000.00 | $ 2,430,976,377.00 | | TMP_312 | SR 509 Separated Bike Lane between Pacific Ave - Slayden Rd NE | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ 3,614,000.00 | $ 2,434,590,377.00 | | TMP_313 | Thorne Rd - Heavy Haul Improvements | Improved roadway | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ 2,210,000.00 | $ 2,436,800,377.00 | | TMP_314 | S 8th St Connector Bike Connection (Unspecified) between Tacoma Ave S - Fawcett Ave S | Bike Connection (Unspecified) | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ 794,000.00 | $ 2,437,594,377.00 | | TMP_315 | S Fife Street Bike Connection (Unspecified) between S 42nd St - S 47th St | Bike Connection (Unspecified) | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ 721,000.00 | $ 2,438,315,377.00 | | TMP_316 | Bike Connection (Unspecified) between S Fife St - S 48th St | Bike Connection (Unspecified) | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.38 | $ - | $ 2,438,315,377.00 | | TMP_317 | S Puget Sound Ave Bike Lane between Midblock N of S 56th St - Midblock S of S 56th S | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 16,000.00 | $ 2,438,331,377.00 | | TMP_318 | S Puget Sound Ave Bike Lane between S 50th St - S 54th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 43,000.00 | $ 2,438,374,377.00 | | TMP_319 | N 21st St Separated Bike Lane between N Visscher St - N Steele St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 919,000.00 | $ 2,439,293,377.00 | | TMP_320 | McKinley Ave - Division Ln to E 56th St Arterial Improvements | Repaving and necessary ADA upgrades | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 6,209,000.00 | $ 2,445,502,377.00 | | TMP_321 | S 11th St Separated Bike Lane between S 12th St - S Grant Ave | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 241,000.00 | $ 2,445,743,377.00 | | TMP_322 | S Adams St Separated Bike Lane between S 64th St - S 66th St | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.38 | $ 57,000.00 | $ 2,445,800,377.00 | | TMP_323 | WSDOT ITS projects on SR509 and I-70S | Includes fiber interconnect, VMS and cameras. Currently is an unfunded portion of the WSDOT ITS Strategic Plan | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ - | $ 2,445,800,377.00 | | TMP_324 | N 30th St Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications, including signal at Orchard, left turns at Proctor | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 280,000.00 | $ 2,446,080,377.00 | | TMP_325 | Jackson Avenue/Narrows Drive Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 490,000.00 | $ 2,446,570,377.00 | | TMP_326 | SR 509 Slip Ramps at D | Construct a half diamond interchange at East D Street and SR-509. An interchange justification report (IJR) is required for approval of the added access to SR-509. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ - | $ 2,446,570,377.00 | | TMP_327 | SR 167 Completion | Extension of SR 167 from current terminus to I-5 and SR-509 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ 2,000,000.00 | $ 2,448,570,377.00 | | TMP_328 | East 34th Street Hill Climb | Reconstruct stair connection between East M and Portland Avenue | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 1,050,000.00 | $ 2,449,620,377.00 | | TMP_329 | Lincoln Avenue Wye Track | Installation of a wye track beneath the Lincoln Avenue Bridge to provide more direct access to the US Oil facility and improve operational flexibility. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ - | $ 2,449,620,377.00 | | TMP_330 | Rail Classification Yard – East End Access Reconfiguration | Reconfiguration of the east end of the classification yard to allow for multiple congruent train movements simultaneously. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ - | $ 2,449,620,377.00 | | TMP_331 | Rail Classification Yard – West End Reconfiguration | Reconfiguration of the classification yard's west end to allow for multiple congruent train movements simultaneously. Would add a 3rd at-grade crossing on Milwaukee Way | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ - | $ 2,449,620,377.00 | | TMP_332 | Transfer Yard Connection to Lincoln | Constructs a new connection between the Port's Transfer Yard into existing Tacoma Rail infrastructure paralleling Lincoln Avenue to provide more efficient ingress/egress to U. S. Oil without crossing Port of Tacoma Road. | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ - | $ 2,449,620,377.00 | <
> | Project ID | Name | Short Description | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Overall Score | Total ($) | Cumulative Total ($) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | TMP_333 | Sprague Overpass | Overpass or shared-use path project as part of any WSDOT new or reconstruction project | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ 9,725,000.00 | $ 2,459,345,377.00 | | TMP_334 | Sheridan Ave between S 56th St - S 64th St | Missing link sidewalks and shared use path, and paving | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 5,400,000.00 | $ 2,464,745,377.00 | | TMP_335 | S 34th St Shared Use Path between S G St - E D St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 7,000,000.00 | $ 2,471,745,377.00 | | TMP_336 | E Division Ln Shared Use Path between E I St - Portland Ave | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 5,500,000.00 | $ 2,477,245,377.00 | | TMP_337 | E 48th St Shared Use Path between E D St-East E St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 900,000.00 | $ 2,478,145,377.00 | | TMP_338 | E 40th St Shared Use Path between E G St - E McKinley Ave | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 700,000.00 | $ 2,478,845,377.00 | | TMP_339 | E 34th St ROW Shared Use Path between E M St - E N St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 900,000.00 | $ 2,479,745,377.00 | | TMP_340 | Browning St - Grandview to Pioneer | Reconstruct Browning Street from Grandview Avenue East to Pioneer Way to include sidewalks, permanent street, turn lanes, signal. | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 24,000,000.00 | $ 2,503,745,377.00 | | TMP_341 | Ruston Way Rehabilitation | Reconstruction of Ruston Way from McCarver to N 49th St to include repair of subgrade, replacement of curb and gutter as needed, sidewalk and seawall repairs, utility repairs, landscaping, and ADA improvements. Parking areas withinROW may be improved | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 18,249,000.00 | $ 2,521,994,377.00 | | TMP_342 | Browns Point Blvd from 33rd St. NE at the west near 43rd Ave. NE and 33rd St. NE at the east near Meeker Ave. | Browns Point Blvd. Improvement Phase III - Roadway improvements between 33rd St. NE at the west near 43rd Ave. NE and 33rd St. NE at the east near Meeker Ave. to include sidewalks and access to Alderwood Park & Kobetich Library | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 17,401,000.00 | $ 2,539,395,377.00 | | TMP_343 | E L St Bike Lane between E 26th St - E 29th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 35,000.00 | $ 2,539,430,377.00 | | TMP_344 | S Alaska St Bike Lane between S 37th St - S 38th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 20,000.00 | $ 2,539,450,377.00 | | TMP_345 | S Puget Sound Ave Bike Lane between S 72nd St - S 74th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 23,000.00 | $ 2,539,473,377.00 | | TMP_346 | E 40th St Bike Lane between E Portland Ave - E R St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 43,000.00 | $ 2,539,516,377.00 | | TMP_347 | S I Street Bike Lane between Division Ave - 6th Ave | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ 55,000.00 | $ 2,539,571,377.00 | | TMP_348 | E R St Bike Lane between E 40th St - E 48th St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 82,000.00 | $ 2,539,653,377.00 | | TMP_349 | S Wilkeson St Bike Lane between S 19th St - S Tacoma Way | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ 122,000.00 | $ 2,539,775,377.00 | | TMP_350 | Orchard St / Lakewood Dr Separated Bike Lane between S 56th St - 66th St W | Separated Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 273,000.00 | $ 2,540,048,377.00 | | TMP_351 | N Ruston Way Separated Bike Lane between City Boundary - N 49th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 144,000.00 | $ 2,540,192,377.00 | | TMP_352 | Jackson Ave Separated Bike Lane between N Westgate Blvd - S 19th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 643,000.00 | $ 2,540,835,377.00 | | TMP_353 | Ruston Way Separated Bike Lane between N 49th St - Henry St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 960,000.00 | $ 2,541,795,377.00 | | TMP_354 | S C St Sharrows between S 25th St - S 23rd St | Sharrows | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ 6,000.00 | $ 2,541,801,377.00 | | TMP_355 | Bike Connection (Unspecified) between S Pine St - S Fife St | Bike Connection (Unspecified) | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ - | $ 2,541,801,377.00 | | TMP_356 | Bike Connection (Unspecified) between S 16th St - S 17th St | Bike Connection (Unspecified) | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ - | $ 2,541,801,377.00 | | TMP_357 | St Paul Ave - Portland to E 11th St Arterial Improvement | Repaving and necessary ADA upgrades | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ 2,062,000.00 | $ 2,543,863,377.00 | | TMP_358 | Marshall - Milwaukee to Port of Tacoma Rd Arterial Improvement | Repaving, sidewalks, and necessary ADA upgrades | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.31 | $ 6,971,000.00 | $ 2,550,834,377.00 | | TMP_359 | Tyler St - S 36th to S 74th St Arterial Improvements | Repaving and necessary ADA upgrades | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 10,314,000.00 | $ 2,561,148,377.00 | | TMP_360 | S G St - Wright Ave to 40th St Arterial Improvements | Repaving and necessary ADA upgrades | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.31 | $ 2,703,000.00 | $ 2,563,851,377.00 | | TMP_361 | E 96th St and McKinley | New signal | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 1,300,000.00 | $ 2,565,151,377.00 | | TMP_362 | S Winnifred St ROW Shared Use Path between S 7th St - S 7th St | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 320,000.00 | $ 2,565,471,377.00 | | TMP_363 | S Union Ave Shared Use Path between S Melrose St - S 15th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 700,000.00 | $ 2,566,171,377.00 | | TMP_364 | S 7th St ROW Shared Use Path between S Orchard St - S Huson St | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 800,000.00 | $ 2,566,971,377.00 | | TMP_365 | S 76th St ROW Shared Use Path between S Bell St - A St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 700,000.00 | $ 2,567,671,377.00 | | TMP_366 | S 16th St ROW Shared Use Path between S Lawrence St Midblock - S Alder St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 500,000.00 | $ 2,568,171,377.00 | | TMP_367 | N Highland St ROW Shared Use Path between N 10th St - N 9th St | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 600,000.00 | $ 2,568,771,377.00 | | TMP_368 | E L St ROW Shared Use Path between E 39th St - E 40th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 900,000.00 | $ 2,569,671,377.00 | | TMP_369 | E J St ROW Shared Use Path between E 42nd St - E 43rd St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 800,000.00 | $ 2,570,471,377.00 | | TMP_370 | E 68th St ROW Shared Use Path between E 68th St - E 68th St | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 3,969,000.00 | $ 2,574,440,377.00 | | TMP_371 | 29th St NE Connector (TPU) | Shared-Use Path | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 2,448,000.00 | $ 2,576,888,377.00 | | TMP_372 | Shared Use Path between S Thompson Ave - S G St across Lincoln Park | Shared-Use Path | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 2,200,000.00 | $ 2,579,088,377.00 | | TMP_373 | McCarver St Bike Lane between N 30th St - N 29th St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 13,000.00 | $ 2,579,101,377.00 | | TMP_374 | N Union Ave Bike Lane between N 8th St - S 7th St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 31,000.00 | $ 2,579,132,377.00 | | TMP_375 | N 51st St Bike Lane between N Mildred St - N Pearl St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 81,000.00 | $ 2,579,213,377.00 | | TMP_376 | N Mildred St Bike Lane between Five Mile Drive - N 51st St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 57,000.00 | $ 2,579,270,377.00 | | TMP_377 | N Proctor St Bike Lane between N 35th St - N 28th St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 75,000.00 | $ 2,579,345,377.00 | | TMP_378 | Orchard St Bike Lane between N 23rd St - N 7th St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 142,000.00 | $ 2,579,487,377.00 | | TMP_379 | Norpoint Way NE Separated Bike Lane between NE 29th St - Marine View Dr | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ 503,000.00 | $ 2,579,990,377.00 | | TMP_380 | Impact Fee Feasibility Study | An overall study to evaluate the potential for impact fees in the City and their application to funding new projects based on planned development | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25 | $ - | $ 2,579,990,377.00 | | TMP_381 | Enhanced Sounder service - South Tacoma to Downtown Seattle | Speed and reliability improvements, operating on a full-day schedule, and weekend operations | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.25 | $ - | $ 2,579,990,377.00 | | TMP_382 | E 48th St - Pacific to McKinley | Improved roadway to arterial standards | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.19 | $ 4,587,000.00 | $ 2,584,577,377.00 | | TMP_383 | Union Avenue - N 21st St to N 30th St | Improved roadway to arterial standards | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.19 | $ 4,359,000.00 | $ 2,588,936,377.00 | | TMP_384 | N 36th St - Ruston Way to Union Avenue | Missing link sidewalks | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 208,000.00 | $ 2,589,144,377.00 | | TMP_385 | Ruston Way Corridor Improvement Project | A signal integration and coordination project and other ITS applications | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.19 | $ 70,000.00 | $ 2,589,214,377.00 | | TMP_386 | S Cheyenne St ROW Shared Use Path between S 52nd St - S 54th St | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.19 | $ 1,340,000.00 | $ 2,590,554,377.00 | | TMP_387 | S 9th St Shared Use Path across S Cedar St | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 260,000.00 | $ 2,590,814,377.00 | | TMP_388 | 19th St NE Shared Use Path between 68th Ave NE - BPA Trail | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 614,000.00 | $ 2,591,428,377.00 | | TMP_389 | Norpoint Way - Marine View Dr to 29th St NE | Improved roadway to arterial standards | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 5,130,000.00 | $ 2,596,558,377.00 | | TMP_390 | Browns Point Blvd. from 38th Ave. NE to Norpoint Way NE (to the north-west) | Browns Point Blvd. Improvement Phase II - Roadway improvements between 38th Ave. NE and Norpoint way NE to include sidewalks. | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 7,436,000.00 | $ 2,603,994,377.00 | | TMP_391 | N Alder St Bike Lane between N 22nd St - N 21st St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 11,000.00 | $ 2,604,005,377.00 | | Project ID | Name | Short Description | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Overall Score | Total ($) | Cumulative Total ($) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | TMP_392 | N Alder St Bike Lane between N 26th St - N 25th St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 13,000.00 | $ 2,604,018,377.00 | | TMP_393 | S 28th St Bike Lane between S M - S J St | Bike Lane | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 34,000.00 | $ 2,604,052,377.00 | | TMP_394 | N Park Way Bike Lane between N Pearl St - N 51st St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 58,000.00 | $ 2,604,110,377.00 | | TMP_395 | S 23rd St Bike Lane between S Washington St - S Cedar St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 66,000.00 | $ 2,604,176,377.00 | | TMP_396 | McCarver St Separated Bike Lane between N Ruston Way - N 30th St | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 35,000.00 | $ 2,604,211,377.00 | | TMP_397 | N 30th St Separated Bike Lane between McCarver St - Garfield Gulch | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 186,000.00 | $ 2,604,397,377.00 | | TMP_398 | 29th St NE Separated Bike Lane between 53rd Ave E - Tacoma City Limits | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 250,000.00 | $ 2,604,647,377.00 | | TMP_399 | Northshore Pkwy Separated Bike Lane between Browns Point Blvd NE - Hoyt Rd SW | Separated Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 813,000.00 | $ 2,605,460,377.00 | | TMP_400 | E 43rd St - Pacific Ave to E J St Arterial improvements | Repaving and necessary ADA upgrades | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.19 | $ 6,704,000.00 | $ 2,612,164,377.00 | | TMP_401 | N 30th - Proctor to Orchard/Pearl - Arterial improvement | Improved roadway to arterial standards | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 6,621,000.00 | $ 2,618,785,377.00 | | TMP_402 | Norpoint Way and 45th Avenue NE | New signal | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 1,300,000.00 | $ 2,620,085,377.00 | | TMP_403 | Northshore Pkwy New Signal Corridor - 45th Ave NE, Browns Point, and Norpoint | New signal | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 3,900,000.00 | $ 2,623,985,377.00 | | TMP_404 | N Mildred St ROW Shared Use Path between N Westgate Blvd - N 10th St | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 4,240,000.00 | $ 2,628,225,377.00 | | TMP_405 | E L St ROW Shared Use Path between E 51st St - E 52nd St | Shared-Use Path | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 800,000.00 | $ 2,629,025,377.00 | | TMP_406 | Northshore Pkwy - Norpoint to 49th Ave NE | Improved roadway to arterial standards | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 10,913,000.00 | $ 2,639,938,377.00 | | TMP_407 | 45th St NE Bike Lane between Browns Point Boulevard - Nassau Ave NE | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 57,000.00 | $ 2,639,995,377.00 | | TMP_408 | 49th Ave NE Bike Lane between Northshore Pkwy - Norpoint Way NE | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 122,000.00 | $ 2,640,117,377.00 | | TMP_409 | NE Nassau Ave Bike Lane between Northshore Pkwy - Browns Point Blvd NE | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 172,000.00 | $ 2,640,289,377.00 | | TMP_410 | Browns Point Boulevard Bike Lane between 51st St NE - 33rd St NE | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 292,000.00 | $ 2,640,581,377.00 | | TMP_411 | N 37th St - Narrows to Shirley Arterial improvement | Repaving and necessary ADA upgrades | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.13 | $ 1,693,000.00 | $ 2,642,274,377.00 | | TMP_412 | 33rd St NE Bike Lane between Browns Point Blvd - 49th Ave NE | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.06 | $ 134,000.00 | $ 2,642,408,377.00 | | TMP_413 | N 30th St Bike Lane between N White St - N McCarver St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.06 | $ 37,000.00 | $ 2,642,445,377.00 | | TMP_414 | 51st St NE Bike Lane between Harbor View Dr NE - Browns Point Blvd NE | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.06 | $ 51,000.00 | $ 2,642,496,377.00 | | TMP_415 | N 30th St Bike Lane between N Alder St - N White St | Bike Lane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.06 | $ 60,000.00 | $ 2,642,556,377.00 | # APPENDIX E – MODEL DOCUMENTATION # Table of Contents | | Page | | :--- | :--- | | Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 | | Roadway Networks ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 | | Land Use........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 | | Calibration ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 | | Results ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4 | | State Facilities ............................................................................................................................................................... 5 | # Table of Figures | | Page | | :--- | :--- | | Table 1: City of Tacoma Land Use Summary by Subarea......................................................................................... 2 | | Figure 1 City of Tacoma Land Use Zone Boundaries................................................................................................. 3 | | Table 2: PM Peak Hour LOS Results at State Ramp Terminals ................................................................................ 5 | # INTRODUCTION Fehr & Peers used Pierce County’s recently developed activity-based model, PierceCast, for the Tacoma TMP analysis. Complete details on the model development and validation are provided in *Travel Demand and DTA Models Design for Pierce County* (RSG, May 20, 2022). PierceCast is a focused version of PSRC’s regional activity-based model, SoundCast, that has been calibrated and validated to travel behavior throughout Pierce County. The existing year scenario reflects 2018 conditions and the future year scenario estimates 2044 conditions. For the TMP, Fehr & Peers changed the existing year to 2022 conditions, reviewed the roadway network within the City of Tacoma for accuracy, updated the land use based on information provided by the City, and adjusted model parameters to better match 2022 traffic volumes. Results were provided to the project team from the 2022 and 2044 scenarios. # ROADWAY NETWORKS Fehr & Peers reviewed the transportation networks (freeway, arterial, and transit) for consistency with 2022 conditions and 2050 planned projects. The following roadways were updated to reflect current conditions or recently completed projects: * Reduce Yakima Bridge to one lane in each direction * Closed 11th St Bridge between Portland Ave and Milwaukee Way The following improvement projects were coded into the 2050 future year model, per direction from the City of Tacoma: * Narrow Cedar St from S 19th St to Center St from five lanes to three lanes * Reconfigure Puyallup Ave from C St to Portland Ave E from five lanes to three lanes, with an additional eastbound bus-only lane. * Reduce S 11th St and S 12th St from Sprague to Cedar St to one westbound travel lane * Construct new S Burlington Way (formerly North Access Road) from S 35th St to S 48th St with one traffic lane in each direction No changes to the transit networks were made to the 2050 scenario. # LAND USE The City of Tacoma provided updated land use estimates for both the 2022 existing year and 2050 future year using a custom zone system. The parcel land use in PierceCast was updated following these zones boundaries using a tool developed by Fehr & Peers. The zone system includes 383 zones within the City. Table 1 below summarizes the number of households and jobs by subarea. The map on the following page shows the zone boundaries and subareas highlighted. **Table 1 City of Tacoma Land Use Summary by Subarea** | Subarea | 2022 Households | 2022 Employment | 2050 Households | 2050 Employment | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 34th & Pacific | 208 | 1,229 | 1,441 | 2,957 | | 38th & G | 380 | 670 | 2,299 | 809 | | 56th & STW | 151 | 850 | 1,522 | 2,508 | | 6th Ave & Pine St | 810 | 1,140 | 3,003 | 1,278 | | 72nd and Pacific | 483 | 779 | 1,580 | 2,162 | | 72nd and Portland | 165 | 820 | 1,193 | 2,202 | | James Center | 413 | 1,670 | 1,440 | 2,223 | | Lower Portland Avenue | 287 | 710 | 1,521 | 2,782 | | McKinley | 387 | 400 | 1,757 | 538 | | MLK | 1,682 | 10,904 | 5,869 | 24,099 | | Narrows | 278 | 290 | 1,101 | 428 | | North Downtown | 2,924 | 13,648 | 11,085 | 30,165 | | Point Ruston | 547 | 160 | 1,095 | 298 | | Proctor | 296 | 1,120 | 845 | 1,189 | | South Downtown | 2,292 | 12,838 | 8,004 | 28,369 | | South Tacoma MIC | 0 | 7,360 | 0 | 14,729 | | Stadium | 452 | 673 | 1,577 | 1,485 | | Tacoma Central | 365 | 5,231 | 1,393 | 7,993 | | Tacoma Mall | 2,720 | 10,449 | 5,460 | 17,820 | | Tideflats MIC | 0 | 10,339 | 0 | 17,710 | | Westgate | 80 | 1,220 | 1,109 | 2,741 | | Outside Subareas | 81,950 | 30,111 | 98,413 | 40,273 | | **Total** | 96,870 | 112,611 | 151,707 | 204,758 | *Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024.* Outisde the City of Tacoma, the Pierce County land use totals were extrapolated to the year 2050 using the zonal totals for 2018 and 2044. For King, Snohomish, and Kitsap counties, PSRC's 2050 LUV-it land use forecast was used. Figure 1 City of Tacoma Land Use Zone Boundaries <
> *Source: City of Tacoma, 2024.* # CALIBRATION The City of Tacoma provided traffic counts from October 2022 at around two dozen intersections that were used to compare with the model's volume estimates. Fehr & Peers also downloaded volume data from the same time period from WSDOT’s loop database for freeways within the City. The only calibration adjustments that were made were to adjust the volume-delay function parameters to increase congestion on freeways and encourage more traffic to use local arterials, as initial model results showed higher freeway and lower arterial volumes compared to actual counts. After incorporating these changes, the difference between the daily observed counts and the daily model estimates was around 6% low for all freeways and 14% low for all arterials. For the PM peak hour between 4-5pm, these differences improved to 1% high for freeways and the 9% low for arterials. Fehr & Peers was limited in the amount of time available for model calibration and further effort would be required to improve the overall results. For the purposes of the TMP and providing citywide growth trends, the model was considered appropriate. # RESULTS The updated PierceCast model was used to provide the following information to the project team: * Aggregated person trip flows by time of day and travel mode for districts within and outside of the City for 2022 and 2050. * Daily and hourly passenger car and truck volumes for all roadways within the City and in the model. In addition, the volumes from the model were used to forecast 2050 turning movement volumes at 10 freeway off-ramp locations for state facility intersection analysis. # STATE FACILITIES State facilities within Tacoma were analyzed in two ways: * Existing and future volume to capacity ratios from the model were provided to the project team. * Ten high volume freeway ramp terminal intersections were analyzed. Using the forecasted 2050 turning movement volumes noted above plus 2024 PM peak hour counts at the 10 selected intersections, Fehr & Peers completed a Synchro traffic operations intersection level of service (LOS) evaluation. All signals have been optimized for cycle lengths and splits prior to the calculation of future conditions due to the assumption that signals will be optimized within the given time frame. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 2 and all intersections are forecasted to operate at or better than LOS standard in 2050. Table 2 PM Peak Hour LOS Results at State Ramp Terminals | # | Intersection Name | Control | HCM Version | LOS Stand ard | Existing (2024) PM (LOS/Delay) | Future (2050) PM (LOS/Delay) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 1 | I-5 SB Ramp & S 38th St | Signal | 2000 | D | A/9 | B/10 | | 2 | I-5 NB Ramp & S 72nd St | Signal | 6th | D | B/11 | B/15 | | 3 | Tacoma Mall Blvd & I-5 SB Ramp | Signal | 6th | D | B/14 | C/21 | | 4 | Portland Ave E & E 28th St | Signal | 6th | D | C/29 | C/31 | | 5 | S Union Ave & SR 16 WB Ramp | Signal | 6th | D | C/22 | D/55 | | 6 | S Mullen St & Center St | Signal | 6th | D | C/30 | D/53 | | 7 | Portland Ave E & E 27th St | Signal | 6th | D | B/15 | C/20 | | 8 | S Union Ave & SR 16 EB Ramp | Signal | 6th | D | B/17 | C/25 | | 9 | Bantz Blvd & 6th Ave | Signal | 6th | D | B/12 | B/17 | | 10 | N Jackson Ave & SR 16 EB Ramp | Signal | 6th | D | D/38 | C/32 | *Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024.* --- ## Housing — One Tacoma Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 5: Housing (adopted June 24, 2025) - Source: https://cms.tacoma.gov/Planning/Comprehensive%20Plan/Tacoma%20Comp%20Plan%2005_H.pdf - Pages: 99 - Covers: housing - **Transcription findings were recorded for this document;** check figures against the source. # 05 Housing HOUSING GOALS * GOAL H–1 In Tacoma, housing is available and accommodates a full spectrum of needs, preferences, life stages, and financial capabilities. City policies, programs, and incentives encourage the production of housing types and affordability levels that are not being produced in the private market. * GOAL H–2 Access to housing is made fairer and more equitable, with a special effort to remove disparities in housing access for Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, low-income households, older adults, and households that include people with disabilities. * Goal H–3 Anti-displacement policies are coordinated to reduce the risk of displacement for at-risk households and mitigate impacts for households that face displacement. * GOAL H–4 Across Tacoma, safe and healthy housing provides access to jobs, goods, and services that meet daily needs within a 15-minute walk. This housing is connected to the rest of the city and region by safe, convenient, affordable multi-modal transportation. * GOAL H–5 All Tacomans can find suitable housing that does not incur cost burden. * GOAL H–6 New housing units are low emission, energy efficient, built to high-performance standards, and well-integrated with their surroundings. # Housing ## 5.1 Introductory Context ### WHAT IS THIS CHAPTER ABOUT? The goals and policies in this chapter convey the City’s intent to: * Implement Tacoma’s vision of neighborhoods that are inclusive, welcoming to a diverse community, resilient, thriving, distinctive, and walkable, and that include a range of housing choices and costs. * Ensure fair and equitable access to a range of housing types for a socially and economically diverse population. * Support healthy, resource-efficient, and physically accessible housing. * Concentrate the highest densities of housing in centers and along high-capacity transit corridors, where access to transportation and services can reduce the cost of living and improve quality of life. * Increase the amount of affordable housing, especially for lower-income families and households with special needs. Promote a supply of permanently affordable housing for Tacoma’s most vulnerable residents. * Expand the number and location of housing opportunities, both market rate and subsidized, for households of all sizes throughout the city. * Take proactive steps to address the impacts of systemic racism in housing and dismantle continuing racism where it exists. The Future Land Use Map (See Exhibit 17 in Growth Strategy) allows for a more-than-adequate housing supply to meet future needs. Tacoma’s current challenge is to provide housing with a diverse range of unit types and prices in locations that help meet the needs of all, including low-income populations, communities of color, and people of all ages and abilities. To meet that challenge, Tacoma continues its transformation toward a refreshed vision for housing growth that promotes production of different housing types and sizes, clustered in locations that connect households to daily essentials and amenities. ### WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? While a place to live is a basic human need, not all Tacomans have safe and healthy housing. Economic, social, and physical barriers limit many Tacomans’ access to adequate housing. Income, physical disabilities, immigration status, limited English proficiency, and discrimination based on race, sexual orientation, and other factors can also limit choices. *** **Book I: Core Policy Elements** 1 | Introduction and Vision 2 | Growth Strategy 3 | Complete Neighborhoods 4 | Environment and Watershed Health 5 | Housing 6 | Transportation 7 | Economic Development 8 | Parks and Recreation 9 | Public Facilities and Services 10 | Historic Preservation 11 | Engagement and Administration **Contents** 5.1 | Introductory Context 5.2 | Goals and Policies 5.3 | Priority Actions ONE TACOMA Chapter 05: Housing The City plays a crucial role in ensuring a fair and equitable housing market by setting policies that affect the overall supply of housing, the types of housing that get built, and where housing is built. These decisions and the resulting housing landscape create the opportunities and security all people need to live healthy and successful lives. ### WHAT WE HEARD Since the last update to the Comprehensive Plan, housing has been a significant topic of engagement efforts, due to the Affordable Housing Action Strategy, which encompasses Home in Tacoma and Rental Housing Code changes. These efforts asked community members across districts to voice their concerns and opinions on the state of housing affordability and housing supply in Tacoma. In the City’s 2024 Community Survey, when asked what their greatest concern was for their neighborhood, residents’ first response was homelessness, followed by affordable housing. Participants in the Home in Tacoma Survey describe the future of housing as neighborhoods with mature trees and green spaces, affordable housing at a range of income levels, a mix of historic and new buildings, infrastructure and services that keep pace with growth, and transportation choices that include walking, rolling, biking, and transit. Other popular policy levers that community members want are encouraging infill, detached-accessory dwelling units (DADUs), and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Overall, Tacomans sense a great deal of urgency and concern about housing affordability and homelessness in the city. However, broad engagement suggests an appetite for only very modest increases in density and the pace of development. Parking and traffic, preserving neighborhood character, views, open space, and associated infrastructure and services were some of the most common concerns. ### HOW DOES THIS CHAPTER ADDRESS KEY THEMES? Access to quality housing is a foundational human need. With safe and secure housing established, Tacoma residents can access further opportunities, including education and economic opportunities. People with stable housing are more able to contribute to the city’s vibrant cultural life, engage civically, and be well. On the other hand, housing instability or inadequate housing puts incredible stress on human capacity and collectively limits our potential as a city. (**Equity and Opportunity**) In its most basic role as shelter from the elements, housing provides protection from injury and disease. As a core social determinant of health, the quality, affordability, and adequacy of housing supply affect whether people live in crowded conditions or are exposed to environmental hazards, such as poor indoor air quality and allergens. Housing quality and access are not only tied to physical health, but also to mental health outcomes. Being housed oneself and living in a community where one’s neighbors are securely housed contributes a great deal to psychological safety. People living in objectively higher-quality housing have a greater sense of safety in their neighborhoods. When people do not have housing, however, the damaging impact on both their psychological and physical safety drastically spikes, as community members who are unhoused are seven to ten times more likely to be the victims of violence than the general population (Meinbresse et al., 2014). (**Public Health and Community Safety**) <
> EQUITY <
> OPPORTUNITY <
> PUBLIC HEALTH <
> SAFETY <
> SUSTAINABILITY Policy decisions about housing development can have systemic impacts on climate and sustainability goals within a city. When housing, transportation, and economic development decisions are strategically aligned, greater transportation mode shifts to walking, biking, and transit occur, reducing congestion and GHG emissions on a large scale. Building codes also affect residential building design choices related to energy efficiency, sustainable material use, air pollution, and water management systems that have environmental impacts at scale. (Sustainability) ## WHAT ARE SOME BASELINE CONDITIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES? Tacoma’s housing production has not kept pace with growth targets. From 2017 to 2023, the city’s housing stock has grown at an average annual rate of 0.8% (Exhibit 37). To achieve the 2050 housing target, average annual growth needs to be double this, at 1.6%. Compared with Pierce County overall, Tacoma’s housing production has proportionally slowed since the 1980s, reflecting a countywide trend of population growth in areas outside this regional metropolitan hub. **Exhibit 37. Tacoma Housing Units, Actual and Target 2015–2050** <
> *Sources: OFM Housing Units, 2015-2023; PSRC Housing Target for 2017-2050; Seva Workshop, 2024.* New housing development in Tacoma aligns with the City's goal of co-locating growth and development in nodes with the highest access to transit and opportunity. The map in Exhibit 38 visualizes housing production in Tacoma since 2017 by location and unit count. While Tacoma’s existing housing stock predominantly consists of single family homes (67%), recent production trends favor multidwelling housing, which comprises 80% of all units developed from 2017-2023. Newer housing production has been highest Downtown, where 40% of these new units are located. Another 30% of new housing units are located within the city's MUCs. Exhibit 38. Tacoma Residential Building Permits by Unit Count, 2017–2023 <
> Tacoma’s recent housing production reflects the City’s growth strategy of promoting density, particularly in areas that are high-opportunity and transit-oriented. Since 2017, 80% of new housing units are in multidwelling developments, 40% are located Downtown, and 30% are located within the city’s other MUCs. Sources: City of Tacoma, 2023; Seva Workshop, 2024 ONE TACOMA Chapter 05: Housing In Tacoma, half of households own their homes while half of households rent.[^p6-2] However, affordability trends demonstrate that homeownership is becoming increasingly out of reach for moderate-income households as home prices have risen at more than double the rate of incomes from 2015-2023. First-time homebuyers are particularly hard-hit by the combined factors of increasing housing costs and mortgage lending rate spikes (Exhibit 39). Homeownership remains a path to building generational wealth for a family, and these higher costs raise the barrier to entry for many Tacoma households. Exhibit 39. Housing Cost and Income Increases as a % Change from 2015 in Tacoma, Average Annual Mortgage Lending Rates 2015-2023 <
> Sources: Zillow Home Value Index and Observed Rent Index, Downloaded April 2024; WSHFC Area Median Income, 2015-2023; St Louis FED Mortgage Interest Rates, 2023; Seva Workshop, 2024 [^p6-2]: ACS 5-year estimates, 2021. Racial disparity in homeownership is stark in Tacoma, steeped in a long history of racial exclusion and discrimination. These gaps persist among demographics for first-time homebuyers, indicating that the trend may worsen rather than improve in coming years.[^p7-3] The lowest homeownership rates today are observed among Black (32%), Pacific Islander (32%), Hispanic (43%), and households that identify as "Other race" (37%). (Exhibit 40). A detailed exploration of barriers to homeownership related to racial equity in Tacoma can be found in Chapter 6 of the attached baseline conditions report. Exhibit 40. Tacoma Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicity (% Share Owner and Renter Households), 2021 <
> Note: AIAN=American Indian and Alaska Native; NHOPI=Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Hispanic or Latine is an ethnicity. The Hispanic or Latino category includes Hispanic and Latine people of all races. All other categories show non-Hispanic races. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates; Seva Workshop, 2024 [^p7-3]: Federal Housing Finance Agency, Public Use Database (PUDB) - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, 2022 ONE TACOMA Chapter 05: Housing Alongside the region, Tacoma is experiencing severe housing affordability challenges – 37% of households are cost-burdened from housing. Rates worsen for lower income brackets (Exhibit 41). Households that pay 30% or more of their income toward housing are considered cost-burdened. These households may struggle to cover other essential household expenses, such as transportation or healthcare. Households that pay 50% or more of their income towards housing are considered severely cost-burdened. In Tacoma, geographic trends for cost burden are observed, with concentrations in Central, South Tacoma, and South End neighborhoods. The map in Exhibit 42 explores the geographic distribution of rental housing cost burden. Exhibit 41. Percent of Households Cost Burdened by Income Level in Tacoma, 2020 <
> Note: Cost-burdened households spend between 30-50% of income toward housing. Severely cost-burdened households spend more than 50% of gross income for housing. Sources: CHAS dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020; Seva Workshop, 2024 ONE TACOMA Chapter 05: Housing **Exhibit 42. Distribution of Renter Cost Burdened-Households in Tacoma, as a % of Block Group Population, 2020** <
> *Sources: CHAS dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020; Seva Workshop, 2024* ONE TACOMA TACOMA 2050 5-328 Renters experiencing housing cost burden are at higher risk of displacement when rents increase. In 2024, the City of Tacoma adopted an Anti-Displacement Strategy that outlines policies and programs that address housing stability for vulnerable residents. These strategies address three types of displacement: physical displacement, occurring when building conditions change like in case of natural disaster, condemnation, or eminent domain; economic displacement, when housing cost increases are dramatic enough that a resident must move or is evicted; and cultural displacement, when a household moves because the businesses/services/community that cultivate a sense of belonging for them are no longer present. As part of the Anti-Displacement Strategy, Tacoma studied displacement risk mapping exercised completed by the Department of Commerce, the Puget Sound Regional Council, UC Berkeley Urban Displacement Project, Evictions Study Map, and the City’s own Equity Index[^p10-4]. Under these displacement definitions and considering the findings of these five studies, the strategy identifies particular displacement risk: * Geographically, in the Hilltop neighborhood and in parts of South and East Tacoma * Racially, as people of color are shown to be at higher displacement risk than White residents Additional summary and study of displacement trends and policy response to these trends can be found in the attached baseline conditions report, starting on page 5-189. Market interventions will be essential to support housing units for lower income brackets. In visioning a future without housing cost burden or homelessness in Tacoma, 30% of all new units should be affordable to extremely low-income households, 34% for low- and very low-income households, and the remainder for moderate- and higher-income households. The distribution is based on Pierce County allocations and considers current housing needs to eliminate cost burden and homelessness, as well as the needs of future households. The production of income-restricted affordable housing is the most reliable way to meet the needs of households in the lowest income brackets, which are typically not well served by market-rate housing production. As shown in Exhibit 43, this unit mix is a dramatic departure from the affordability levels found within Tacoma’s existing housing stock, where only 45% of housing units are affordable to those with incomes at or below 30% AMI, and only 11% of units are affordable for very low-income households. In addition to the need shown in this table, 2,670 additional emergency housing beds are needed in the 2020-2044 timeframe. Exhibit 43. Housing Units Needed by Income Bracket in Tacoma, 2020-2044, Compared with Existing Housing Unit Mix by Income Bracket, 2020 <
> [^p10-4]: Department of Commerce Displacement Risk Map, Draft, 2024, PSRC Displacement Risk Map, 2019, https://www.urbandisplacement.org/, https://evictionlab.org/, and Tacoma Equity Index, 2022 Housing need of 42,865 units, 2020-2044 | | | |---|---| | Households >120% AMI | 24% 10,455 | | Households >100% AMI to 120% AMI | 6%, 2,452 | | Households >80% AMI to 100% AMI | 6%, 2,705 | | Households >50% AMI to 80% AM | 15% 6,283 | | Households >30% AMI to 50% AMI | 19% 7,949 | | Households >=30% AMI | 17% 7,483 | | PSH | 0.3% | | Non-PSH | 13%, 5,538 | Existing mix of housing units by income bracket, 2020 | | | |---|---| | Households >120% AMI | 16% | | Households >100% AMI to 120% AMI | 11% | | Households >80% AMI to 100% AMI | 19% | | Households >50% AMI to 80% AM | 40% | | Households >30% AMI to 50% AMI | | | Households >=30% AMI | 11% | | PSH | 5% | | Non-PSH | | <
> Sources: Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies 2023-22 Appendix A; Seva Workshop, 2024 ### What does “low income” mean? Area Median Income (AMI) is calculated at a number of geography scales, depending on the intent and use of the data. The below scale shows 2024 AMI levels and affordable rent calculations for a household of three, as defined by the Washington State Housing Finance Commission for Pierce County. Anyone who meets the income threshold but pays more than the shown amount for housing is considered housing cost burdened. <
> Overall housing production increase is a key strategy to addressing affordability in Tacoma. A healthy supply of new housing, even when it’s market rate and serving moderate or higher income brackets, allows for a natural “filtering” process to evolve, where units currently occupied by high-income households are sold to more moderate-income households, freeing up the moderate-income units for low-income households. Without adequate production, the housing supply is squeezed, and high-income households drive up the cost of all housing by occupying units that might otherwise be home to moderate-income households, market rate production does not directly address the needs of households in the lowest income groups, but does help maintain better alignment for the other segments of the housing market. This frees up more resources to be spent on those with the greatest need. The market rate housing market will never fully address the needs of very-low and extremely low-income households. Tacoma has demonstrated a need for more units that serve these income brackets without incurring cost burden and for permanent supportive housing units. These housing types require public subsidies and funding support. Tacoma, in 2019, established its Affordable Housing Fund (authorized by SHB 1406), which allocates a portion of sales tax that would otherwise go to the State back to the City, for use supporting affordable housing work. In 2023, Pierce County initiated a sales tax increase to raise additional funds to be spent on addressing the housing needs of those at or below 60% AMI in the county⁵. Still, a wide gap remains in acquiring funds needed to fully meet the need in the city and region. A full analysis of Tacoma’s housing market baseline can be found in the technical report for this element. [^p12-5]: Ordinance 2022-81 ## 5.2 Goals and Policies **GOAL H-1: In Tacoma, housing is available and accommodates a full spectrum of needs, preferences, life stages, and financial capabilities. City policies, programs, and incentives encourage the production of housing types and affordability levels that are not being produced in the private market.** **Policy H-1.1:** Maintain sufficient residential development capacity to accommodate Tacoma’s housing targets. Update infrastructure and services as needed to support urban growth. **Policy H-1.2:** Encourage new and innovative housing types that meet the evolving needs of Tacoma households and expand housing choices in all neighborhoods. These housing types include multi-dwelling units, and from duplexes to high-rise developments, small units, accessory dwelling units, prefabricated homes, such as manufactured and modular, co-housing, and clustered housing. **Policy H-1.3:** Support the maintenance and improvement of the existing housing stock, and encourage the adaptation of the existing housing stock to accommodate a variety of needs. **Policy H-1.4:** Monitor housing trends including production, unit type, affordability levels, and geographic distribution. Adopt zoning changes as needed that align with the goals of this element. **Policy H-1.5:** Encourage a robust and diverse supply of affordable, accessible housing to meet the needs of special populations, including emergency housing, emergency shelters, transitional housing, and permanent supportive housing for individuals and families experiencing homelessness, especially in centers and other places in close proximity to services and transit. **Policy H-1.6:** Reduce housing instability and homelessness within Tacoma by advancing Housing First programs and implementing the City’s Homelessness Strategy. **Policy H-1.7:** Implement equitable land use incentives, such as density or development bonuses, lot size reductions, TDR, height or bulk bonuses, fee waivers, accelerated permitting, parking requirement reductions, tax incentives, and “surplus land sales,” to remove housing development barriers for income-restricted affordable housing and other housing types serving cost-burdened communities. **Policy H-1.8:** Review and update affordable housing incentives and requirements, such as those listed in H-1.7, to improve their efficacy and impact. **Policy H-1.9:** Create a process to coordinate public investments, such as capital improvements, with affordable housing activities to leverage the most benefit from public investment. **Policy H-1.10:** Track housing production trends to assess progress toward goals related to updated design standards and zoning changes, particularly for infill and middle-density housing types. **Policy H-1.11:** Review and update City permitting and processes, as well as available education and technical support, to streamline the homebuilding process for developers and the public. Policy H-1.12: Support the exploration and potential development of a community-led social housing developer to help address identified gaps in housing production by income level and support a range of affordability options to meet growth targets. This entity should prioritize the creation of permanently affordable housing for households earning less than 80% of the AMI, with a particular focus on serving marginalized communities. To ensure long-term viability, the entity should pursue financial sustainability through a mix of unit types and price points in projects, including some market-rate units. The City encourages such developments to incorporate high levels of energy efficiency and performance standards. When public revenues are utilized, the City should prioritize maintaining public ownership of these developments. City staff and decision makers should seek, when able, to exchange knowledge with successful social housing initiatives through presentations, expert consultation, and/or site visits to better understand best practices. GOAL H-2: Access to housing is made fairer and more equitable, with a special effort to remove disparities in housing access for Black, Indigenous, and People of Color households, low-income households, older adults, and households that include people with disabilities. Policy H-2.1: Implement barrier-free access to housing consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Increase access by actions such as implementing visitability and universal design features, considering details in individual units, on-site plans, and more broadly at the neighborhood scale. Policy H-2.2: Sustain and increase, when possible, funding for eviction, relocation, and foreclosure prevention programs. Policy H-2.3: Continually evaluate plans, investments, and other legislative land use decisions to identify potential disparate impacts on housing choice and access for protected classes. Policy H-2.4: Evaluate plans and capital investments for potential unintended consequences, such as displacement in areas with concentrations of communities of color, low- and moderate-income households, and renters. Policy H-2.5: Ensure a range of housing options and supportive environments to enable older adults to remain in their communities as their needs change. Policy H-2.6: Expand tenant protections by providing resources for households experiencing a crisis, increasing community organizing capacity, and supporting existing code that requires residential landlords to provide sufficient notice of rent increases, informs tenants of their rights under the law, and provides relocation assistance if rent increases exceed a defined limit. Policy H-2.7: Promote equitable access to opportunity for persons with disabilities by prioritizing supplemental housing assistance for accessible units in centers and complete neighborhoods with frequent transit. # HOW DOES THIS PLAN SUPPORT HOMEOWNERSHIP AND HOUSING AFFORDABILITY? <
> THE AVERAGE TOWNHOME SELLS FOR 31% LESS THAN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, AND A CONDO FOR 18% LESS ANALYSIS OF AFFORDABILITY TRENDS SHOW THAT HOMEOWNERSHIP TODAY IS MORE OUT OF REACH FOR MODERATE-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IN TACOMA THAN IT WAS FIVE YEARS AGO, AND THAT RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HOMEOWNERSHIP RATES PERSIST AND ARE WORSENING FOR SOME GROUPS. <
> RECENT ZONING REFORM IN TACOMA DRAMATICALLY INCREASES THE CITY'S CAPACITY FOR NEW HOUSING. THIS CAN RELIEVE PRESSURE ON SUPPLY AND RESTORE BALANCE IN THE HOUSING MARKET, ENSURING THAT TACOMA CAN REMAIN A COMMUNITY THAT IS HOME FOR ESSENTIAL WORKERS, HOUSEHOLDS WITH MODERATE INCOMES, BIPOC FAMILIES, AND FAMILIES OF ALL SIZES. <
> THE 15-MINUTE CITY VISION IN TACOMA SIGNIFICANTLY EXPANDS THE FOOTPRINT OF LAND AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT AS MIDDLE HOUSING TYPES, SUCH AS TOWNHOMES, THAT CAN BE MORE ACCESSIBLE FOR FIRST-TIME HOME BUYERS. <
> <
> THIS PLAN CONSIDERS FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS NOT AS A MONOLITH, BUT ACROSS THE INCOME SPECTRUM. THAT MEANS ACKNOWLEDGING THE DRAMATIC NEED FOR MORE PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, EMERGENCY SHELTERS, AND SUBSIDIZED HOUSING IN THE COMMUNITY, ENVISIONING A FUTURE WITHOUT CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS OR HOUSING COST BURDEN. HOMEOWNERSHIP RATES BY RACE / ETHNICITY <
> **GOAL H-3:** Anti-displacement policies are coordinated to reduce the risk of displacement for at-risk households and mitigate impacts for households that face displacement. **Policy H-3.1:** Use a full spectrum of housing tools to address anti-displacement needs, such as funding for affordable housing. **Policy H-3.2:** Implement inclusionary zoning in submarkets with supportive market conditions tailored to specific affordability needs and economic context. Recalibrate terms of the program on a rolling basis in response to changes in the housing market. **Policy H-3.3:** Require that developers benefiting from land use changes, property tax exemptions, fee waivers, expedited processing, and City funding use affirmative marketing in advertising unit availability. **Policy H-3.4:** Implement a resident prioritization policy that applies to both residents and neighborhoods with high displacement risk. **Policy H-3.5:** Promote ownership opportunities to qualified first-time homebuyers as a pathway for wealth-building. **Policy H-3.6:** Promote multidwelling housing units with two or more bedrooms, particularly in areas where they are in short supply. **Policy H-3.7:** Working with local architects and lenders, create a set of affordable ADU designs and a financing package to facilitate the construction of, or subdivision to, ADUs by moderate- and low-income households. **Policy H-3.8:** Require the redevelopment of large parcels with City investment to include deeply affordable rental and/or ownership products. **Policy H-3.9:** Support businesses at risk of displacement by providing City subsidies for leases, implementing first rights of refusal for City-subsidized commercial in redeveloped sites, and/or offering relocation assistance. **Policy H-3.10:** Continue to identify and address racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in Tacoma's community. **Policy H-3.11:** Engage with BIPOC community members, and others who have been historically underrepresented, in policymaking. Provide stronger community-based roles for policy design and implementation of anti-displacement policies. **GOAL H-4:** Across Tacoma, safe and healthy housing provides access to jobs, goods, and services that meet daily needs within a 15-minute walk. This housing is connected to the rest of the city and region by safe, convenient, affordable multi-modal transportation. **Policy H-4.1:** Meet the housing needs of underserved and underrepresented populations living in areas with higher poverty rates, such as South Tacoma, Eastside, and South End, by coordinating plans and investments with housing programs, mobility improvements, and anti-displacement measures. Ensure that community engagement is integral to planning decisions to align investments with local interests and needs. **Policy H-4.2:** Promote housing that is protected from noise and hazardous environmental conditions and materials, and improve conditions for existing housing in locations exposed to hazards. *** **Visitability** captures the features that make a dwelling unit accessible to someone who has trouble with steps or who uses a wheelchair. These features include zero-step entrances, wider clearances at doorways, and a wheelchair accessible restroom on the main level. **Universal design** is a broader concept that can apply to a full building, site design, or neighborhood layout. The goal is to create spaces that are inherently usable by as many people as possible without needing special adaptation. A universal design framework will consider a full range of mobility conditions, sensory differences, and cognitive impediments. Policy H-4.3: Promote higher density, multidwelling development at designated centers and along high-frequency transit corridors, as shown in Exhibit 22 and 24 included in the Growth Strategy element. Policy H-4.4: Preserve affordable homeownership and housing stability for low-income renters in high-opportunity areas through actions such as home improvement loans, downpayment assistance, subsidized utility rates, and actions. Policy H-4.5: Provide incentives to promote the development of affordable, mixed-income housing citywide, with special focus toward areas identified on the Frequent Transit Network Vision Map in Exhibit 24. Discourage the over-concentration of facilities for “high-risk” populations in any one geographic area. **GOAL H-5:** All Tacomans can find suitable housing that does not incur cost burden. Policy H-5.1: Preserve and produce income-restricted affordable housing to address gaps in the housing supply not met by the private market, especially below 60% AMI. Coordinate with housing providers and service organizations to address community needs and disrupt patterns of displacement and cycles of homelessness. Policy H-5.2: To eliminate housing cost burden and homelessness, 70% of units added in 2020-2044 in Tacoma should be affordable to households at or below 100% of Pierce County AMI, as summarized by Washington State Finance Housing Commission (Exhibit 40). Meet this through increased resources for affordable housing development, zoning, and land use incentives. Policy H-5.3: Evaluate plans and investments across City departments for their impact on housing cost; implement anti-displacement measures for cost-burdened communities when investments indicate displacement risk; and consider ways to reduce the combined cost of housing, utilities, and/or transportation for impacted residents. Policy H-5.4: Encourage income diversity across the city by allowing a mix of housing types and tenures in all neighborhoods. Policy H-5.5: Support regional cooperation, often facilitated through South Sound Housing Affordability Partners, in addressing housing needs in the Tacoma metropolitan area and the greater the Puget Sound, especially for emergency and permanent supportive housing, low- and moderate-income households, and historically underserved and underrepresented communities. Policy H-5.6: Ensure that a continuum of safe and affordable housing opportunities, related supportive services, and trauma-informed care are allowed and appropriately resourced. Eliminate racial disparities among those experiencing homelessness and connect individuals with holistic care teams. Support efforts for humane and robust homelessness crisis response. Policy H-5.7: Increase homeownership rates and expand locational choice for BIPOC households and other groups who have been historically underserved and underrepresented as homeowners in high opportunity areas. Policy H-5.8: Facilitate a variety of ownership opportunities and choices by allowing and supporting the creation of condominiums, cooperatives, mutual housing associations, limited equity cooperatives, community land trusts, and sweat equity. Policy H-5.9: Create a local source of revenue and pursue a variety of other funding sources to preserve and develop housing units and various assistance programs for households whose needs are not met by the private market. **Policy H–5.10:** Prioritize entitlement and permit applications for projects that offer at least 20% of their units at levels serving 70% AMI or below by moving applications to the front of the queue and dedicating staff with affordable housing development and/or financing expertise to expedite the review period. **Policy H–5.11:** Establish new code to create a program to offer surplus property to affordable housing development partners (i.e. housing authorities, non-profit developers, and Indigenous housing partners) for the development of affordable housing serving households at 70% AMI or below. Adopt rules and guidelines to support the selection of these partners based on criteria (e.g. levels of affordability served, at-risk populations served, design standards, and incorporating transit-oriented development standards into the affordable housing project). **GOAL H–6:** New housing units are low emission, energy efficient, built to high-performance standards, and well-integrated with their surroundings. **Policy H–6.1:** Update building standards to support housing that provides features supportive of healthy and active living, such as high indoor air quality, useable open areas, connection to recreation areas, community gardens, and crime-preventative design. **Policy H–6.2:** Promote low emissions, energy efficiency, green building practices, materials, and design to produce healthy, efficient, durable, and adaptable homes. **Policy H–6.3:** Encourage the adaptive reuse of resource-rich existing older commercial buildings in or near designated centers into mixed-use housing developments to prevent carbon emissions from demolition and construction of new buildings. **Policy H–6.4:** Connect residential areas with pathways, sidewalks, and high-quality onsite amenities, such as secure bicycle parking and electric vehicle charging. **Policy H–6.5:** Require site designs and relationships to adjacent developments that reduce or prevent social isolation, especially for groups that often experience it, including older adults, people with disabilities, communities of color, and immigrant communities. **Policy H–6.6:** Support a strong housing code enforcement program to reduce substandard housing through repair and rehabilitation, such as an active rental inspection program. **Policy H–6.7:** Promote the maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse of the city’s existing housing stock. Pursue financial incentives and funding for housing improvement programs, subdivision, and adaptive reuse, especially for low-income households. Integrate regulatory tools that incentivize reuse and conversion of existing viable structures into housing to meet community needs. **Policy H–6.8:** Promote innovative development techniques to better utilize land, promote design flexibility, preserve open space and natural features, and conserve energy resources. In 2024, the City of Tacoma adopted an Anti-Displacement Strategy that outlines policies and programs that address housing stability for vulnerable residents. These strategies address three types of displacement: **physical displacement**, occurring when building conditions change like in case of natural disaster, condemnation, or eminent domain; **economic displacement**, when housing cost increases are dramatic enough that a resident must move or is evicted; and **cultural displacement**, when a household moves because the businesses/services/community that cultivate a sense of belonging for them are no longer present. # 5.3 Priority Actions | ACTION | LEAD | | :--- | :--- | | Evaluate the City's bonus programs, prioritize incentives, consider inclusionary zoning when feasible in submarkets, and set goals for new housing development. Draft plan for achieving goals in alignment with current staff workload and provide annual progress update to City Council. | PDS | | Review and continue to update set of pre-approved ADU designs and other planning designs and house subdivision guidance. As part of this program, review success after a 2 or 3-year horizon and add more models, if feasible. | PDS | | Create guidance for affirmative marketing. | OOS | | Update the Downtown Subarea Plans to incorporate a minimum 10% affordable housing set aside and consider projected demand for transitioning commercial space to housing. Ensure all future TOD related subarea plans incorporate inclusionary zoning mechanisms. Consider state and federal funding and zoning support for transitioning commercial space to housing. | PDS | | Consider expansion of Reduced Parking Areas to reduce housing costs, especially in coordination with future subarea plans and in conjunction with the expansion of high frequency transit. | TT | | Update commercial zoning districts to improve the feasibility of multifamily and mixed-use development. Implement middle housing standards and housing types within the City's high density zoning districts. | PDS | | Explore the benefits and impacts of dedicating revenue from expiring affordable housing incentives to support the long-term sustainability of the Housing Trust Fund. | PDS | | Provide updates in alignment with data availability to City Council on how many new housing units have been built and how many permits for new housing units are under review. Coordinate housing data and reporting between permitting, economic development, and strategic planning staff. | PDS | | Pursue additional local sources of revenue to preserve and develop affordable housing units. | PDS | | Build staff capacity and determine an appropriate funding source to create a feasibility study on the establishment of a social housing program, and other innovative housing programs that may arise, in collaboration with regional stakeholders, particularly at the County level. The feasibility study will inform next steps, provide best practices for implementation and give a robust understanding of the program costs. | PDS | | Provide City Council with options for funding to expand land banking opportunities. As part of future subarea planning, identify potential opportunities for land banking. | PDS | | Provide educational opportunities and incentives for Tacoma residents and developers to encourage home ownership and middle housing and expand community awareness of these opportunities. | PDS | | Provide educational opportunities and incentives for Tacoma residents and developers to encourage home ownership and middle housing and expand community awareness of these opportunities. | PDS | # Technical Report City of Tacoma, Washington # ONE TACOMA A Comprehensive Plan for a Vibrant, Connected, and Sustainable City Housing Baseline Report | June 2025 # CONTENTS **1 Inventory 4** 1.1 Housing Stock 4 Units for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households 12 1.2 Affordability 15 Ownership Housing 15 Rental Housing 16 Household Incomes 17 Affordability 20 Cost Burden 21 **2 Projected Housing Need 25** 2.1 Growth targets 25 Distribution of targets across income brackets 25 **3 Land Capacity 27** 3.1 Existing land capacity for housing 27 Zoning 29 Capacity Analysis 37 3.2 Home in Tacoma 45 **4 Programs and Policies 47** 4.1 Identifying barriers to affordability and availability of housing 47 4.2 Addressing barriers, gaps, and needs 49 **5 Access to employment 52** **6 Racial equity in housing policy 55** 6.1 Racially disparate impacts 55 6.2 Displacement 58 6.3 Exclusion 61 6.4 Policy Audit 64 # EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Tacoma Housing Units, 2017-2023 4 Exhibit 2: Tacoma Housing Units by Type, 2021. 5 Exhibit 3: Housing Production in Tacoma by Type, 2017-2023. 6 Exhibit 4: Multifamily Units by Size of Building, New Production in Tacoma 2017-2023. 6 Exhibit 5: Map of Tacoma Residential Permits, 2017-2023. 7 Exhibit 6: Accessory Dwelling Units Permitted and Constructed in Tacoma, 2019-2023. 8 Exhibit 7: Tacoma Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicity (Shown as %), 2021. 9 Exhibit 8: Tacoma Population Density, 2021. 10 Exhibit 9: Tacoma and Pierce County Housing Stock by Building Age, 2021. 11 Exhibit 10: Households by Income Bracket, Tacoma, 2020. 13 Exhibit 11: Matching Housing Types with Income Brackets 13 Exhibit 12: Homelessness Counts in Pierce County, 2017-2022. 14 Exhibit 13: Tacoma Average Home Prices, Annual Change (%), 2015-2023. 16 Exhibit 14: Average Rents in Tacoma, 2015-2023. 17 Exhibit 15: Median Household Income by Race & Ethnicity, 2021. 18 Exhibit 16: Median Household Income by Census Tract in Tacoma, 2021 19 Exhibit 17: Housing Cost and Income Increases as a % Change from 2015 in Tacoma, Average Annual Mortgage Lending Rates 2015-2023. 20 Exhibit 18: First-time Homebuyers in Tacoma by Race & Ethnicity, 2022. 21 Exhibit 19: Percent of Households Cost Burdened by Tenure, 2020. 22 Exhibit 20: Renter Households Cost Burdened in Tacoma (%), by Race & Ethnicity, 2020. 22 Exhibit 21: Distribution of Renter Cost Burdened-Households in Tacoma, as a % of Block Group Population, 2020 23 Exhibit 22: Renter Cost Burden by Race/Ethnicity and Neighborhood in Tacoma, 2020. 24 Exhibit 23: Tacoma Housing Units, Actual and Target 2015-2050. 25 Exhibit 24: Housing Units Needed by Income Bracket in Tacoma, 2020-2044. 26 Exhibit 25: Land Use Designations that Allow for Residential Uses, % of Total Acreage. 27 Exhibit 26: City of Tacoma Land Use Designation Map, 2023. 28 Exhibit 27: West End Zoning Districts 29 Exhibit 28: North End Zoning Districts 30 Exhibit 29: Central Zoning Districts 31 Exhibit 30: New Tacoma Zoning Districts 32 Exhibit 31: North East Zoning Districts 33 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions Exhibit 32: South Tacoma Zoning Districts 34 Exhibit 33: South End Zoning Districts 35 Exhibit 34: Eastside Zoning Districts 36 Exhibit 35: Tacoma Residential Land Capacity, by Zone, 2022. 37 Exhibit 36: Tacoma Housing Capacity, 2022. 38 Exhibit 37: Tacoma Zoning Districts Categorized by Typical and Allowed Housing Types 39 Exhibit 38: Income Bands Associated with Zoning Categories 40 Exhibit 39: Tacoma Residential Land Capacity by Income Band, 2020-2044 Targets 41 Exhibit 40: Emergency Housing Land Capacity Analysis 42 Exhibit 41: Middle Housing Types across Residential Zones (permit type - minimum lot area in SF) 43 Exhibit 42: Special Needs Housing Types as Permitted Uses in Tacoma 44 Exhibit 43: City of Tacoma Areas Zoned as R-4-L. 45 Exhibit 44: Housing Production Trends by Income Level, 2011-2021, Compared To Needed Production Levels for Targets 2020-2044. 47 Exhibit 45: Available Funding and Needed Funding for Affordable Housing, Pierce County, 2022. 48 Exhibit 47: Tacoma Inflow/Outflow Analysis, 2021. 53 Exhibit 48: Means of Transportation to Work, 2021. 54 Exhibit 49: Means of Transportation to Work by Race and Ethnicity, 2021. 54 Exhibit 50: People of Color as a Proportion of the Population in Tacoma, 2021. 56 Exhibit 51: Tacoma “Residential Security Map”, 1937. 57 Exhibit 52: Percent Change of Owner and Renter Households by Race, in the City of Tacoma 1990- 2020. 58 Exhibit 53: Displacement Risk Mapping in Tacoma, Draft 2024. 59 Exhibit 54: Location Quotient, Asian, Black, Hispanic Latino, White Alone 63 Exhibit 55: Policy Audit of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Housing Element 66 ONE TACOMA iii # EXECUTIVE SUMMARY **Tacoma’s housing production has not been keeping pace with growth targets.** From 2017-2023, Tacoma’s housing stock has grown at an average annual rate of 0.8%. To achieve the 2050 housing target, average annual growth needs to be double this, at 1.6%. Tacoma’s housing production has proportionally slowed since the 1980s, when compared with Pierce County overall. Today, 64% of Tacoma housing units predate 1980 compared to 43% of the overall Pierce County housing stock. This reflects a countywide trend of population growth outside this regional metropolitan hub. **The existing housing stock is older and predominantly single family structures, while new production favors multifamily development.** Two-thirds of housing units in Tacoma (67%) are single family homes. However, when looking at housing built in recent years, 80% of units are in multifamily structures. Two-thirds of multifamily units are in larger buildings (50 units or more), and one-third are units in smaller and midsized multifamily structures. Downtown is a growing center for housing units, representing 40% of units built 2017-2023. North East and Central Tacoma are growing at the slowest pace. **There is racial disparity for homeownership in Tacoma, and this wealth-building opportunity is increasingly out of reach for moderate income households.** 50% of Tacoma households are homeowners, but this rate is not consistent across race and ethnic groups. Homeownership rates are lowest among Black, Pacific Islander, Hispanic and “Other” households. This disparity is steeped in a history of racial exclusion and discrimination. Impacts from historic factors, such as redlining and racially restrictive covenants are still observed today. Modern phenomena, such as the foreclosure crisis, discriminatory lending practices, and lack of access to credit (to name a few) continue to block many People of Color from homeownership in Tacoma, and the city’s Black community is particularly hard hit. Forty-eight percent (48%) of Tacoma renters experienced housing cost burden in 2020, along with 27% of homeowners. Cost burden rates for renters are particularly high (over 65%) in certain areas across the City, with highest concentrations in Central, South Tacoma, and the South End. Patterns in racial disparity are observed geographically for cost burden, as well. Black households experience the highest rates of cost burden in North East, South Tacoma, and the West End. Asian households have relatively lower rates of rental cost burden across most of Tacoma, but a concentration of cost-burdened Asian renters live in the North End. Hispanic renters are most cost-burdened in Central, Eastside, and South Tacoma neighborhoods. Production of 42,865 units is needed in Tacoma by 2044 to meet housing targets. Market interventions will be essential to support housing units for lower income brackets. From this target, 30% of units should be affordable to extremely low-income households, 34% for low- and very low-income households, and the remainder for moderate- and higher-income households. The distribution is based on Pierce County allocations and takes into account current housing needs to eliminate cost burden and homelessness, as well as the needs of future households. These production targets envision a future with no housing cost burden and no chronic homelessness in Tacoma. Better integration of housing and employment centers could improve rates of commuting by public transit, bike, or walking. Tacomans who commute are overwhelmingly traveling by car, and only 2% of employees walk to work. These patterns reflect a disconnect between residential centers and employment opportunities. It also demonstrates room for improvement in transit capture – currently only at 6%. Transit ridership rates are highest among Black and AIAN commuters and lowest among White and “Other” groups. Improved connections could be built by adding more housing in proximity to employment centers, as well as improvements to transit and bicycle networks. # Data Source Summary | Datapoint | Source | | :--- | :--- | | Cost Burden | CHAS 2016-2020 | | Permit data | City of Tacoma | | Housing Stock | OFM for numbers, ACS for detail categories (% for types), City of Tacoma data for ADUs | | Demographics | ACS 5-year estimates, 2021 | | Home Prices | Zillow for home values and rents | | Income | WSHFC reports for Pierce County for the area-wide median household income and income bands associated with “low-income” categories | # 1 INVENTORY ## 1.1 Housing Stock Tacoma has 94,531 housing units.[^p29-1] Since 2017, Tacoma’s base years for tracking its housing targets, the housing stock has increased by 4,588 units, reflecting an annual growth rate of 0.8%. Tacoma’s 2017-2050 target for housing is to add 59,052 units which reflects an annual growth rate of 1.5% across the time period, a much faster pace of increase than experienced in these first six years. As of 2023, Tacoma needs to add a net new 54,464 housing units by 2050 to meet targets. Exhibit 1: Tacoma Housing Units, 2017-2023 <
> Sources: OFM, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. ### Housing Units, by Type Tacoma’s housing stock is approximately 2/3 single family homes with the remaining 1/3 split across middle housing types and multifamily units in a range of building sizes. Specifically, 6% of units are in townhomes or duplexes, 12% are in small multifamily buildings (5-20 units), 5% are in midsized multifamily buildings (20-49 units), 9% are in lager multifamily buildings (50+ units), and less than 1% of are mobile/manufactured homes. See Exhibit 2. [^p29-1]: OFM, 2023 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions Exhibit 2: Tacoma Housing Units by Type, 2021. <
> Sources: ACS 5-year estimates, 2021; Seva Workshop, 2024. Recent trends in housing production for Tacoma lean to higher proportions of multifamily housing, which makes up 80% of units developed 2017-2023. Over this timeframe, Tacoma averaged new unit production at a rate of 867 units/year.[^p30-2] Although the City’s permit data groups together middle housing types such as townhomes and multiplexes under the ‘multifamily’ category. Of the multifamily production, most are in buildings with 50+ units. About a quarter are in midsized multifamily buildings, and 9% of units are in smaller multifamily buildings. A summary of annual production rates 2017-2023 is provided in Exhibit 3 with detail on multifamily production in Exhibit 4. Single family homes make up 15% of new housing stock, duplexes 3%, and ADUs 2%. Newer housing production is highest Downtown, accounting for 40% of new units produced since 2017. The West End, South End, and North End are the next neighborhoods for new unit counts, with 11% of production each. Lowest production rates are observed in North East (3%) and Central (6%) neighborhoods. See map in Exhibit 5. [^p30-2]: The 6,070 units added 2017-2023 (867 average annual) comes from permit data. This figure differs from the OFM net units added over the same time period, quoted above at 4,588, which takes into account demolitions over the time frame and works from a slightly different reporting period for annual estimates. ONE TACOMA 5 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions **Exhibit 3: Housing Production in Tacoma by Type, 2017-2023.** <
> ■Single-Family ■Multi-Family ■Duplex ■Accessory Structure Note: City permit data for production does not take into account demolitions and works in a different annual data collection cycle than OFM. OFM estimates should be used for tracking total housing stock estimates. Sources: City of Tacoma Permit data, 2017-2023; Seva Workshop, 2024. **Exhibit 4: Multifamily Units by Size of Building, New Production in Tacoma 2017-2023.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma Permit data, 2017-2023; Seva Workshop, 2024. ONE TACOMA 6 ### Exhibit 5: Map of Tacoma Residential Permits, 2017-2023. <
> Source: Tacoma Permit Data, 2017-2023. ## Accessory Dwelling Units Accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, are an important component to a community’s housing stock. They offer flexibility for homeowners to live multi-generationally or with caregiving support, to supplement income by renting the additional unit, and to meet a variety of other personal and familial needs. ADUs that become rental units are often priced at affordable rates and may offer access to new neighborhoods that are predominantly occupied by homeowners. ADUs are permitted across residential districts in Tacoma. Attached and detached ADUs are permitted on any lot, provided that site standards for size, setback, open space, and other requirements are met. The size of ADUs is limited to 1,000 SF or 85% of the area of the main building, whichever is smaller. The maximum height of structures is 18’ or 20’ if parking is incorporated.[^p33-3] From 2019-2023, 421 ADU permits were issued and 269 ADUs were reported as constructed in Tacoma. See Exhibit 6. ADU policies in Tacoma were revamped in 2019 and subsequently amended in 2021 to make it easier and more affordable for homeowners to add these units to their property. ADU production is on the rise and the City is working to make the process as streamlined as possible. Still, the capital investment needed to create these units can be prohibitive and not all residential lots are a good fit for this use. ADUs represent one component in the larger picture of providing housing options that meet the needs and affordability levels of a diverse community. **Exhibit 6: Accessory Dwelling Units Permitted and Constructed in Tacoma, 2019-2023.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma Permit Data, 2019-2023; Seva Workshop, 2024. # Housing Tenure Overall in Tacoma, 50% of households are owners and 50% of households are renters. Patterns of racial disparity are observed in Tacoma’s homeownership rates, with lowest rates of ownership among Black (32%), Pacific Islander (32%), “Other” (37%), and Hispanic (43%) [^p33-3]: TMC 13.06.080.A. This was groups. Highest rates, by contrast, are found among Asian (62%) and White (61%) households. See Exhibit 7. In 2021, the City of Tacoma completed an in-depth study into its racial disparities related to housing. This report notes the decline in Black homeownership during the 30-year period from 1990-2020, while all other racial groups experienced increased or stable rates. It also analyzes lending data that demonstrates low rates of mortgage loan approvals for Black applicants.[^p34-4] Homeownership rates are important, as this is the most common avenue toward wealth building for American households. **Exhibit 7: Tacoma Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicity (Shown as %), 2021.** <
> Note: AIAN=American Indian and Alaska Native; NHOPI=Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Hispanic or Latine is an ethnicity. The Hispanic or Latino category includes Hispanic and Latine people of all races. All other categories show non-Hispanic races. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates; Seva Workshop, 2024. ## Geographic Distribution Tacoma’s residential centers are distributed across the city, as shown in Exhibit 8. Central Tacoma, Eastside, and South End have the greatest land areas with higher population density, more than 6,000 people per square mile. The neighborhoods of West End, South Tacoma, and North East are less densely populated though every neighborhood except for New [^p34-4]: ECONorthwest and BDS Planning, *Analysis of Systemic Disparities in Achievable Housing Options*, 2021. https://www.cityoftacoma.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/cms/CBCFiles/Tacoma%20Housing%20Disparities%2020Report_2021.pdf ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions Tacoma has at least one densely populated area. Incorporated areas surrounding Tacoma to the northeast, south, and west demonstrate similar patterns. **Exhibit 8: Tacoma Population Density, 2021.** <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017 to 2021). ## Building Age **Tacoma’s housing stock skews older, with 43% of structures built prior to 1960.** Production rates in Tacoma slowed in the 2000s - less than 15% of units have been built 2000 or later. By contrast, Pierce County overall has only 20% of its housing stock built prior to 1960 and 25% of units have been built 2000 or later. **Exhibit 9: Tacoma and Pierce County Housing Stock by Building Age, 2021.** <
> Sources: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017 to 2021); Seva Workshop, 2024. ### HOMES THAT NEED REPAIRS ACS reports on housing issues such as homes lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities. In Tacoma, approximately 415 housing units (0.5%) are identified as having incomplete plumbing facilities. Most of these are rental units. About twice this rate, 950 housing units (1.1%) are reported as lacking complete kitchen facilities.[^p36-5] Tacoma’s Home Rehabilitation Program addresses a wider range of home repair issues, such as: roof replacement, exterior/interior painting, window replacement, carpet and flooring replacement, heating and air system replacement, electrical work, sewer repair or installation, termite and pest repair, repairing or replacing concrete (such as sidewalks, driveways, or ADA ramps), door and window screen replacement, or foundation/structural repairs. From 2019 – 2024, 66 major ($15-60k) renovations and 204 minor (<$15k) renovations were completed through this program. Homeowners are provided low interest loans to cover the cost of the needed repairs and households at or below 50% of AMI can repay the funds with no interest.[^p36-6] [^p36-5]: ACS B2516 and B25052 5-year estimates, 2021 [^p36-6]: City of Tacoma Home Rehabilitation Program ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions # Units for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) establishes thresholds for income groups at the household level. These brackets are relative to the area’s median income and establish eligibility for income-restricted affordable housing units. The categories used for their data reporting are: * Moderate Income: Between 80 – 100% of the area median income * Low Income: Between 50 – 80% of the area median income * Very Low-Income: Between 30 – 50% of the area median income * Extremely Low-Income: Less than 30% of the area median income AMI = Area Median Income. Different programs scale their “area median” based on different geographies. HUD uses a specific “HUD Area Median Family Income” (HAMFI) to set their income ranges, scaled with household size. In Tacoma for 2024, for example: 100% AMI is $112,300 (family of 4) 80% AMI is $92,650 50% AMI is $57,900 30% AMI is $34,750 HUD Income Limits 2024 ## Household Income Brackets Tacoma households skew lower income when compared to the region – 59% are at or below the area median income. Using the income groups described above, 12% of Tacoma households are moderate income, 21% are low-income, 12% are very low-income, and 15% are extremely low-income. See Exhibit 10. These designations are based around the HUD-defined area median income (HAMFI), which is calculated at a regional scale. A table summarizing the incomes assigned to each category for the most recent year available, 2024, can be found in When determining eligibility for income-restricted affordable housing units, household size is taken into consideration. ONE TACOMA 12 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions **Exhibit 10: Households by Income Bracket, Tacoma, 2020.** <
> Source: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020; Seva Workshop, 2024. Error! Not a valid link.Sources: Washington State Housing Finance Commission, 2023; Seva Workshop, 2024. The table in Exhibit 11 describes housing types in Tacoma that are most likely to fall within the affordability range of each group, based on the incomes described above. An analysis of the existing housing stock then counts the units in Tacoma that could be a fit for households in each category without incurring housing cost burden. **Exhibit 11: Matching Housing Types with Income Brackets** | Household Income Bracket | Housing Types Likely to be Affordable for This Group | Count of Housing Units in Tacoma | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | <= 30% HAMFI | Income-restricted affordable housing, transitional housing units, permanent supportive housing | **4,155** 2,900 income-restricted affordable housing units; 137 permanent supportive housing units; 1,118 emergency housing units | | >30% to <=50% HAMFI | Income-restricted affordable housing, some rental units in older buildings | **4,195** 4,195 rental units (some income-restricted) | | >50% to <=80% HAMFI | Income-restricted affordable housing, Older multifamily or middle housing rentals, Mobile homes | **16,146** 15,790 affordable rental units (some income-restricted) 356 mobile homes | | >80% to <=100% HAMFI | Multifamily rental, Middle housing types (ownership) | **8,270** 7,230 affordable rental units; 1,040 middle housing owner units | | >100% to <=120% HAMFI | Multifamily rental, ownership opportunities for smaller and/or older homes | **17,067** 2,013 affordable rental units; 1,371 ownership units | ONE TACOMA 13 >120% HAMFI | All products | 40,813 | | | | 8,052 affordable rental units; | | | | 32,761 ownership units; | Notes: Middle housing ownership units calculated as ownership units in 1-unit attached housing through structures less than 20 units; Split between 80 – 100% HAMFI and 100-120% HAMFI. Multifamily ownership in buildings 20-49 units added to 100-120% HAMFI and ownership units in 50+ buildings added to >120% HAMFI. Affordable rental units for >100% HAMFI split between 100-120% and >120% HAMFI 20/80. Single family homes split between these two groups at a 30/70 rate to reflect older housing stock of Tacoma homes. Sources: HUD CHAS Table 18C, 2016-2020 for counts of affordable rental units; ACS B25032 5-year estimates, 2017-2021 for ownership units and mobile homes; Seva Workshop, 2024. # Emergency housing, emergency shelters, and permanent supportive housing In 2017, the City of Tacoma declared homelessness a public health emergency. The count of people experiencing homelessness in the region has continued to rise since then – an estimated 40% increase from 2017-2022 in Pierce County. The count of people experiencing homelessness in Pierce County in 2022 was 1,851.[^p39-7] The existing supply of emergency housing, emergency shelters and permanent supportive housing in Tacoma is estimated at 1,362 in 2022.[^p39-8] This includes 1,225 shelter beds and 137 units of permanent supportive housing. The City hopes to transition many of its shelter beds into longer-term forms of housing support such as permanent supportive housing and affordable housing units. Exhibit 12: Homelessness Counts in Pierce County, 2017-2022. <
> [^p39-7]: Point-in-Time Counts [^p39-8]: Tacoma Homelessness Strategy, 2022. ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions Note: The PIT count for 2021 was not conducted, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Sources: Washington Department of Commerce PIT Counts, 2017-2022; Seva Workshop, 2024. # 1.2 Affordability Housing costs in Tacoma have risen dramatically in the past decade, leading to affordability challenges across almost all segments of the market. In recent years, homeownership affordability has become increasingly strained, being reserved for an increasingly exclusive segment of Tacoma’s society. ## Ownership Housing Homeownership is becoming increasingly out of reach for moderate income households in Tacoma. The average home price in Tacoma in 2023 was $460,000, a 58% increase from 5-years prior (2018). See Exhibit 13. Over the same timeframe, mortgage lending rates increased by 50%, from an average of 4.5% to 6.8%.[^p40-9] This combination of factors dramatically increases the cost to purchase a new home, particularly for a first-time homebuyer. Using estimates for average home prices, typical 30-year mortgage lending rates, and expected costs such as property taxes and homeowners insurance, the mortgage on an average home in 2023 is affordable to households at 126% AMI – just out of reach for households in the moderate income band. Using a consistent set of assumptions, in 2018 the mortgage for an average priced home was affordable to households at 103% AMI. [^p40-9]: Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis 30-Year Fixed Rate Mortgage Averages, 2018 & 2023. ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions Exhibit 13: Tacoma Average Home Prices, Annual Change (%), 2015-2023. <
> | | 2015-16 | 2016-17 | 2017-18 | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Annual Change (%) | 14.3% | 14.1% | 13.8% | 9.2% | 11.7% | 19.9% | 10.7% | -2.4% | Sources: Zillow Home Value Index, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. # Rental Housing Average rent in Tacoma is affordable for households at 60% AMI. The average rent in Tacoma is $1,676 per month, an increase of 78% since 2015. See Exhibit 14. This analysis, however, does not account for the size of the rental unit which may not align with the household size. Rents vary widely depending on unit condition, size, and location. For example, in a “high market area” for Tacoma, rents are estimated anywhere from $1,500 to $2,890 a month depending on unit type. This range spans affordability for households at 60% AMI to 100% AMI.[^p41-10] [^p41-10]: HIT Feasibility Analysis Memo, 2024. ONE TACOMA 16 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions **Exhibit 14: Average Rents in Tacoma, 2015-2023.** <
> | | 2015-16 | 2016-17 | 2017-18 | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Annual Change (%) | 8.9% | 10.1% | 8.0% | 6.0% | 5.8% | 11.7% | 8.2% | 1.5% | Sources: Zillow Observed Rent Index, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. # Household Incomes Tacoma’s overall median household income in 2021 was $69,956, a 42% increase from the overall median household income in 2011, which was $49,232. There are wide disparities for median household income when comparing by race and ethnicity, as shown in Exhibit 15. White households have a higher median household income at $77,531. Black and AIAN households have the lowest incomes with medians at $50,603 and $51,234, respectively. All other BIPOC groups also have median household incomes below the citywide median. This median household income falls well below the Pierce County median income in 2021, estimated at $82,574 or the HUD-area median income at $91,100. In Tacoma, incomes are higher in areas around the North End, West End, and Northeast Tacoma. Incomes are lowest in South Tacoma, the South End, and the Eastside. These geographic trends are visualized in the map in Exhibit 16. ONE TACOMA 17 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions **Exhibit 15: Median Household Income by Race & Ethnicity, 2021.** <
> ↑ Median Income: $69,956 Note: Exhibits per group are compared to the overall median income. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021); Seva Workshop, 2023. ONE TACOMA 18 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 16: Median Household Income by Census Tract in Tacoma, 2021 <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021). ONE TACOMA 19 # Affordability Housing affordability is an increasing challenge in Tacoma, particularly for ownership housing. As shown in Exhibit 17, the cost of ownership housing has increased at more than double the rate of median area incomes since 2015, 135% and 59% respectively. Rents increased 78%. These disparities shown a decline in affordability for both rental and ownership housing in Tacoma, but most dramatically for ownership units. Rates of increase for ownership housing spiked, in particular, from 2019-2022. A slight cooldown was observed from 2022-2023. First-time homebuyers are particularly hard-hit by the combined factors of increasing housing costs and mortgage lending rates. The average fixed-rate 30-year mortgage lending rate in the US was at a low of 2.96% in 2021 but jumped to 5.34% in 2022 and 6.81% in 2023. Higher interest rates have a big impact on monthly housing costs, particularly for first time homebuyers who cannot leverage established equity from previous purchases for a higher down payment amount. In 2022, 56% of Tacoma mortgages were given to first-time homebuyers. The demographics of these homebuyers demonstrate a skew toward White and Asian households and a proportionate underrepresentation of Black and Pacific Islander buyers. See Exhibit 18. Exhibit 17: Housing Cost and Income Increases as a % Change from 2015 in Tacoma, Average Annual Mortgage Lending Rates 2015-2023. <
> Sources: Zillow Home Value Index and Observed Rent Index, Downloaded April 2024; WSHFC Area Median Income, 2015-2023; St Louis FED Mortgage Interest Rates, 2023; Seva Workshop, 2024. Exhibit 18: First-time Homebuyers in Tacoma by Race & Ethnicity, 2022. | | First-time homebuyers by race/ethnicity | All households by race/ethnicity | Delta | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | American Indian or Alaska Native | 1% | 2% | -1% | | Asian | 11% | 7% | 4% | | Black or African American | 6% | 10% | -4% | | Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0% | 3% | -3% | | White | 72% | 68% | 4% | | Multi-race household | 10% | 9% | 1% | | Hispanic or Latino | 14% | 12% | 2% | | Not Hispanic or Latino | 86% | 88% | -2% | Sources: Federal Housing Finance Agency, Public Use Database (PUDB) - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, 2022 Single-Family Census Tract File; Seva Workshop, 2024. # Cost Burden Households that pay 30% or more of their income toward housing are considered cost-burdened. These households may struggle to cover other essential household expenses, such as transportation or healthcare. Households that pay 50% or more of their income towards housing are considered extremely cost-burdened. Renters in Tacoma are much more likely than homeowners to experience housing cost burden. Forty-eight percent (48%) of renters experienced housing cost burden in 2020, along with 27% of homeowners. See Exhibit 19. When disaggregated by race/ethnicity, the highest rates of renter cost burden are observed among “Other” households (56%), Black households (54%), Pacific Islander households (51%), and Hispanic households (49%). These rates are shown in Exhibit 20. Cost burden rates are particularly high (over 65%) in areas across the city, but are most concentrated in Central, South Tacoma, and the South End. The map in Exhibit 21 explores the geographic distribution of these trends. The detailed table in Exhibit 22 further dives into the geographic distribution of renter cost-burden and disaggregates neighborhood rates by race/ethnicity. Demographic groups differ in location of renter cost burden concentration. For example, Black households have the highest rates in North East, South Tacoma, and the West End. Asian households have relatively lower rates of rental cost burden across most of Tacoma, but a concentration of cost-burdened Asian renters live in the North End. Hispanic renters are most cost-burdened in Central, Eastside, and South Tacoma neighborhoods. ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions **Exhibit 19: Percent of Households Cost Burdened by Tenure, 2020.** <
> ■ Severely Cost-Burdened ■ Cost Burdened ■ Not Cost-Burdened ▨ Cost Burden data not availabe Note: Cost-Burdened households spend between 30-50% of income toward housing. Severely cost-burdened households spend more than 50% of gross income for housing. Sources: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020; Seva Workshop, 2024. **Exhibit 20: Renter Households Cost Burdened in Tacoma (%), by Race & Ethnicity, 2020.** <
> ■ Severely Cost-Burdened ■ Cost-Burdened ■ Not cost burdened ▨ Cost Burden data not available Note: Cost-Burdened households spend between 30-50% of income toward housing. Severely cost-burdened households spend more than 50% of gross income for housing. Sources: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020; Seva Workshop, 2024. ONE TACOMA 22 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 21: Distribution of Renter Cost Burdened-Households in Tacoma, as a % of Block Group Population, 2020 <
> Source: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020. ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 22: Renter Cost Burden by Race/Ethnicity and Neighborhood in Tacoma, 2020. | | Central | Eastside | New Tacoma | North East | North End | South End | South Tacoma | West End | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **White alone, non-Hispanic** | 52% | 51% | 40% | 43% | 32% | 49% | 51% | 43% | | **Black or African-American alone, non-Hispanic** | 51% | 52% | 41% | 58% | 20% | 52% | 57% | 62% | | **Asian alone, non-Hispanic** | 47% | 38% | 42% | 40% | 85% | 36% | 39% | 24% | | **AIAN, non-Hispanic** | n/a | 34% | 67% | 38% | n/a | 72% | 45% | 24% | | **Pacific Islander alone, non-Hispanic** | 87% | 40% | 75% | 71% | n/a | 54% | 71% | n/a | | **Hispanic, any race** | 59% | 63% | 40% | 32% | 17% | 48% | 55% | 31% | | **Other (including multiple races, non-Hispanic)** | 47% | 39% | 49% | 67% | 44% | 56% | 64% | 66% | 55 - 65% Cost Burden Rate Over 65% Cost Burden Rate AIAN = American Indian and Alaska Native. Note: Green highlighting indicates a rate >55% and blue highlighting indicates a rate >65%. Margins of error will be higher for groups with smaller sample sizes. Sources: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) dataset based on American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2016-2020; Seva Workshop, 2024. ONE TACOMA 24 # 2 PROJECTED HOUSING NEED ## 2.1 Growth targets Tacoma’s growth target for 2017-2050 is to add 137,000 people or 59,052 housing units. So far, 4,588 units have been added to the City’s housing stock (2017-2023) which leaves a remaining 54,464 unit gap. The annual growth rate needed to achieve the 2017-2050 target is 1.5%. The achieved annual growth rate for the 2017-2023 period is 0.8%. The pace of production will need to increase in future years to align with this vision for growth in Tacoma. The graph in Exhibit 23 also identifies the 2044 housing target, as defined by Pierce County. This target (2020-2044) sets the standard for evaluating adequate capacity by income bracket in Tacoma, per guidance provided by state and regional agencies. **Exhibit 23: Tacoma Housing Units, Actual and Target 2015-2050.** <
> As of 2023, there is a gap of 54,464 housing units to fill by 2050 to achieve regional growth targets in Tacoma. Sources: OFM Housing Units, 2015-2023; PSRC Housing Target for 2017-2050; Seva Workshop, 2024. ## Distribution of targets across income brackets Tacoma strives to meet its growth targets equitably, which means that new housing units should accommodate households across the income spectrum. The Department of Commerce has outlined a methodology for projecting housing need by income bands that takes into account a full spectrum of needs at the countywide scale. Pierce County has taken this methodology and assigned targets to each of its jurisdictions, both totals and allocations by income bracket. See Exhibit 24. Exhibit 24: Housing Units Needed by Income Bracket in Tacoma, 2020-2044. <
> The production of 42,865 units is needed in Tacoma by 2044. 30% of this is at the lowest affordability level, 34% for low- and very low-income households, and the remainder for moderate- and higher-income households. The distribution is based on Pierce County allocations and takes into account current housing needs to eliminate cost burden and homelessness, as well as the needs of future households. These production targets envision a future with no housing cost burden and no chronic homelessness in Tacoma. Sources: Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies Appendix A, 2022; Seva Workshop, 2024. ## Emergency Housing Needs Communities also need to plan for emergency housing and emergency shelters. In implementation, the lines between these two types of accommodation can be blurred and thus for planning purposes they are calculated together as a single category. Housing types in this category must be indoors and allow access to personal hygiene facilities. It includes emergency shelters, hotel rooms, tiny home villages, and short-term apartments. Existing supply (2020): 1,118 Target for the 2020-2044 planning period: 2,624 # 3 LAND CAPACITY ## 3.1 Existing land capacity for housing Tacoma has capacity for an additional 68,049 housing units across its residential zones, according to Pierce County’s 2022 Buildable Lands study. This exceeds the housing target of an additional 42,865 units by 2044. Additionally, housing policy that is currently following the legislative process will add another 300,000 – 650,000 units of capacity to the City’s residential zones, largely allocated for middle housing types.[^p52-11] This chapter details Tacoma’s residential zoning districts and their capacity to meet the city’s housing targets – considering a diverse set of needs to align with a diverse population. **Exhibit 25: Land Use Designations that Allow for Residential Uses, % of Total Acreage.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma; 2023; Seva Workshop, 2024. Tacoma’s current land use framework follows a ‘center and corridors’ model. The largest and densest centers are the Regional Growth Centers located Downtown and at the Tacoma Mall. Mixed-Use Centers are distributed across the city and are often buffered by gradual density step-downs from multifamily zones to lower density residential blankets that cover 41% of the city’s land (65% of land from areas that allow for residential uses). Tacoma currently allows residential uses in 9 of its 15 broader land use designations. Zones that do not allow for residential use are the industrial districts, parks, institutional campuses, airport areas, and [^p52-11]: Capacity range from HIT DEIS page 2-6 shorelines. The chart in Exhibit 25 shows the share of land allocated across these broader land use designations that allow for residential uses, and the map in Exhibit 26 identifies Tacoma’s land use designations geographically. ### Exhibit 26: City of Tacoma Land Use Designation Map, 2023. <
> Source: City of Tacoma, 2023. ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions # Zoning The broader land use designations represent a wider range of detailed zoning districts. These districts are mapped at the neighborhood level in this section, on pages 29 through 36. ## Exhibit 27: West End Zoning Districts <
> Note: The City of Tacoma adopted a zoning update related to housing policy after the completion of this baseline conditions report (Home in Tacoma). These updates are note reflected in this section but impact the lowest density residential zones. Much of the West End neighborhood is covered by lower density residential zones, R1 and R2. Pearl Street is the prominent north/south hub for mixed use and higher density zoning districts, such as CCX, R4, and C2. The east/west corridors on 6th Ave and S 12th Street are also denser activity areas. ONE TACOMA 29 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 28: North End Zoning Districts <
> The North End neighborhood is characterized by R2 residential zoning. The southeastern pocket of this neighborhood is designated as a Historic Mixed-Use residential district. There is a small corridor of NCX and C2 zoning along the southern border (6th Ave). ONE TACOMA 30 # Exhibit 29: Central Zoning Districts <
> | Central Zoning Districts | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | R2 One Family Dwelling | C1 Commercial | DR Downtown Residential | | R2-SRD One Family Dwelling Special Review | PDB Planned Business Development | WR Warehouse/Residential | | R3 Two Family Dwelling | C2 Commercial | M1 Light Industrial | | R4L Low Density Multiple Family Dwelling | URX Urban Residential Mixed Use | M2 Heavy Industrial | | R4 Multiple Family Dwelling | NCX Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use | Parks and Open Space | | T Transitional | RCX Residential Commercial Mixed Use | Neighborhood Council Districts | | | CCX Community Commercial Mixed Use | Tacoma City Limits | | | HMX Hospital Medical Mixed Use | | Central Tacoma includes a wide range of zoning districts, including areas of low-, mid-, and higher- density. ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 30: New Tacoma Zoning Districts | New Tacoma Zoning Districts | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | R2 One Family Dwelling | C2 Commercial | DCC Downtown Commercial Core | | R2-SRD One Family Dwelling Special Review | NRX Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use | M1 Light Industrial | | R3 Two Family Dwelling | URX Urban Residential Mixed Use | M2 Heavy Industrial | | R4L Low Density Multiple Family Dwelling | NCX Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use | PMI Port Maritime and Industrial | | R4 Multiple Family Dwelling | RCX Residential Commercial Mixed Use | Combined Shoreline | | R5 Multiple Family Dwelling | HMX Hospital Medical Mixed Use | Parks and Open Space | | HMR-SRD Historic Mixed Use Residential | DR Downtown Residential | Neighborhood Council Districts | | C1 Commercial | DMU Downtown Mixed Use | Tacoma City Limits | | | WR Warehouse/Residential | | <
> New Tacoma includes Downtown and the industrial district of the Tideflats. Downtown zones allow for the highest density of residential uses in the city. ONE TACOMA 32 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 31: North East Zoning Districts <
> The North East neighborhood is almost entirely R1 and R2 zoning in the areas outside of industrial use. There are a few small nodes of commercial activity where a greater mix and density of uses are allowed. ONE TACOMA 33 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 32: South Tacoma Zoning Districts <
> The South Tacoma neighborhood features a wide range of densities and use types. There are industrial lands running along a central spine, but a mix of commercial and residential areas to either side. ONE TACOMA 34 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 33: South End Zoning Districts <
> The Sound End of Tacoma is blanketed mostly by R2 zoning. There are commercial corridors running north/south along Pacific Avenue and Tacoma Mall Blvd. A pocket of mixed use districts exists in the north of the subarea. ONE TACOMA 35 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 34: Eastside Zoning Districts <
> Tacoma’s Eastside has a range of zoning districts. Most of the central area in the neighborhood is designated as R2. The northern portions of the neighborhood include a range of commercial and mixed use areas. The eastern edge features higher density and mixed use districts along Portland Avenue. ONE TACOMA 36 # Capacity Analysis The Pierce County 2021 Buildable Lands Study identifies capacity for an additional 68,049 housing units in Tacoma under existing zoning regulations. The table in Exhibit 35 breaks out this capacity by zone. Half of Tacoma’s residential capacity is concentrated in 4 zoning districts: Downtown Residential/DR (15%), Urban Residential Mixed-Use/URX (14%), Residential Commercial Mixed-use/RCX (11%), and Downtown Mixed-Use/DMU (10%). Another 40% of residential capacity is found across 6 districts: Single Family/R2 (9%), Warehouse Residential/WR (8%), Neighborhood Commercial Mixed-Use/NCX (8%), Community Commercial Mixed-Use/CCX (6%), Downtown Commercial Core/DCC (5%), and Urban Center Mixed-Use/UCX (5%). The remaining 10% of capacity is spread across 15 districts that each have 2% or less of total capacity. A map of this capacity can be found in Exhibit 36. Exhibit 35: Tacoma Residential Land Capacity, by Zone, 2022. | Zone | Vacant | Underutilized | Vacant Single Unit | Pipeline | Total Capacity | % Total | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | C2 | 53 | 514 | 0 | 17 | 584 | 0.9% | | CCX | 733 | 3,145 | 0 | 0 | 3,878 | 6% | | DCC | 164 | 3,340 | 0 | 0 | 3,504 | 5% | | DMU | 1,782 | 5,011 | 0 | 0 | 6,793 | 10% | | DR | 2,668 | 7,146 | 0 | 78 | 9,892 | 15% | | NCX | 470 | 5,176 | 0 | 0 | 5,646 | 8% | | NRX | 8 | 160 | 0 | 0 | 168 | 0.2% | | R1 | 395 | 472 | 84 | 0 | 951 | 1% | | R2 | 2,601 | 2,383 | 1,031 | 74 | 6,089 | 9% | | R2-SRD | 84 | 544 | 40 | 0 | 668 | 1% | | R3 | 224 | 502 | 24 | 16 | 766 | 1% | | R4 | 284 | 799 | 0 | 58 | 1,141 | 2% | | R4L | 220 | 611 | 13 | 0 | 844 | 1% | | R5 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0.01% | | RCX | 1,226 | 5,970 | 0 | 15 | 7,211 | 11% | | S15 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 561 | 574 | 0.8% | | S8 | 145 | 648 | 0 | 0 | 793 | 1.2% | | T | 71 | 143 | 25 | 4 | 243 | 0.4% | | UCX | 302 | 3,005 | 0 | 0 | 3,307 | 5% | | URX | 500 | 9,266 | 0 | 10 | 9,776 | 14% | | WR | 1,409 | 3,851 | 0 | 0 | 5,260 | 8% | | Total | 13,352 | 52,637 | 1,227 | 833 | 68,049 | | Source: Pierce County Buildable Lands, 2022; Seva Workshop, 2024. ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions **Exhibit 36: Tacoma Housing Capacity, 2022.** <
> Sources: Pierce County Buildable Lands, 2022; Seva Workshop, 2024. ## Zoning Categories Tacoma’s housing capacity is sufficient for the total number of target housing units, but further analysis is needed to understand if this capacity maps to the full income spectrum. To understand if this capacity will meet the needs of all Tacomans and foster an equitable future for housing, Tacoma’s zoning districts with available housing capacity are grouped into broader ONE TACOMA 38 categories below by allowed/typical housing types produced. Achieved density level calculations are also included, to better understand existing conditions by zone. ### Exhibit 37: Tacoma Zoning Districts Categorized by Typical and Allowed Housing Types | Zone | Achieved Density Levels | Zone Category | Typical/Allowed Housing Types | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | R1 | 1.76 | Low Density Residential | Single Family | | R2 | 5 | Low Density Residential | Single Family, Townhomes, Duplex | | R2-SRD | 10.45 | Low Density Residential | Single Family, Townhomes, Duplex | | R3 | 14.24 | Moderate Density | Single Family, Townhomes, 2-3-plex | | R4L | 23.8 | Low-Rise Multifamily | Manufactured Housing, Single Family, Townhomes, Duplex, Small Multifamily | | C2 | 37 | Low-Rise Multifamily | Low-rise multifamily, Emergency housing allowed | | NRX | | Low-Rise Multifamily | 2-3-plex, low-rise multifamily | | S15 | 70 | Low-Rise Multifamily | Small multifamily | | S8 | 136 | Low-Rise Multifamily | Small multifamily | | URX | 32 | Low-Rise Multifamily | Townhomes, 2-3-plex, Small multifamily | | T | 24.29 | Low-Rise Multifamily | Group housing and retirement homes | | CCX | 31 | Mid-Rise Multifamily | Midrise multifamily, Emergency housing allowed | | DR | 111 | Mid-Rise Multifamily | Midrise multifamily, Emergency housing allowed | | NCX | 198 | Mid-Rise Multifamily | Midrise multifamily, Emergency housing allowed | | R4 | 24.11 | Mid-Rise Multifamily | Medium density multifamily, Special needs housing | | RCX | 41 | Mid-Rise Multifamily | Midrise multifamily | ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions | Zone | Achieved Density Levels | Zone Category | Typical/Allowed Housing Types | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | DCC | 581 | High-Rise/Tower | High rise towers, Emergency housing allowed | | DMU | 331 | High-Rise/Tower | Higher density multifamily, Emergency housing allowed | | R5 | | High-Rise/Tower | High density multifamily | | UCX | 61 | High-Rise/Tower | High density multifamily, Emergency housing allowed | | WR | | High-Rise/Tower | Workforce housing, Emergency housing allowed | Sources: Typical and allowed housing types from the Tacoma Zoning Reference Guide, 2016; Achieved densities from Pierce County Buildable Lands pg. 244, 2022; Seva Workshop, 2025. The table below correlates these defined zone categories with incomes likely to be served by the available housing products allowed and typical within them. ### Exhibit 38: Income Bands Associated with Zoning Categories | Income Bands | Zoning Categories Associated | Typical/Allowed Housing Types | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 0-30% AMI, including non-PSH and PSH | | Low-rise multifamily: walkup apartments or condominiums (up to 3 floors) | | 30-50% AMI | Low-rise and Mid-rise multifamily | Mid-rise multifamily: apartments or condominiums ~4-8 floors (40-85 ft) | | 50-80% AMI | | | | 80-100% AMI% | Moderate density and High-rise/Tower | Moderate density: 2-3-plexes, townhomes | | 100-120% AMI | | High-rise/Tower: multifamily buildings taller than 85 ft. | | >120% AMI | Low density | Detached single-family homes | Sources: Zone category definitions based on Commerce Housing Element Update guidance pg. 32, 2023; Income association with housing types based on affordability analysis in this report as well as HIT Feasibility Memo. ## Capacity by income band Combining the capacity calculations summarized in Exhibit 35 and the zoning category to income band correlations outlined in Exhibit 38, residential capacity in Tacoma can be evaluated across the income spectrum. This analysis is shown below in Exhibit 39. As highlighted on previous pages, this capacity analysis is based on calculations prior to the adoption of new zoning regulations in Tacoma, related to the Home in Tacoma update. These new zoning regulations dramatically expand the existing capacity in Tacoma’s lowest density zoning districts, estimated to increase net new housing units by 25,000-50,000 in lower density zones. 12 This offers additional assurance that Tacoma more than exceeds the targets allocated to each income band into the future. **Exhibit 39: Tacoma Residential Land Capacity by Income Band, 2020-2044 Targets** | Income Bands | Zones Associated | Projected Need (2020-2044) | Capacity in Associated Zones | Surplus or (Gap) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 0-30% AMI, including non-PSH and PSH | | | | | | 30-50% AMI | Low-rise and Mid-rise multifamily | 27,208 | 40,750 | 13,542 | | 50-80% AMI | | | | | | 80-100% AMI% | Moderate density and High-rise multifamily | 5,157 | 19,635 | 14,478 | | 100-120% AMI | | | | | | >120% AMI | Low density | 10,455 | 7,708 | (2,747) | Sources: Projected need based on Pierce County CPP Appendix A, 2022; Capacity by zone based on Pierce County Buildable Lands, 2022; Seva Workshop, 2025. ## Capacity for emergency housing Capacity data from Pierce County Buildable Lands (2022) was used for this analysis. 1) To start, the project team identified zones where emergency shelters are allowed outright: UCS, CCX, CIX, C2, M1, DCC, DMU, DR, and WR. 13 All parcels identified as vacant from these designations were pulled. 2) Vacant parcel acreage was reduced by identification of critical areas and removal of parcels from the list with development permits that occurred in years since the buildable lands analysis. 3) Each property remaining on the list was evaluated for the potential number of emergency housing beds it could accommodate. This was performed by applying example densities, as identified in Commerce Guidance. Half of the parcels used the standard of emergency housing from, at 71 units/acre and half of the parcels used the standard of tiny home village housing at 14 units per acre. 14 These were selected as comparable estimates from peer communities, reflecting a moderate density level for any given site. [^p66-12]: Additional capacity estimates based on HIT DEIS pg. 2-7 [^p66-13]: TMC Special Needs Housing Use Table 13.06.080N [^p66-14]: Washington Department of Commerce “Guidance of Updating Your Housing Element”, Exhibit 18, pg. 49 4) Per Tacoma’s Title 2 Building Code for emergency shelters, no individual site was allowed to exceed 99 beds. Any site with an estimate beyond 99 was reduced to this maximum capacity limit.[^p67-15] ### Exhibit 40: Emergency Housing Land Capacity Analysis | Zones | Vacant Acreage (Gross) | Critical Areas (Acres) | Vacant Acreage (Net) | Capacity for Emergency Housing Beds | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | C2 | 14 | 3.6 | 10.4 | 538 | | CCX | 20 | 1.4 | 18.8 | 691 | | DMU | 14 | 0.6 | 13.4 | 639 | | DR | 18 | 3.1 | 15.0 | 687 | | DCC | 1 | 0.0 | 1.3 | 78 | | UCX | 7 | 1.3 | 5.7 | 150 | | WR | 11 | 0.2 | 10.9 | 401 | Sources: Pierce County Buildable Lands, 2022; Seva Workshop, 2025. 5) This analysis resulted in a capacity for **3,184 emergency housing beds**. This exceeds the 2044 capacity target of 2,624 beds. a. Not considered in this analysis were underutilized parcels and hotels/motels in the selected zones, which would further expand the estimate for emergency housing capacity. b. Not considered in this analysis are higher density congregate emergency shelter types, which could be part of Tacoma’s future response to addressing emergency housing needs and would yield more capacity on the included parcels. c. This analysis only considers zones where emergency housing is permitted outright. In an additional 12 zones emergency housing is permitted as a conditional use, which further increases the total capacity for this type: R4, R5, PRD, URX, RCX, NCX, T, C1, HM, HMX, and PDB zones. d. In addition to this analysis, Tacoma’s Ordinance 28460 allows an exemption for religious and non-profit sites to host emergency shelters on a temporary basis, which further expands the city’s capacity to accommodate emergency housing needs. [^p67-15]: TMC 2.21.510 # Capacity for special housing types * Housing for moderate income households in Tacoma includes ownership opportunities for middle housing types and rental opportunities for most types of rental units.[^p68-16] * Housing for low-income households in Tacoma includes much of the rental housing stock but few homeownership opportunities without public subsidy or nonprofit support. There are some units of income-restricted affordable housing set aside for these renters. * Housing for very-low income households in Tacoma includes income-restricted affordable housing and some market-rate rental units in older buildings. * Housing for extremely low-income households in Tacoma includes transitional housing, permanent supportive housing, and income-restricted affordable housing. <
> Middle housing types, such as townhomes, 2-3-4-plexes, and cottage housing are allowed across most all residential districts in Tacoma. The R1 zone is the most restrictive for these types. The table in Exhibit 41 summarizes middle housing types permissions across residential zones. For each type, the minimum lot size varies and is larger in lower density zones. Capacity analysis shows the most space for additional housing units in the R-2 zone (6,089 units). ### Exhibit 41: Middle Housing Types across Residential Zones (permit type - minimum lot area in SF) | Dwelling Type | R-1 Zone | R-2 | R-2 SRD | HMR-SRD | R-3 | R-4-L | R-4 | R-5 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Single-family detached, small lots | P - 6,750 | P - 4,500 | P - 4,500 | P - 4,500 | P - 2,500 | P - 2,500 | P - 2,500 | P - 2,500 | | Two-family | N | CU - 6,000 | P/CU - 6,000 | P/CU - 6,000 | P - 6,000 | P - 4,250 | P - 3,750 | P - 3,500 | | Three-family | N | N | P/CU - 9,000 | P/CU - 9,000 | P - 9,000 | P - 5,500 | P - 5,000 | P - 4,500 | | Townhouse | N | CU - 3,000 | CU - 3,000 | CU - 3,000 | P - 3,000 | P - 1,500 | P - 1,000 | P - 1,000 | | Cottage housing | CU | CU | CU | CU | CU | CU | CU | CU | CU = Conditional Use permit required Sources: TMC 13.06.020(F); Seva Workshop, 2024. [^p68-16]: HIT Feasibility Analysis Memo, 2024. **Manufactured housing**, described in the zoning code as mobile homes and trailer courts, are allowed as a conditional use in the R-4-L and C-2 zones. The R-4-L zone,is described as “low density multifamily” and can be found in small areas south of Downtown and the Tideflats, as well as scattered sites across Tacoma’s neighborhood districts. See map on the next page, Exhibit 43, which identifies these areas. There are approximately 356 units of manufactured housing in Tacoma today.[^p69-17] Capacity for additional units in the R-4-L zone is 844 and in the C2 zone is 584. Mobile home communities are increasingly rare within city limits, due to financial pressures that lead to redevelopment. **Multifamily housing** is allowed in many residential districts. Mid-scale residential (R3) allows multifamily as a conditional use on lots at least 9,000 square feet in size. In all residential and commercial zones above this, multifamily housing is permitted outright. **Permanent supportive housing and income-restricted affordable housing** is allowed anywhere that multifamily housing units are permitted. Exceptions exist if units are classified as group housing or emergency housing – explored below. **Group housing and foster care facilities** are allowed uses across almost all residential, commercial, and mixed-use zones, although lower density residential zones limit the quantity of residents in group housing facilities. In mixed use zones such as NCX or CCX these uses are not allowed at the street level along frontage of pedestrian streets. **Emergency and transitional housing** is allowed as a conditional use in many Tacoma zones such as R-4-L, R-4, and R-5. They are allowed uses in Urban Center, Commercial Mixed-Use, Downtown Commercial Core, and other higher density zones. The table in Exhibit 42 summarizes where these housing types are currently allowed in Tacoma. ### Exhibit 42: Special Needs Housing Types as Permitted Uses in Tacoma | | Size (number of residents) | R-1, R-2, R-2SRD, HMR-SRD, NRX | R-3 | R-4-L, R-4, R-5, PRD, URX, RCX, NCX, T, C-1, HM, HMX, PDB | UCX, CCX, CIX, C-2, M-1, DCC, DMU, DR, WR | M-2, PMI | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Emergency and Transitional Housing | Limit 6 | N | N | CU | P | N | | Emergency and Transitional Housing | 7-15 | N | N | CU | P | N | | Emergency and Transitional Housing | 16 or more | N | N | CU | P | N | | Confidential Shelter, Adult Family Home, Staffed Residential Home | Limit 6 | P | P | P | P | N | N = Not permitted; CU = Conditional Use; P = Permitted Source: TMC 13.06.080.N [^p69-17]: ACS 5-year estimates, 2021 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions Exhibit 43: City of Tacoma Areas Zoned as R-4-L. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. # 3.2 Home in Tacoma Home in Tacoma (HIT) is a project with phase I adopted in December 2021 enacting changes to the city’s housing growth strategy by supporting middle housing types citywide and taking action to ensure that housing growth can meet multiple community goals. In 2023, the City conducted intensive engagement as part of the project’s second phase. In the meantime statewide ONE TACOMA 45 legislation such as HB 1110 (middle housing), HB 1337 (ADU support), and SB 5412 (SEPA Exemptions) was passed. Tacoma adjusted its package of policy reforms to align with these legislative directives. The public comment period for HIT ended in March 2024. The changes for this package of reforms include[^p71-18]: ## Middle Housing Zoning Framework Single family zoning will be replaced with Urban Residential (UR) zoning that allows for a range of building sizes that include multiple units, also known as middle housing. New housing types and permitting frameworks will be developed to support this shift. **Housing Types** | Houseplex | Backyard Building | Courtyard Housing | Rowhouses | Multiplex | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | | | | | | A single building with up to 6 units which is generally the size of a single-unit house, includes an entry from the street and a backyard. Allowed in UR-1/2/3. Includes single-unit homes as permitted use in UR-1/2/3. | A building located behind another structure at the rear of a lot, which may contain a garage. Allowed in UR-1/2/3. | A group of detached or attached units arranged around a shared courtyard which is a shared social space taking the place of private back yards. Detached Courtyard Housing is allowed in UR-1/2/3. Attached is allowed in UR-2/3. | A multi-story building with access to the street from a front door; it is always attached to 2 to 5 other Rowhouses, which together create a "Rowhouse Cluster". Allowed in UR-1/2/3. | A medium building consisting of 7 or more stacked units with the appearance of a large house or a small apartment building. Allowed only in UR-3. | <
> ## Middle Housing Standards New form-based building design standards will correspond with these zoning changes. Revised site development standards will follow suit to update buildings’ height, scale, parking and landscape requirements. Housing types will be: houseplex, backyard building, courtyard housing, rowhouses, and multiplex. ## Affordable Housing Regulatory Tools These policies are designed to increase housing supply, choice, affordability, and ownership opportunities in Tacoma. They expand the City’s inclusionary housing program to target unmet needs and align with market conditions. The structure of the City’s bonus program is revisited to be more user friendly, reduce administrative burden, and to set parameters for income targets. MFTE is recommended for the new UR-3 zone. [^p71-18]: City of Tacoma Home in Tacoma Project Summary, Feb 2024 # 4 PROGRAMS AND POLICIES ## 4.1 Identifying barriers to affordability and availability of housing ### Housing Production Trends Compared to Need This section reviews housing production trends for the types needed to meet housing targets across all income bands in Tacoma. Exhibit 44: Housing Production Trends by Income Level, 2011-2021, Compared To Needed Production Levels for Targets 2020-2044. | Income level (% AMI) | Projected housing need (2020-2044) | Housing type(s) that best serve these needs | Aggregate housing need (2020-2044) | Annual unit production needed | Average annual unit production (2011-2021) | Is there a barrier to sufficient production? | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 0-30% PSH | 7,486 | Low-rise and Mid-rise multifamily (walk-ups, apartments and condominiums up to 85') | 27,256 | 1,136 | 68 | Yes | | 0-30% Other | 5,538 | | | | | | | >30 - 50% | 7,949 | | | | | | | >50- 80% | 6,283 | | | | | | | >80-100% | 2,705 | Moderate density (townhomes, 2-3-4-plexes) and High-rise multifamily (apartments and condominiums above 85') | 5,157 | 215 | 319 | No | | >100-120% | 2,452 | | | | | | | >120% | 10,455 | Low density (single family) | 10,455 | 436 | 510 | No | Sources: Projected housing need from Pierce County CPPs, Appendix A; Average annual unit production from ACS 5-year estimates, 2011 and 2021 (note that this source documents the net change in this unit type, taking into account both demolition and construction); Seva Workshop, 2025 ### Identifying Barriers Per the analysis shown in Exhibit 44, low-rise and mid-rise multifamily housing styles are identified for low production rates relative to desired production to meet targets. While there may be some small additional regulatory or process improvements to propose for these housing types, the leading barrier understood in this case is financial feasibility. The HIT Feasibility Analysis (2024) tests the market feasibility for many middle housing types addressed in the proposed code amendments associated with the program. This analysis finds that, even with all the proposed code updates and process improvements in HIT, low-rise and mid-rise multifamily products are only financially feasible in “high market areas” which are much less likely to serve the intended income brackets of 80% AMI or less. Further, while some low-rise and mid-rise development formats are financially feasible in these high market areas, they remain *less* profitable than alternatives, such as townhomes or duplexes. Another key finding from this report is that ownership housing is more likely to be built than rental housing for these middle housing types, making it even less likely that small- to mid-rise rental buildings will be part of new housing stock in Tacoma. Addressing the financial feasibility barrier for low-rise and mid-rise multifamily housing types raises similar concerns to meeting targets for PSH and income-subsidized affordable housing for those in Tacoma’s lowest income brackets. Adequate provisions for income-restricted affordable housing in Tacoma has been studied extensively through the City’s recent Affordable Housing Action Strategy work. Financial assistance, whether in the form of direct funding, incentive programs, or rental vouchers, falls far short of the amount needed to meet housing needs. This is true across Pierce County, as explored in the “Pierce County Housing Action Strategy” (2022) and summarized in Exhibit 45.[^p73-19] This analysis estimates an annual funding gap of $624 million dollars countywide for households at 50% AMI or less, even if potential new funding strategies outlined in the study are implemented. Coordinated action countywide is described as critical to meet these needs, including new funding streams and land donation efforts. Tacoma is exploring many options to increase its supply of affordable housing, however, and these strategies are reviewed in the next section of this report. **Exhibit 45: Funding Gap for Affordable Housing, Pierce County, 2022.** <
> Image Source: “Pierce County Housing Action Strategy”, 2022, BERK Consulting. [^p73-19]: https://www.piercecountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/120662/Pierce-County-Housing-Action-Strategy-2022- # 4.2 Addressing barriers, gaps, and needs The City of Tacoma has been very active in recent years to address its housing challenges. In February 2024, the City adopted its Anti-Displacement Strategy which adds 21 policy and program options for the City to take that address a lack of affordable housing and displacement pressures in the City. The list below captures these initiatives designed promote greater affordability and equity in the city’s housing market: ### Income-Restricted Affordable Housing Policies and Investments * **Affordability incentives** such as height and density bonuses, tax reduction, and permitting support are examples of supports that Tacoma has implemented to promote the inclusion of affordable units within market rate housing developments.[^p74-20] * **Inclusionary zoning**. This policy framework takes the above incentives and makes them mandatory in areas of the city where the market supports denser development. Tacoma currently has inclusionary zoning in place in the Tacoma Mall Regional Center (2018).[^p74-21] * **Land banking** is the process of purchasing land or buildings in areas of the city that can be used for the development of affordable housing. The Tacoma Community Redevelopment Authority (TCRA) Board is the City’s mechanism for land banking.[^p74-22] ### Supporting Homeownership and Wealth Building * **Down-payment homebuyer assistance** includes homebuyer education as well as assistance for down payment funds for first-time homeowners. Tacoma’s program began in 2023. * **Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)** are allowed in Tacoma and new policies promote increased development of this housing type, which helps build equity for homeowners and offers housing stock that meets a variety of community needs. Tacoma’s ADU program was revamped in 2019 and new supports help homeowners with the financing needed for increased production. * **Home Maintenance Support** helps low-income homeowners pay for necessary repairs that make their housing suitable for long-term living. ### Tenant Protections * Tacoma’s **rental inspection program** assesses quality of conditions for renters, holding landlords accountable to health and safety standards. This program mitigates [^p74-20]: https://www.cityoftacoma.org/government/city_departments/planning_and_development_services/DevelopmentServices/development_and_housing_incentives [^p74-21]: TMC 13.18 [^p74-22]: Tacoma Community Redevelopment Authority (TCRA) Board displacement that could be caused by violation of these standards by identifying pathways to remediation for property owners. In today's version of this program, the tenant must request the inspection.[^p75-23] * **Rental Housing Code.** In 2018, Tacoma adopted the Rental Housing Code, which provides protections for tenants in the city. It includes requirements for notice prior to termination of tenancy or rent increases, or notice and relocation assistance when the building will change use or redevelop.[^p75-24] Landlords are penalized if they are out of compliance with these regulations. * **Tenant Relocation Funds.** This program provides $2,000 in relocation assistance to eligible tenants to assist with moving costs when displacement occurs due to demolition, rehabilitation, or a change in use. ## Direct Assistance to Address Housing Insecurity * **Utility assistance** provided by Tacoma Public Utilities and Environmental Services offers reduced utility costs to eligible households. ## Policies and Programs Under Consideration * **Home in Tacoma (HIT).** As described on page 45, this package of reforms widely expands access to middle housing types across Tacoma. These housing types offer homeownership at rates that are affordable to a broader range of income bands.[^p75-25] * **Right of First Refusal** is being explored as a policy option to pair with Tacoma's Preservation Ordinance. This would give affordable housing developers the first chance at purchasing certain properties, at market rate, before the building is offered to other potential buyers. * **Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA).** This program help tenants organize to purchase a building collectively rather than have the property sold to another investor. This action builds equity for renters in areas experiencing displacement and share in any gains to land values built in their communities. * **A Housing Preservation Fund** would create a dedicated stream of funds for the acquisition of properties, or the provision of low-interest financing, to support preservation efforts. * **Community land trust (CLT) support.** The City could allocate funds to offset startup or operating costs associated with CLTs in Tacoma. [^p75-23]: https://www.cityoftacoma.org/government/city_departments/equity_and_human_rights/landlord-tenant_program/landlord- tenant_code_compliance_inspection [^p75-24]: https://cms.cityoftacoma.org/CBCFiles/RentalHousingCode/rentalhousingcodeflyer.pdf [^p75-25]: As of November 2024, Tacoma City Council approved HIT code updates, replacing the lowest density residential zones with Urban Residential designations that allow for a greater mix of housing types, reduce parking requirements, and enable more flexibility with lot use. * A Community Prioritization Policy would give preference to households who have been displaced, who descend from displacement, or who are actively at high risk of displacement when reviewing applications for income-restricted affordable housing. # 5 ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT According to 2021 LEHD Origin Destination Employment Statistics (LODES), 28% of working Tacoma residents both live and work Tacoma. A combined 22% percent have places of employment in surrounding cities of Lakewood, Kent, Auburn, Federal Way, and Fife. Twelve (12%) of Tacoma workers have their place of employment in Seattle. About one-third work elsewhere – this includes at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, one of the largest Tacoma resident employers. See Exhibit 46. It is important to note the LEHD data is based on administrative records such as unemployment insurance reporting connecting place of residence and place of employment. These numbers reflect both commuters and those who are working remotely. They also do not include self-employed workers who are more likely to work from home. The American Community Survey is based on self-reported respondent experiences and will be inclusive of self-employed workers. Based on the 2021 ACS data, the Tacoma workforce largely commutes by car, 70% driving alone and another 10% carpooling. The mean travel time to work is 30.4 minutes with 22.7% of workers commuting 45 minutes or more to work. Ten percent of the workforce works from home and only 6% of workers use public transportation. See Exhibit 47. The likelihood of Tacoma workers taking a certain means of transportation to work varies by race and ethnicity. Exhibit 48 compares the distribution of commute methods to the underlying distribution of workers by race and ethnicity. Communities of color are more likely than average to carpool. Black workers are much more likely than average to commute to work by public transportation. White, non-Hispanic or Latino, workers are the most likely group to commute alone by car, truck, or van. Tacoma’s biggest job center is Downtown, followed by the Tacoma Mall, Tideflats, and South Tacoma MIC areas. Strengthening public transportation options from residential centers to these employment hubs could improve the public transportation capture rate from the city’s commuters. Given the higher ratio of Black workers using public transportation, continued improvement of bus service can help meet racial equity goals. Very few Tacomans report walking to work (2%). This indicates that there is not a complementary clustering of work opportunities and housing centers within the city. Exhibit 46: Tacoma Inflow/Outflow Analysis, 2021. <
> Sources: Census OntheMap, 2021; Seva Workshop, 2024. ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions **Exhibit 47: Means of Transportation to Work, 2021.** <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021) **Exhibit 48: Means of Transportation to Work by Race and Ethnicity, 2021.** <
> Note: A value of 0 indicates the share of that group using that means of transportation is equal to their share in the overall population. AIAN=American Indian and Alaska Native; NHOPI=Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Hispanic or Latine is an ethnicity. The Hispanic or Latine category includes Hispanic and Latine people of all races. All other categories show non-Hispanic races. Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021) (B08119, B08105B-I) ONE TACOMA 54 # 6 RACIAL EQUITY IN HOUSING POLICY ## 6.1 Racially disparate impacts In Tacoma, racial disparities are observed in homeownership rates (see Exhibit 7), household incomes (see Exhibit 15), and rates of housing cost burden (Exhibit 20). Non-white households have lower rates of homeownership and lower household incomes, and Black households experience the greatest disparities across these datapoints. Geographically speaking, Tacoma’s communities of color are more densely populated in south and east Tacoma neighborhoods, as shown in the map in Exhibit 49. Location decisions are a function of many factors at the household level, including available resources and access to desired amenities. Today’s distribution of racial groups is also influenced by historical policies and practices, such as treaties, redlining, Japanese incarceration, and Chinese expulsion[^p80-26]. During active redlining in Tacoma, the North End and areas extending to the bay were identified as the most desirable parts of the city. Downtown, the Hilltop area, the northern parts of Eastside, and parts of South Tacoma were labeled as “hazardous” (pink) or “undesirable” (yellow) due to the presence of non-white residents. These practices concentrated communities of color in neighborhoods that were de-prioritized for public investment and services. Areas identified as “first” (green) or “second” (blue) grade were more favorable and predominantly White homeowners. These same areas remain whiter than other Tacoma neighborhoods today. See Exhibit 50 for the 1937 map used by mortgage lenders. Today, the decline in homeownership affordability for moderate and low-income households perpetuates these inequities. Rising interest rates and house prices raise the barrier to entry for home ownership. In Tacoma, racial disparity persists among first-time homebuyers, particularly for Black and NHOPI households. See Exhibit 18. Policy proposals included with Home in Tacoma address this decline in affordability by expanding opportunities for middle housing types. The proposed zoning changes and incentive programs would take steps to address this disparity. [^p80-26]: For a more detailed history see: Mapping Inequality, https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/map/WA/Tacoma/context#loc=12/47.2481/-122.4546 ## Exhibit 49: People of Color as a Proportion of the Population in Tacoma, 2021. <
> Source: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021). Exhibit 50: Tacoma “Residential Security Map”, 1937. <
> Image Source: “Mapping Inequality” website, hosted by the University of Richmond. In 2021, the City of Tacoma conducted an in-depth study into its systemic race-based disparities in housing. This report studied both quantitative and qualitative sources related to housing, discrimination, and homeownership opportunity in Tacoma. Key findings from this study include: * Black households have experienced a stark decline in homeownership from 1990-2020 in Tacoma. All other racial groups experienced increase or stable rates of homeownership over this time period. Black and Hispanic households across the country are shown to have been more significantly impacted by the predatory and subprime lending practices that led to the 2008 foreclosure crisis. See Exhibit 51. ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions Exhibit 51: Percent Change of Owner and Renter Households by Race, in the City of Tacoma 1990-2020. <
> Tenure — Owner -- Renter Notes: AAPI is Asian American and Pacific Islanders, AIAN is American Indian and Alaska Native, Other refers to people not fitting into a provided group. The multiracial category was not introduced until 2000 and thus not included. Sources: Sources: U.S. Census, American Community Survey (ACS), 2015- 2019 (5 Year Survey) and NHGIS (National Historical GIS) iPUMs data; EcoNorthwest “Tacoma Housing Disparities”, 2021. * Tacoma’s educational attainment levels are significantly lower than statewide rates across almost every race category. In Tacoma, 19% of Black residents have a bachelor’s degree or higher compared to a rate of 33% for White residents. Lower levels of educational attainment impact expected income generation potential, which connects directly to a household’s ability to avoid cost burden. * Racial disparities for household income are observed in Tacoma, connecting to trends in homeownership and educational attainment. Black households have the lowest median income. # 6.2 Displacement In 2024, the City of Tacoma adopted an Anti-Displacement Strategy that outlines policies and programs that address housing stability for vulnerable residents. These strategies address three types of displacement: **physical displacement**, occurring when building conditions change like in case of natural disaster, condemnation, or eminent domain; **economic displacement**, when housing cost increases are dramatic enough that a resident must move or is evicted; and **cultural displacement**, when a household moves because the businesses/services/community that cultivate a sense of belonging for them are no longer present. ONE TACOMA 58 The strategy studies displacement risk mapping exercises completed by the Department of Commerce, Puget Sound Regional Council, UC Berkeley Urban Displacement Project, Evictions Study Map, and the City’s own Equity Index.[^p84-27] Rather than creating a new displacement risk mapping tool, the City evaluated these 5 different, but related, analyses for a comprehensive study of the various factors impacting displacement risk in Tacoma. **Exhibit 52: Displacement Risk Mapping in Tacoma, Draft 2024.** <
> Note: This is a Draft version Source: Washington Department of Commerce, 2025. Under these displacement definitions and considering the findings of these five studies, the strategy identifies particular displacement risk: * Geographically, in the Hilltop neighborhood and in parts of South and East Tacoma [^p84-27]: Department of Commerce Displacement Risk Map, Draft, 2024, PSRC Displacement Risk Map, 2019, https://www.urbandisplacement.org/, https://evictionlab.org/, and Tacoma Equity Index, 2022 * Racially, People of Color are shown to be at higher displacement risk than White residents Additional detailed study into movement of particular households is conducted in the 2021 “Tacoma Housing Disparity Study”. This report observes that between 2000-2019, residential patterns of Black households indicate that the central, west end, and eastside areas of Tacoma show signs of gentrification and displacement risk. **Existing policies and programs that might contribute to displacement in Tacoma are:** * Concentrated and significant upzones contribute to displacement risk. Land becomes more valuable as denser development is allowed on each site, which contributes to financial pressures toward economic displacement. When certain parts of the city remain very low density while others are dramatically upzoned, displacement risk is concentrated in those upzoned areas. In Tacoma, there are many neighborhoods where low density residential zoning is protected, meaning that other areas, such as the Downtown and Mixed-Use Centers, have experienced this increased displacement risk. * Large public investments in infrastructure and amenities can contribute to displacement risk. These investments, such as new public transit infrastructure, increase the desirability of neighborhoods and can increase land values. Light rail expansion in Tacoma will increase displacement risk near station areas, both from physical displacement via eminent domain and economic displacement form increased property values. Future stations are planned in the Portland Avenue and Tacoma Dome areas, with service starting in 2030. **Existing policies and programs that are aimed at mitigating displacement pressures:** * Concentrations of residential zones with very low density also contribute to a city’s overall displacement risk. Maintaining these areas means that during periods of growth when development pressures rise, there is less land to spread these pressures across. Areas vulnerable to displacement pressure feel a more intense version of those forces. State policies that eliminate exclusive single family zoning (HB 1110) and new legislation proposed through Home in Tacoma would make a big impact on increasing housing options in Tacoma.[^p85-28] * Affordable housing incentive programs increase the supply of income-restricted housing units. These units provide assurance that households with lower incomes will have a place in the community, for the long term. When applied in areas with higher concentrations of vulnerable populations, they can have a bigger anti-displacement impact. Examples of these programs in Tacoma today include: Inclusionary zoning, density bonuses, Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE), and priority permit review. * Down-payment homebuyer assistance program. Since 2014, the City has intermittently contracted with Washington State Housing Finance Commission to administer downpayment assistance funds for eligible households with incomes at or below 80% [^p85-28]: apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2023-24/htm/bill%20reports/House/1110%20HBA%20HOUS%202023.htm; Home in Tacoma legislation was adopted in Tacoma in November 2024. AMI. This program ended in 2023, but the City is working to implement a new, internally operated program. # 6.3 Exclusion ## Historic Practices A history of exclusionary legal practices provides a framework for modern residential patterns. A longer exploration of this history can found in the Equity Assessment Context History and Baseline document for this project. Key takeaways from this review, relevant to residential exclusion, include: * Intense decrease in Tribal populations after early arrival of White settlers due to diseases such as smallpox and influenza. Displacement of indigenous inhabitants via treaties that cede Tribal lands in areas now known as Tacoma. * Labor movements and fear-based campaigns against Chinese railroad workers, leading to a ban on citizenship and land ownership for these immigrants in the late 1800s. This included a mob in 1885 that marched through Tacoma’s Chinatown, destroying homes and businesses. * The internment of Japanese and Japanese-Americans to concentration camps during World War II. * Redlining and Racially Restrictive covenants, as explored in the Racially Disparate Impacts section, blocked many – particularly Black Americans – from homeownership and settlement in certain designated areas of Tacoma until these practices started being dismantled with the Fair Housing Act of 1968 ## Modern Lending Practices Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data show that Black, Hispanic, and other minority applicants are less successful than White applicants in obtaining mortgage financing in Tacoma. The most common denial reasons listed for loan applicants in Tacoma are debt to income ratio (28%) and credit history (23%). Credit history is a more prevalent reason for denial among Black and Indian/Alaska Native applicants, while Hispanic applicants are more likely denied based on debt-to-income ratios.[^p86-29] Access to credit is a major factor in determining eligibility for homeownership and building generational wealth. ## Location Quotient Analysis A location quotient is a metric calculated to show the concentration of communities of interest in each census tract relative to patterns across a lager geography. It is a useful [^p86-29]: “Tacoma Housing Disparity Study”, 2021. Data from 2020. tool for illustrating patterns of segregation and exclusion. For example, if 7% of a neighborhood population is Black, and 7% of that county’s population is Black, then the location quotient is 1. A tract where 14% of residents are Black would have a location quotient of 2. And a track where only 3.5% of residents are Black would have a location quotient of 0.5. So, tracts with high location quotient scores have a greater share of that population compared to the rest of the County. Tacoma has long been more diverse than Pierce County has a whole. As noted above, the City has historically been home to particularly high concentrations of Asian and Black residents as compared to Pierce County. Asian communities in Tacoma are highly represented in the southern parts of the city, particularly in South Tacoma and Eastside. Black communities have higher representation across many Tacoma neighborhoods, but notably low representation along the waterfront in the North End. Both Black and Asian communities are also highly represented in areas outside of the Tacoma City boundary and in other urban and peri-urban areas of Pierce County. See Exhibit 53. The durability of redlining effects can be seen in North End that has a higher concentration of White households than compared to Pierce County as a whole and lower concentration of Asian, Black and Hispanic/Latino residents. The location quotient maps suggest that the concentration of White communities is relatively even across Tacoma, with lowest prevalence in southern neighborhoods. Hispanic/Latino communities of Tacoma are most densely represented in Eastside, New Tacoma, and South Tacoma neighborhoods. ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 53: Location Quotient, Asian, Black, Hispanic Latino, White Alone <
> Sources: American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2017-2021); Seva Workshop, 2024. A location quotient is a metric calculated to show the concentration of communities of interest in each census tract relative to patterns across a lager geography. It is a useful tool for illustrating patterns of segregation and exclusion. In the above maps, the darker orange shade identifies concentrations of the studied group across Tacoma, and the green identifies low prevalence of the group. In the top left, Asian households. Top right, Black households. Bottom left, Hispanic/Latino households, and bottom right-White households. These rates are relative to Pierce County’s overall demographics, hence the overall lower ratios of White households in Tacoma. ONE TACOMA 63 # 6.4 Policy Audit In compliance with the HB 1220 framework of updates to comprehensive plans, the One Tacoma Plan process started with an in-depth review of the City’s housing policy history with a racial equity lens. This can be found in the project’s Equity Assessment Context History and Baseline document. The project team then selected a short list of equity outcomes that are cross-cutting across all Comprehensive Plan chapters. Housing-specific indicators reviewed in this assessment include an analysis of first-time buyers of single dwelling structures, renter-occupied housing cost burden greater than 50%, and the percent of residents living in the same house one year ago. All data was disaggregated both by geography and by race/ethnicity to identify patterns of discrimination and exclusion across the city. Then, a comprehensive review of all policies in the Housing element of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan applied a rating to flag concerns for racial equity considerations. The rubric for this review was designed to be a tool for reviewers to assess Comprehensive Plan policies regardless of prior assessment and equity experience. The goal is not to “score” each policy on each of the Assessment Considerations. Instead, the considerations are guiding questions and lenses for reviewers to think through the policy and its characteristics and implications. After thinking though the considerations, we recommend assigning an overall rating as a synthesis of the results. In the audit process, multiple reviewers independently review the policies and assign ratings. Comparing the results of these independent audits, policies where different ratings were assigned would warrant further discussion to arrive at a consensus. We note that the goal is not to have a plan full of transformative policies, but to build in key opportunities to advance equity, especially on priority outcomes and for priority groups listed above. | | Assessment Considerations | Overall Rating | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Purpose** | Who is this policy intended to serve?

What impact or outcomes does this policy intend to create? Does it affect priority equity outcomes?

Was it created in response to input from the community it was intended to serve? | Harmful/Exploitative (H)
- Perpetuates or exacerbates existing injustices in the distribution of benefits and burdens.

Neutral/Blind (N) - Does not call out or recognize differences by subgroup. May be implicitly biased according to dominant paradigms. | | **Implementation** | How are the activities of this policy resourced (funding, staffing, public will/attention)?

Are there explicit equity-focused priorities identified and resourced accordingly?

Are resources for implementation of this policy distributed equitably? | | ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions | | Assessment Considerations | Overall Rating | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | How do communities access the benefits of this policy? What unique barriers may exist for specific subgroups?

What is the process for implementation of this policy? Are there points at which bias may affect the outcome? | Sensitive/Responsive (S) – Recognizes differences by subgroups and targets interventions by subgroup to respond to differential needs within in the existing paradigm. | | **Impact** | How is the policy aligned with Comp Plan goals and/or specific Equity outcomes?

Who is impacted (benefiting or burdened) by the implementation of this policy? Are specific priority groups or areas identified?

Is the policy alone sufficient for achieving equity outcomes? If no, are complementary policies and programs available and sufficient?

What unintended impacts may result from this policy and how are the benefits and burdens of these distributed? | Transformative (T) – Structurally shifts systems of power and distribution of benefits and burdens in a just way. | | **Accountability** | Are there relevant disaggregated data and measures available to assess the success of this policy?

Who is accountable for the results of policy implementation?

Are results of this policy transparent to impacted communities?

Are there mechanisms and venues to continue to engage impacted communities in the improvement and redesign of this policy? | | A lens for language improvements was also applied to this review. A summary of the findings is included below. ONE TACOMA 65 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions ## Exhibit 54: Policy Audit of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Housing Element | Number | Text | Policy Rating | Equity Notes | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | H-1 | Promote access to high-quality affordable housing that accommodates Tacomans’ needs, preferences, and financial capabilities in terms of different types, tenures, density, sizes, costs, and locations. | S | Recognizes difference but also trying to achieve many things at once. | | H-1.1 | Maintain sufficient residential development capacity to accommodate Tacoma’s housing targets and accomodate changing housing needs and preferences of Tacoma residents. | N | | | H-1.2 | Strive to capture at least 35 percent of Urban Pierce County’s residential growth. | N | | | H-1.3 | Encourage new and innovative housing types that meet the evolving needs of Tacoma households and expand housing choices in all neighborhoods. These housing types include single family dwelling units; multi-dwelling units from duplexes to multi-family developments; small units; accessory dwelling units; pre-fabricated homes such as manufactured, modular; co-housing and clustered housing. | S | Could be transformative if it wasn't so broad. Unclear how single family dwellings are new and innovative | | H-1.4 | Strongly support the maintenance and improvement of the existing housing stock and encourage the adaptation of the existing housing stock to accommodate the changing variety of household types. | N | Depends on implementation and who will benefit from investments. | | H-1.5 | Apply zoning in and around centers that allows for and supports a diversity of housing types. | N | | | H-1.6 | Allow and support a robust and diverse supply of affordable, accessible housing to meet the needs of special populations, to include older adults, and people with disabilities, and permanent, supportive housing for homeless individuals, especially in centers and other places which are in close proximity to services and transit. | S | Calls out important groups, but the verbs are weak on action - "allow" and "support". | | H-1.7 | Implement land use incentives (e.g. density or development bonuses, lot size reductions, transfer of development rights, height or bulk bonuses, fee waivers, accelerated permitting, parking requirement reductions, and tax incentives, and "surplus land sales" in appropriate locations to facilitate the development of new housing units. | N | Could identify how incentives could best serve the needs of burdened groups. As written, incentives could benefit anyone. | | H-1.8 | Create a process to coordinate public investments, such as capital improvements, with affordable housing activities to reduce the overall cost of development. | T | Specific, directed impact, shifting of resources. | ONE TACOMA 66 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions | Number | Text | Policy Rating | Equity Notes | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | H-1.9 | Apply infill housing approaches to create additional housing opportunities for low and mid-range (Missing Middle) housing types. | T | Specific and action-oriented. | | H-1.10 | Establish and update a regulatory process to pilot infill of innovative housing types, as well as to pilot new development standards, affordability incentives and permit review processes. | S | Good direction - but just a pilot program. | | H-1.11 | Implement the Home In Tacoma Project housing vision and policies set forth in this and other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, in collaboration with the community and guided by the Affordable Housing Action Strategy, Home In Tacoma Housing Action Plan and other pertinent policies. Home In Tacoma Project Phase 2 will include: a. Zoning changes, including potential refinements to the Future Land Use Map and designated Corridors b. Design standards updates c. Actions to ensure that urban infrastructure and services are adequate to support growth d. Potential phasing of implementation, as well as regular evaluation of development outcomes and actions to address unintended consequences e. Actions to reduce the potential demolition of viable structures f. Actions to create green, sustainable and resilient housing g. Actions to promote physical accessibility h. Review and update of regulatory affordable housing incentives and requirements i. Review of City permitting and processes j. Education and technical support for developers and the public | T | Major land use changes that would transform residential zoning in a big way. | | H-2 | Ensure equitable access to housing, making a special effort to remove disparities in housing access for black, indigenous and people of color, low-income households, diverse household types, older adults, and households that include people with disabilities. | T | Specifically calls for allocation of resources to address disparities. Language flag: Capitalize Black, Indigenous, and People of Color | | H-2.1 | Foster inclusive communities, overcome disparities in access to community assets, and enhance housing choice for people in protected classes throughout the city by coordinating plans and investments with fair housing policies. | N | This feels very similar to the goal - no specific action called for. | | H-2.2 | Implement barrier-free access for all housing consistent with the Americans for Disabilities Act (ADA). Pursue additional actions to increase access such as implementation of | S | What kinds of actions? Would be transformative if all | ONE TACOMA 67 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions | Number | Text | Policy Rating | Equity Notes | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | visitability and universal design features in nerly constructed housing. | | new housing was barrier-free. | | H-2.3 | Coordinate plans and investments with programs that prevent avoidable, involuntary evictions and foreclosures. | N | This feels too vague. What programs? | | H-2.4 | Evaluate plans and investments and other legislative land use decisions to identify potential disparate impacts on housing choice and access for protected classes. | S | This was conducted as part of 1220. | | H-2.5 | Evaluate plans and investments for the potential to cause displacement in areas with concentrations of communities of color, low- and moderate-income households, and renters. | N | No call to action - would hope to see more active language around providing anti-displacement support. | | H-2.6 | If plans and investments are anticipated to create neighborhood change, proactively mitigate involuntary displacement of under-resourced residents through increasing affordable housing in affected areas, providing relief from rising housing costs, and implementing programs to support small and neighborhood-centered businesses. | N | "Where" plans and investments, not "if". | | H-2.7 | Strive to ensure a range of housing options and supportive environments to enable older adults to remain in their communities as their needs change. | N | Too vague. | | H-2.8 | Help people stay in their homes through expanded tenant's protections, providing resources for households experiencing a crisis, increasing community organizing capacity, and other means. | S | Again, get more specific about the existing programs to keep and expand. | ONE TACOMA 68 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions | Number | Text | Policy Rating | Equity Notes | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | H-2.9 | Establish and implement a coordinated Anti-displacement Strategy to reduce the risk of displacement for people at high displacement risk and to help to deal with displacement impacts, with actions including: 1. As the Home In Tacoma Project moves forward, strengthen the emphasis on anti-displacement as a primary goal. 2. Use the full spectrum of housing tools to address needs, such as funding for affordable housing and increased staffing and program resources. 3. To ensure equitable distribution of housing opportunities, implement land use changes to allow more missing middle products citywide. 4. Implement inclusionary zoning in submarkets where it is economically feasible, tailored to specific affordability needs and market conditions. 5. Require that developers benefiting from land use changes, property tax exemptions, fee waivers, expedited processing, and city funding use affirmative marketing in advertising unit availability. 6. Implement a resident preference policy that applies to both residents at-risk of displacement and neighborhoods with high-displacement risk. 7. Promote ownership opportunities as a pathway for wealth-building for those who choose it. 8. Promote family-sized units, particularly in areas where they are in short supply. 9. Working with local architects and lenders, create a set of affordable ADU designs and a financing package to facilitate the construction of ADUs by lower income households. 10. Require redevelopment of large parcels with city investment include deeply affordable rental and ownership products (e.g., publicly-assisted rentals, land trust). 11. Coordinate with the Tacoma Housing Division to ensure that residents at-risk of displacement have the resources they need to mitigate eviction and displacement. 12. Support anchor institutions and businesses at risk of displacement by providing city subsidies for leases and implementing first rights of refusal for city-subsidized commercial in redeveloped sites. 13. Empower people of color and others who have been historically under-represented in policymaking to take a stronger role in implementing policy. | T | If resourced, this could transform the ways that communities experience benefit from public investment. | | H-3 | Promote safe, healthy housing that provides convenient access to jobs and to goods and services that meet daily needs. This housing is connected to the rest of the city and region by safe, convenient, affordable multimodal transportation. | S | This is supportive of equity goals - but feels like a lot of themes wrapped into one goal (safe, healthy, access to transit/jobs). | ONE TACOMA 69 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions | Number | Text | Policy Rating | Equity Notes | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | H-3.1 | Meet the housing needs of under-served and underrepresented populations living in high poverty areas by coordinating plans and investments with housing programs. | N | The wording is a bit confusing – needs a rewrite for clarity. As written it could mean bringing transit into high poverty area or investing in housing programs outside of existing high poverty areas to avoid concentrations of poverty. | | H-3.2 | Locate higher density housing, including units that are affordable and accessible, in and around designated centers to take advantage of the access to transportation, jobs, open spaces, schools, and various services and amenities. | S | | | H-3.3 | Promote transit supportive densities along designated corridors that connect centers, including duplex, triplex, cottage housing, townhouses, and low to mid-scale multifamily housing. | S | Review to make sure this aligns with land use allocations. | | H-3.4 | Strive to accommodate 80% of the City's housing targets within and around designated centers. | H | Potentially harmful - this could serve to "protect" single family neighborhoods from growth, thus increasing their exclusivity. | | H-3.5 | Improve equitable access to active transportation, jobs, open spaces, high-quality schools, and supportive services and amenities in areas with high concentrations of under-served populations and an existing supply of affordable housing. | N | Too vague to align with. Clarify which neighborhoods or areas of the City need the most investment. | | H-3.6 | Balance programs that preserve affordable housing in lower cost areas (e.g., home improvement grants) with policies to encourage new development and expand access to transportation, jobs, educational opportunities, supportive services, and parks and open space. | N | Unclear. Separate into 2 policies. One that supports affordable homeownership initiatives, one that encourages new development near transit. | | H-3.7 | Provide incentives (e.g. density or development bonuses, lot size reductions, transfer of development rights, height or bulk bonuses, fee waivers, accelerated permitting, parking requirement reductions, and tax incentives, and surplus land sales) to promote the development of affordable, mixed-income housing citywide. Discourage the concentration of facilities for "high risk" populations in any one geographic area. | T | If funded. | | | | | | ONE TACOMA 70 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions | Number | Text | Policy Rating | Equity Notes | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | H-4 | Support adequate supply of affordable housing units to meet the needs of residents vulnerable to increasing housing costs. | S | | | H-4.1 | Preserve and produce affordable housing to meet the needs that are not met by the private market by coordinating plans and investments with housing providers and organizations. | S | Doesn't go far enough -name some of the specific needs after the general call to action. | | H-4.2 | Ensure that at least 25% of the 2040 housing targets are affordable to households at or below 80% of Pierce County AMI. Strive to exceed this through zoning and land use incentives and increased resources for affordable housing development. | T | Update with 2050 targets and related allocations. But the policy is specific, and if funded would be transformative. | | H-4.3 | Evaluate plans and investments for their impact on household cost; and consider ways to reduce the combined cost of housing, utilities, and/or transportation. | N | This feels too broad to mean anything. It also feels disingenuous - the City is not going to actively pursue devaluating its own real estate. | | H-4.4 | Facilitate the expansion of a variety of types and sizes of affordable housing units, and do so in locations that provide low-income households with greater access to convenient transit and transportation, education and training opportunities, Downtown Tacoma, manufacturing/ industrial centers, and other employment areas. | S | This is very aligned with the 15-minute neighborhood framework concept. Remove "facilitate the". | | H-4.5 | Encourage income diversity in and around centers and corridors by allowing a mix of housing types and tenures. | S | Consider shifting to encouraging income diversity across the city, not just in centers and corridors. | | H-4.6 | Facilitate and support regional cooperation in addressing housing needs in the Tacoma metropolitan area and greater Puget Sound, especially for the homeless, low- and moderate-income households, and historically under-served and under-represented communities. | S | | | H-4.7 | Promote a range of affordable housing strategies that extend from basic emergency shelter for the homeless to temporary transitional housing to permanent rental housing and to home ownership. | S | This feels repetitive. Make specific to one of the groups listed (extremely low-income or promoting homeownership) or delete. | ONE TACOMA 71 ONE TACOMA Report | June 2025 Housing Baseline Conditions | Number | Text | Policy Rating | Equity Notes | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | H-4.8 | Prevent homelessness and reduce the time spent being homeless by ensuring that a continuum of safe and affordable housing opportunities and related supportive services are allowed and appropriately accommodated, including but not limited to permanent supportive housing, emergency shelters, and temporary shelters. | T | If funded and implemented, transformative. Implementation needs a focus on racial disparity and trauma-informed care. | | H-4.9 | Increase the supply of permanently affordable housing where practicable. | N | Feels repetitive from the goal area. | | H-4.10 | Encourage development and preservation of small resource-efficient and affordable single family homes throughout the City. | H | Current language is too broad and could be misconstrued. "Small" and "affordable" are not defined. | | H-4.11 | Align plans and investments to support homeownership rates and locational choice for people of color and other groups who have been historically under-served and under-represented. | T | Names specific groups of interest and policy goal. Feels like the end of the sentence needs to be completed. | | H-4.12 | Facilitate a variety of ownership opportunities and choices by allowing and supporting the creation of condominiums, cooperatives, mutual housing associations, limited equity cooperatives, community land trusts and sweat equity. | S | | | H-4.13 | Create a local source of revenue and pursue a variety of other funding sources to preserve and develop housing units and various assistance programs for households whose needs are not met by the private market. | T | If implemented and successful, this is specific and actionable. | | H-4.14 | Pursue incentives and mechanisms to enlist the private market as a partner in the provision of affordable housing units. | N | This feels a bit repetitive but might provide good policy support for initiatives. | | H-4.15 | Modify and expand the City's inclusionary housing provisions to target unmet need and align with market conditions, enacting mandatory inclusionary housing requirements in areas of the City where market strength is adequate. Tailor affordability and tax tools to the specific affordability needs and market conditions in Tacoma's neighborhoods. | T | Specific and adaptable over time. Mandatory inclusionary housing can be transformative, when applied successfully. | | H-4.16 | Prioritize City actions and investments on serving households with the greatest housing challenges and unmet needs. | S | This feels repetitive but perhaps gives some latitude for addressing emerging needs. Maybe with language massaging could help argue for certain policies. | ONE TACOMA 72 | Number | Text | Policy Rating | Equity Notes | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | H-4.17 | Strive for a mix of housing costs in Tacoma’s neighborhoods that meet affordability targets for moderately low, low and very low income Tacoma households. | S | Specific. But again – repetitive. Review to ensure it’s addressing a policy gap. | | H-4.18 | Adopt affordable housing targets for infill and redevelopment projects in the City’s federally designated Opportunity Zones. Conduct associated studies to identify the minimum percentage of affordable units. | N | | | H-5 | Support access to resource efficient and high performance housing that is well integrated with its surroundings, for people of all abilities and income levels. | N | | | H-5.1 | Support development and maintenance of housing, especially multi-dwelling housing, that protects the health and safety of residents and encourages healthy lifestyles and active living. | S | This is OK, but policy 5.3 is very similar and more specific. Recommend deleting this in favor of that one or simplifying to only talk about promoting multifamily housing that is resource efficient. | | H-5.2 | Promote housing that is protected from noise, pests, hazardous environmental conditions and materials. | S | Also need to address improving conditions for existing housing in locations exposed to hazards. | | H-5.3 | Support housing that provides features supportive of healthy and active living, such as high indoor air quality, useable open areas, recreation areas, community gardens, and crime-preventative design. | S | Good but a little unclear how the city will ‘support’ this. | | H-5.4 | Promote energy efficiency, green building practices, materials, and design to produce healthy, efficient, durable, and adaptable homes. | S | | | H-5.5 | Encourage the reuse of resource rich existing older commercial buildings in or near designated centers into mixed-use housing with retail and/or commercial uses at street-level and housing above. | N | Not sure this is an equity promoting policy, but could draw some connections to climate with adaptive reuse | | H-5.6 | Promote active transportation in residential areas through the development of pathways, sidewalks, and high-quality onsite amenities such as secure bicycle parking. | S | Good, but use stronger verbs. | | H-5.7 | Require site designs and relationship to adjacent developments that reduces or prevents social isolation, especially for groups that often experience it, including older | T | Specific about need and how to address | | Number | Text | Policy Rating | Equity Notes | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | adults, people with disabilities, communities of color, and immigrant communities. | | | | H-5.8 | Support a strong housing code enforcement program to reduce substandard housing through repair and rehabilitation, such as an active rental inspection program. | S | Supports renters, although could result in displacement for some. | | H-5.9 | Promote the maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of the City’s existing housing stock. Pursue financial incentives and funding for housing improvement programs, especially for low-income households. Integrate regulatory tools that incentivize reuse and conversion of existing viable structures into housing to meet community needs. | T | | | H-5.10 | Promote innovative development techniques to better utilize land, promote design flexibility, preserve open space and natural features and conserve energy resources. | N | | | H-5.11 | Promote public acceptance of new housing types in historically lower density areas by ensuring that they are well designed and compatible with the character of the neighborhoods in which they are located through a robust design review process. | H | Rethink the phrasing, intent, and how this will be used. | | H-6 | Ensure equitable access to opportunity and housing choice throughout the City’s neighborhoods. | S | Depends on implementation, could be transformative. But language is very universal. | | H-6.1 | Proactively implement the action strategies of the City’s Affordable Housing Action Strategy through a coordinated effort lead by the City of Tacoma in partnership with a broad range of stakeholders. | S | | | H-6.2 | Proactively implement the actions and strategies identified through the Home In Tacoma Project and the Home In Tacoma Housing Action Plan. | S | | | H-7 | Strive to meet multiple goals through housing actions, consistent with Tacoma’s vision for neighborhoods that are inclusive, welcoming to our diverse community, resilient, thriving, distinctive and walkable, including robust community amenities and a range of housing choices and costs. | S | Wide umbrella - recognizes need but not specific enough to reflect a shift in power | --- ## Conservation — One Tacoma Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 4: Environment and Watershed Health (adopted June 24, 2025) - Source: https://cms.tacoma.gov/Planning/Comprehensive%20Plan/Tacoma%20Comp%20Plan%2004_EN.pdf - Pages: 118 - Covers: conservation # 04 # Environment and Watershed Health **ENVIRONMENT AND WATERSHED HEALTH GOALS** * **GOAL EN-1** All Tacomans, especially those in historically overburdened communities, have access to clean air and water, and can experience nature in their daily lives. * **GOAL EN-2** Tacoma’s urban forest is healthy and expansive. * **GOAL EN-3** Net gains in environmental health are experienced by all Tacomans, especially those located in historically overburdened communities. * **GOAL EN-4** Tacoma is a resilient and safe city, with protections in place for communities and properties most at risk from climate events and natural hazards. * **GOAL EN-5** Black, Indigenous, and People of Color and historically overburdened communities are protected from climate and environmental health risks and have equitable access to clean, healthy parks, tree canopies, green spaces, waterways, and other natural assets that support well-being and resilience. * **GOAL EN-6** Watershed-scale planning restores and protects natural resources that will maximize the net gains in ecological functions of Tacoma's environmental assets. # Environment and Watershed Health ## 4.1 Introductory Context ### What is this chapter about? The goals and policies in this chapter convey the City’s intent to: * Improve the health and general welfare of communities in Tacoma by promoting the planning, management, restoration, and preservation of Tacoma’s environmental assets, which encompasses the city’s natural resources, ecosystems, and the services they provide. * Avoid and minimize the community’s exposure to natural hazards, including geologic hazards and flooding hazards. * Improve air quality for all Tacoma community members and lower air temperature resulting from the urban heat island effect. * Improve water quality in rivers, streams, marine waters, floodplains, groundwater, and wetlands. * Set policies to achieve a net gain in habitat functions and values in the city’s environmental assets. * Increase public awareness of the benefits of maintaining Tacoma’s healthy watershed and environmental assets and how actions affect the health and livability of Tacoma and the greater Puget Sound. * Develop an adaptive management strategy for the City of Tacoma for the anticipated impacts of climate change and sea level rise and reduce our contribution to GHG emissions. * Facilitate communication and coordination among Tacoma community members and agencies to promote the preservation and restoration of Tacoma’s valuable environmental assets. * Increase access to nature in our everyday lives through proactive urban forest management and the planting and care of our community trees and living landscapes. *** **Book I: Core Policy Elements** 1 Introduction and Vision 2 Growth Strategy 3 Complete Neighborhoods 4 Environment and Watershed Health 5 Housing 6 Transportation 7 Economic Development 8 Parks and Recreation 9 Public Facilities and Services 10 Historic Preservation 11 Engagement and Administration **Contents** 4.1 Introductory Context 4.2 Goals and Policies 4.3 Priority Actions # Why is this important? Situated in the Puget Sound Lowlands, at the mouth of the Puyallup River Valley and the tidal waters of Commencement Bay, Tacoma’s natural resources provide an array of ecologically, economically, aesthetically, and culturally valuable ecosystem services. The river, streams, aquifers, and floodplains convey and store water and provide critical habitat for native fish and other aquatic species. The city’s urban forests clean and cool Tacoma’s air and water, soak up rainwater, and provide wildlife habitat. The deep waters of Thea Foss Waterway support international trade, commerce, and sea life. Many of these resources also trap carbon and reduce the effects of urban heat islands. Parks and open spaces provide recreational opportunities to communities that help encourage physical activity and social connections. Many of the natural resources found within Tacoma, such as the river, streams, native plants, and shoreline, serve an important cultural role for the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, who are the original stewards of the land where Tacoma sits today. The City is committed to its role in honoring the Medicine Creek Treaty by protecting the environment and habitat where the treaty-protected natural resources are situated. These natural resources are key contributors to Tacoma’s identity, economy, reputation, and sense of place, and are essential to the cultural identity of the Puyallup Tribe. The City has committed to restoring and maintaining a high-quality environment; however, many of Tacoma’s natural resources have been lost over time or are currently at risk. Development increases stormwater runoff by removing trees and expanding impervious surfaces, which erodes and pollutes stream channels that flow into waterways, making them less capable of supporting a healthy habitat and can be harmful to biota. Without changing our approach, development could lead to unnecessary tree removal, habitat loss, and harmful effects on vulnerable plant, fish, and animal species. The City’s land use plans and investments have been, and will continue to be, instrumental in helping to guide and understand effective approaches to preserving natural resources. The City is committed to protecting and restoring its watersheds through proactive natural resource management. The goals and policies in this chapter protect these investments and help the City meet various regulations to protect public health and the environment. With thoughtful guidance, the community can work together to face new challenges, and achieve and sustain healthy watersheds and a resilient environment for all Tacomans as the city grows. <
> *** **WHAT ARE TACOMA’S ENVIRONMENTAL ASSETS?** Tacoma’s environmental assets include the following natural resources and ecosystems: rivers, lakes, streams, and associated riparian uplands; floodplains; riparian corridors; wetlands and buffers; groundwater; trees and urban forests; bays, estuaries, and marshes; shorelines; open space lands; biodiversity areas and corridors; and priority species. Maintenance, preservation, and protection of these assets contribute to a healthy watershed. # What we heard There have been several engagements in recent years including Environmental Services’ Strategic Plan outreach, the Urban Watershed Protection Plan, the Urban Forest Management Plan, and the CAP. Across these engagements, environmental clean-up was a top priority, especially the cleanliness of streams, ponds, lakes, and beaches. Engagement showed a lot of concern for mitigating the impact that human activities and continued development has on Tacoma’s natural resources and receiving waters like the Puget Sound. Air and water pollution were also a high concern due to impacts on community health. Most Tacomans favor moving away from fossil fuel facilities and improving transportation to enhance the transit, bicycle, and pedestrian experience, thereby reducing the city’s GHG emissions. Both community members and staff support the integration of environmental and watershed health action plans with other goals such as green jobs, climate action, equity, parks and green spaces, transportation, and housing. ## ENGAGEMENT EFFORTS During the Comprehensive Plan update, Environmental Services collected new feedback to guide updates and future and continued implementation of the City’s Stormwater Management Program using an interactive Watershed Prioritization Map and a brief Stormwater Community Survey. These engagements identified key issues, such as pet waste, litter, tree shortages, and street flooding, as well as specific geographic locations for the City to focus its efforts. The Stormwater Community Surveys showed only 49% of respondents were aware that stormwater in Tacoma is discharged untreated into surrounding waters, and 67% were unaware of what their surface water utility bill funds. These findings underscore the need for enhanced public education and engagement regarding stormwater management. Additional findings from the surveys identified that the most important community stormwater priorities were stormwater treatment, increased tree planting, property acquisition to preserve trees, and more pet waste stations. The most commonly observed stormwater problems included pet waste, litter and trash dumping, and oil leaks from vehicles. During the two-year process of community engagement to develop the City’s Urban Forest Management Plan, outreach and engagement included community surveys, public meetings, analysis of Tacoma’s customer service call requests related to natural resources, online engagement over the plan’s interactive website, and a series of meetings with stakeholder and special interest groups, as well as City Commissions and Committees. These community engagement efforts provided a broad perspective of the challenges facing Tacoma’s urban forest, as well as potential opportunities. One of several surveys identified that the majority (88%) of approximately 1,500 respondents strongly agree that public trees contribute to a healthy environment and improve the overall quality of life, and urban trees are very important because of their ability to improve air quality (90%) and water quality (88%). Furthermore, 91% of respondents believe the City should “aggressively work toward meeting the 30% tree canopy cover goal”, and 42% feel tree planting and adding more trees is an urgent need. The community generally feels that the number of trees (42% of respondents), as well as the health of trees (31%), has decreased or declined over the last ten years. The City’s Urban Forest Management Plan provides a community-recommended, City-adopted menu of actions and strategies serving as a road map to move towards a goal of a healthy, thriving 30% overall tree canopy coverage by 2030 by creating greater efficiencies in City operations, standardizing LOS, and responding to the challenges of climate change, as well as other environmental factors. The Plan is a management tool for City staff that is transparent to the public regarding the actions taken on behalf of the broader community. Working together, the City and our community can achieve the vision for Tacoma, ensuring this city remains a great place to live, work, and play well into the future. The CAP from 2021 employed various methods to engage the community, including interviews, surveys, visioning workshops, and the establishment of the Environmental Justice Leaders Workgroup and Climate Ambassadors. The community expressed a strong need for access to urban green spaces and forests where they could recreate, recharge, and mitigate climate impacts; this was especially important for BIPOC community members. Residents of Tacoma, particularly the youth, are concerned about the health and well-being of their communities and environment, with a desire to live in a healthy ecosystem free from pollution. To achieve the City’s climate action goals, community engagement highlighted the necessity for a low-carbon, active transportation system. This would not only help reduce emissions, but also improve the City’s overall mobility and transportation objectives. When asked about their concerns regarding climate impacts, community members from all demographics mentioned issues related to air quality and access to fresh water. However, youth expressed particular concern about changes to ecosystem functions and the impact on wildlife. Overall, the CAP emphasizes the importance of an intersectional approach to climate action, addressing issues of public health, access to basic needs, and ecosystem function. ## How does this chapter address key themes? As part of an interconnected system of life, the health of Tacoma's watersheds is foundational to the health of its communities. Healthy urban forests naturally filter and process water and air, in addition to mitigating heat and noise-related stress. The air quality affects the health of watersheds, and when polluted, it can increase the ingestion of toxins, incidence of infectious diseases, and prevalence of chronic diseases such as asthma. Time spent in green spaces also promotes physical and mental well-being, and access to healthy, natural green spaces can contribute to higher home and property values. However, to realize these benefits, development and future growth must consider Tacoma’s natural systems. When development occurs without attention to the underlying natural conditions, such as building roads through habitat corridors, safety can be put at risk, and the city’s environmental assets are degraded. (Public Health and Safety) Extreme weather patterns related to climate change are expected to increase in the coming years, and studies show that the impacts of these hazards are inequitably distributed. The historical impacts of redlining have resulted in communities of color experiencing urban heat island effects, as shown in Exhibit 28, air pollution, localized flooding, and a lack of adequate access to natural and open spaces. Historically, Tacoma’s communities of color have faced a disproportionate level of exposure to environmental factors that impact health and socioeconomic well-being due to the high levels of industrial activity concentrated in their neighborhoods. For PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY SUSTAINABILITY EQUITY OPPORTUNITY instance, Interstate 5 runs through South Tacoma, which has the highest percentage of BIPOC residents in the city, thereby contributing to poor air quality, along with various industrial activities concentrated in the area. As a result, over 10% of South Tacoma residents suffer from asthma. Tacoma’s environmental assets play a key role in mitigating these stressors. Trees help cool environments by providing shade. Investing in green infrastructure and soil quality and protecting aquifer recharge areas ensures that ecosystem services continue functioning and managing flood risk. Future investments in ecological services should prioritize historically neglected communities to address past harms. The city is committed to restoring and enhancing natural areas to ensure all Tacomans can participate in and enjoy them. (**Sustainability and Equity**) The One Tacoma Vision of compact neighborhoods with rich access to opportunities includes both built amenities and services, as well as elements of a natural environment and the benefits that it provides. Tacoma’s shorelines, urban forests, waterways, and other natural areas are essential to this vision. Having access to and the ability to experience nature daily in these spaces is crucial for creating safe, thriving community neighborhoods. (**Access to Opportunity**) Exhibit 28. Urban Heat Island Map of Tacoma, 2020 <
> Sources: Earth Economics, 2020; Seva Workshop, 2024. Climate change is resulting in increased temperatures and days with extreme heat. The impact of these changes is not evenly distributed, as certain neighborhoods experience higher temperatures than others. This map demonstrates how certain communities are overburdened by the urban heat island effect and, as a result, policies must respond to ensure mitigation measures are prioritized in the areas with the most need. Temperatures reflected on this map represents the average afternoon and evening temperatures on a single in Tacoma in 2018. # Environmental Element Terms and Definitions “Biodiversity areas” are generally areas that contain habitat that is valuable to fish or wildlife and is mostly comprised of native vegetation. “Biodiversity corridors” are areas of relatively undisturbed and unbroken tracts of vegetation that connect fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, priority habitats, areas identified as biologically diverse, or valuable habitats within a city or UGA. “Critical areas” include the following areas and ecosystems: (a) wetlands; (b) 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. “Environmental assets” is used in this document to describe many important features of Tacoma’s natural environment and ecosystem. This includes rivers, lakes, streams, and associated riparian uplands; floodplains; riparian corridors; wetlands and buffers; groundwater; trees and urban forests; bays, estuaries, and marshes; shorelines; open space lands; biodiversity areas and corridors; and priority species. Protecting and enhancing environmental assets is a focus for the policies included in this element. “Floodplain” means the total area subject to inundation by the base flood, including the flood fringe and the floodway areas. While floodplains are most notably associated with the risk of flooding due to the proximity to a river, stream, or other water body, they serve as important habitats for wildlife and support diverse ecosystems. “Frequently flooded areas” are lands in the flood plain subject to at least a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year, or within areas subject to flooding due to high groundwater. These areas include, but are not limited to, streams, rivers, lakes, coastal areas, wetlands, and areas where high groundwater forms ponds on the ground surface, according to WAC 365-190-030. “Geologically hazardous areas” are areas identified by WAC 365-190-120 for their susceptibility to erosion, sliding, earthquake, or other geological events, which make them potentially unsuitable for the siting of commercial, residential, or industrial development consistent with public health or safety concerns. “Mineral lands” are areas that may be designated within urban growth areas as a natural resource land according to WAC 365-196-480. Mineral resources are sand, gravel, and valuable metallic substances. Areas that have long-term significance for the extraction of these minerals are economically and environmentally important. “Natural areas” include such public or private areas of land or water which have retained their natural character, although not necessarily completely natural and undisturbed according to RCW 79.70.020. Natural areas also include public or private areas of land or water that are important in preserving rare or vanishing flora, fauna, geological, natural, historical, or similar features of scientific or educational value, and which are acquired, voluntarily registered or dedicated by the owner under this chapter. <
> “**Open spaces**” are areas that provide important community space, habitat for plants and animals, and various recreational opportunities. They can be both active and passive spaces. Active open spaces include parks and trails, whereas passive open spaces include undeveloped lands in their natural state or vegetated areas such as wetlands, streams, and forests. “**Open space corridors**” include lands useful for recreation, wildlife habitat, trails, and connection of critical areas. Connectivity is a key aspect of open space corridors. The connection between or expansion of lands to discourage habitat fragmentation helps protect and support biodiversity of plants, fish, and wildlife. “**Riparian habitat**” means land adjacent to water bodies, as well as submerged land such as streambeds, which can provide functional habitat for salmonids and other fish and wildlife species. Riparian habitat includes, but is not limited to, shorelines and near-shore marine habitat, estuaries, lakes, wetlands, streams, and rivers. Tacoma’s “**urban forest**” is a collection of individual trees and plants that could be living in traditional landscape settings, forest remnants in parks, open spaces, and private property. It encompasses the living components of the complex urban landscape and is an integral part of Tacoma’s infrastructure. The urban forest influences and is influenced by the built environment that surrounds it. Tacoma’s urban forest exists on different types of property that are managed differently depending on ownership (public vs. private), uses (commercial, residential, industrial, open spaces, etc.) and the vegetation present (invasive, native, climate-adapted). Properties where the urban forest can be found include City-owned property and other publicly-owned property, such as parks and schools. “**Urban and community forestry**” or "urban forestry" means the planning, establishment, protection, care, and management of trees and associated plants individually, in small groups, or under more naturally forested conditions within cities, counties, and Tribal lands. “**Urban wildlife habitat**” refers to lands that provide habitat important to wildlife in proximity to a metropolitan area. “**Wetlands**” are areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances, do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland areas in order to mitigate conversion of wetlands. <
> # What are some baseline conditions and opportunities? The Environment and Watershed Health element of the Comprehensive Plan approaches geography by watershed boundaries, rather than neighborhood districts. These nine areas are mapped in Exhibit 29. **Exhibit 29. Tacoma Watersheds Map** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma Environmental Services Department; Seva Workshop, 2024 Environmental assets exist in all of Tacoma’s watersheds, which means communities within Tacoma experience the direct and indirect benefits offered by these assets (Exhibit 30). Environmental assets include rivers, lakes, streams, and associated riparian uplands; floodplains; riparian corridors; wetlands and buffers; groundwater; trees and urban forests; bays, estuaries, and marshes; shorelines; open space lands; biodiversity areas and corridors; and priority species. Protecting and enhancing Tacoma’s environmental assets today and in the future is increasingly important due to climate change impacts and the city’s continued population growth. Historically, urbanization, growth, and development have negatively impacted the environment, which in turn, has impacted the quality of life for many communities in Tacoma. According to Tacoma’s Climate Adaption Strategy, climate change will increase year-round temperatures, extreme heat waves, diminished snowpack, rising sea levels, wildfire and smoke, and flooding from extreme precipitation and storm surges. Climate change will not only impact Tacoma’s natural resources, but there will also be social, health, economic, and infrastructural impacts. Climate change impacts will not equally impact communities within Tacoma; overburdened communities will experience these impacts first and more intensely. With these challenges, Tacoma’s commitment to proactively manage and preserve its natural resources will be critical for ensuring healthy and resilient communities in the future. Through the protection and enhancement of these environmental assets, Tacoma has the potential to improve environmental quality for the benefit of wildlife and communities, correcting negative impacts and improving disparities in access. Coordinated stewardship in communities and neighborhoods across the city can help ensure tangible environmental, economic, and social benefits that all Tacomans can experience. Actions such as habitat restoration, increasing the city’s tree canopy, and vegetation management can preserve parks and open spaces, provide additional access to natural areas, improve air and water quality, and help respond to climate change impacts like flooding and heat waves. As communities work together citywide to protect and enhance the environmental assets found within their respective neighborhoods, those actions will also lead to lasting impacts at the watershed level (Exhibit 31). Exhibit 30. Tacoma Environmental Assets Map <
> Note: The Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways layer includes information for the following assets: rivers, lakes, streams, riparian uplands and corridors, wetlands, bays, estuaries, and marshes. Sources: City of Tacoma (Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space; Tree Canopy) 2024, 2025; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Biodiversity Areas and Corridor), 2024; Pierce County (Regulated Floodplain), 2017; Seva Workshop, 2025 **Exhibit 31. Environmental Assets Within Each Watershed** <
> North Tacoma <
> Tideflats <
> Northeast Tacoma <
> Western Slopes <
> Lower Puyallup <
> Joes Creek <
> Leach Creek <
> Flett Creek <
> Foss Waterway **Environmental Assets** * Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways * Aquifer Recharge Area * Open Space * Biodiversity Areas and Corridor **Tree Canopy Coverage** * Greater than 80% * 60% - 80% * 40% - 60% * 20% - 40% * Less than 20% * Watershed **Regulated Floodplain** * 1% Annual Chance Flood * Moderate Flood Risk (Zone X) * Tacoma City Limits Note: According to the EPA, a majority of the City of Tacoma is considered a sole source aquifer. This sole source aquifer is known as the Central Pierce County Aquifer Area and it spans west beyond DuPont, southeast beyond Graham, and south towards, but does not include La Grande. ## 4.2 Goals and Policies ### Environmental Justice **GOAL EN-1:** Black, Indigenous, and People of Color and historically overburdened communities are protected from climate and environmental health risks and have equitable access to clean, healthy parks, tree canopies, green spaces, waterways, and other natural assets that support well-being and resilience. **Policy EN-1.1:** Collaborate with Tribal governments, Indigenous-led organizations, local environmental groups, and residents to develop stewardship programs for Tacoma’s waterways, wetlands, urban forests, and passive open spaces. Acknowledge the cultural importance of natural resources for livelihoods and cultural survival through educational events. Prioritize culturally relevant educational events in overburdened communities on watershed health, pollution prevention, wetland preservation, and the role of these ecosystems in community resilience and environmental health. **Policy EN-1.2:** Identify neighborhoods with limited access to parks, green spaces, and tree canopy. Prioritize these areas for green infrastructure investments, such as new parks, greenways, and tree planting, to improve air quality, reduce heat, and provide safe, accessible natural areas for recreation. **Policy EN-1.3:** Conduct community assessments to identify and address barriers that prevent equitable access to natural resources and green spaces, especially in overburdened communities. **Policy EN-1.4:** Expand air, water, urban heat, and soil quality monitoring in neighborhoods adjacent to industrial sites, highways, and other high-risk areas. Make data publicly available in accessible formats, and develop targeted pollution reduction initiatives to address environmental health risks in overburdened communities. **Policy EN-1.5:** Partner with community colleges and workforce programs to develop accessible green jobs training and apprenticeships that focus on skills in renewable energy, urban forestry, water conservation, and sustainable agriculture. Collaborate with local organizations that empower historically marginalized communities and provide pathways to long-term employment in the green economy, ensuring living wages, benefits, and opportunities for ownership for workers from underrepresented communities. **Policy EN-1.6:** Develop a Just Transition framework to provide retraining, financial assistance, and job placement support for workers impacted by the transition away from fossil fuels. **Policy EN-1.7:** Require Community Benefit Agreements for large-scale infrastructure and development projects, ensuring that benefits, such as local job creation and improved green spaces, directly support the communities most affected by environmental and climate risks. **Policy EN-1.8:** Work with community members in flood-prone and high-heat neighborhoods to develop and implement community-driven adaptation projects, such as rain gardens, permeable pavements, and shade structures. Prioritize solutions that address local climate risks while providing environmental benefits and enhancing the public realm. *** **WHAT ARE CRITICAL AREAS?** Critical areas in Tacoma include marine habitats, freshwater rivers, streams and lakes, wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, geologic hazardous areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas (FWHCA), which include biodiversity areas and corridors (BAC). To see if you live, work, or own a business near an identified critical area, see the City’s Critical Areas Map at the end of this chapter or the dynamic map maintained on the City's website, at data.cityoftacoma.org. The City regulates development in or near critical areas through their Critical Areas Ordinance. Policy EN–1.9: Require Health Impact Assessments for large development projects, especially within overburdened communities, to understand potential public and environmental health impacts. # Protect Tacoma’s Environmental Assets GOAL EN–2: All Tacomans, especially those in historically overburdened communities, have access to a clean environment, including, clean streets, neighborhoods, air, and water, and can experience nature in their daily lives ## PRESERVING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES AND FUNCTIONS Tacoma’s environmental assets deliver important ecosystem services that contribute to the overall health and livelihoods of communities in the city. Ecosystem services include pollination, decomposition, water filtration, erosion and flood control, carbon storage, and climate regulation. Ecosystems are sustained through natural processes such as photosynthesis, nutrient cycling, and the water cycle. Activities to preserve these services and functions maintain the environment's ability to continue these services and natural processes. Policy EN–2.1: Recognize and manage Tacoma's environmental assets as vital components of the city's infrastructure that provide multiple benefits, including, but not limited to, economic impacts, pollutant reduction potential, carbon sequestration, and the reduction of stormwater runoff, and provide a heightened level of livability and health benefits. Policy EN–2.2: Ensure the city's natural resource inventory tracks the quantity, quality, accessibility, and function of high value environmental assets within each watershed to help inform environmental protection activities for the following: * Rivers, lakes, streams, and associated riparian uplands * Floodplains * Wetlands and buffers * Groundwater * Trees and urban forests * Heritage trees, especially specific species of concern like native Garry oak * Bays, estuaries, and marshes * Shorelines * Native and other vegetation species and communities that provide habitat value * Habitat complexes and corridors, refugia, rare and declining habitats such as wetlands, and habitats that support special status or at-risk plant and wildlife species * Other natural resources as identified Policy EN–2.3: Establish measures to track net changes in habitat functions for the city's environmental assets, with special consideration for measuring the net change in historically overburdened communities. Policy EN–2.4: Develop a prioritized list of focus areas and/or properties desirable for public acquisition to support long-term natural resource protection, coordinating acquisition with other programs to balance ecological preservation and protection with community development needs. <
> WHAT PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES EXIST IN TACOMA? One of the five types of critical areas identified by RCW 36.70A.030(5) is fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program provides guidance on identifying important fish, wildlife, and habitat resources in Washington to ensure communities may maintain and protect species in suitable habitats. Priority species include State and Federal Endangered, Threatened, Sensitive, and Candidate species; vulnerable animal groups (e.g., seabird concentrations, heron rookeries, bat colonies); vulnerable species of recreational, commercial, or tribal importance; and occurrence within a “priority area” such as a nest, roost, foraging area, breeding area, regular gathering area, or migration corridor. **Policy EN–2.5:** Where possible, ensure plans and investments improve habitat connectivity by preventing habitat fragmentation, preserving or creating habitat areas, and enhancing the quality of open space corridors, especially rare and declining habitat types and habitats that support at-risk plant and animal species and communities, such as, but not limited to, Garry oaks and Camas prairies. **Policy EN–2.6:** Encourage mitigation approaches that maximize ecosystem benefits when preservation is not feasible. Require on-site mitigation or use of the approved mitigation banks rather than off-site mitigation, unless off-site mitigation within the same watershed enhances effectiveness. **Policy EN–2.7:** Assess and periodically review the best available science for managing critical areas and natural resources, while also incorporating traditional ecological knowledge and community experiences. Develop plans and regulations while considering Tacoma’s obligation to meet urban-level densities under the GMA. **Policy EN–2.8:** Require BMPs in the siting, design, planting, maintenance, and removal of trees and vegetation on public lands, including public rights-of-way consistent with the City’s adopted Urban Forest Manual, Design Manual, land use codes, and with a focus on preventing the spread of noxious weeds. **Policy EN–2.9:** Seek to prevent human-induced native soil loss, erosion, contamination, or other impairments to soil quality and function. **Policy EN–2.10:** Ensure that plans and investments maintain and improve watershed hydrology. Pollution reduction, impervious surface limitations, tree canopy expansion, and habitat restoration can improve water quality in rivers, streams, floodplains, wetlands, and groundwater aquifers. **Policy EN–2.11:** Protect the quality of groundwater used for public water supplies to ensure adequate sources of potable water for Tacoma and the region through consistent engagement and collaboration with the South Tacoma Groundwater Protection District. Ensure that the level of protection provided corresponds with the potential for contaminating the municipal water supply aquifer. ### CONSERVING BIODIVERSITY Biodiversity refers to the variety of plants, fish, and wildlife found within an ecosystem. An abundant and varied ecosystem indicates stability, resilience, and healthiness. Protecting the variety of species and habitats will ensure Tacoma’s environmental assets can continue to provide ecosystem services. **Policy EN–2.12:** Ensure community members have safe, inclusive, and well-designed physical and visual access to environmental assets by prioritizing infrastructure that provides accessible pathways, interpretive features, and amenities in underserved areas while also protecting high value natural resources, fish, wildlife, and culturally important landscapes. **Policy EN–2.13:** Maintain self-sustaining populations of native plants and native resident migratory fish and wildlife species, including at-risk species and beneficial organisms, such as pollinators. **Policy EN–2.14:** Retain mature, healthy trees, native vegetation, and forested areas on City-owned land and street rights-of-way and within designated open space corridors. Prioritize the preservation of these natural assets during development projects and in discretionary land use decisions. **Policy EN–2.15:** Establish protections for heritage and/or threatened tree species from the impacts of urbanization. In all planning and development projects to support biodiversity, require special consideration for these tree species, such as Garry oaks. **Policy EN–2.16:** Encourage retention and use of native soils, minimizing soil compaction to foster tree health and plant growth and other soil life, including plant life endemic to Puget Sound prairies, microbes, fungi, invertebrates, and other organisms essential for nutrient cycling, carbon storage, and overall soil health. ### POLLUTION CONTROL AND REDUCTION Pollution negatively impacts the environment and impedes the ability for an ecosystem to maintain its natural processes. Actively managing and minimizing the release of pollutants into the air, water, and soil can help protect Tacoma’s environmental assets. **Policy EN–2.17:** Identify and characterize all contaminated sites which adversely affect the city’s shoreline areas, surface waters, groundwater, and soils. Prioritize remediation and environmental restoration in overburdened communities. **Policy EN–2.18:** Manage and treat the quality and quantity of stormwater runoff entering Tacoma waterbodies to protect public health, safety, surface and groundwater quality, and the ecological functions of natural drainage systems. **Policy EN–2.19:** Minimize and manage ambient light levels to protect the integrity of ecological systems and public health without compromising public safety within and adjacent to open spaces, habitat corridors, marine and freshwater shorelines, and other environmentally critical areas. **Policy EN–2.20:** Ensure that only treated and clean stormwater is infiltrated for the purpose of aquifer recharge. **Policy EN–2.21:** Prevent groundwater contamination through performance criteria and guidelines for siting, design, construction, and operation of commercial and industrial structures and activities. **Policy EN–2.22:** Increase education and training on the use of integrated pest management plans to reduce the reliance on pesticides and chemical fertilizers and encourage more plant diversity. **Policy EN–2.23:** Set local limits or buffer zones on the use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers near critical areas to reduce contamination. **Policy EN–2.24:** Require all known available and reasonable methods of prevention control and treatment the City's NPDES Phase I Municipal Stormwater Permit compliance as a condition to permitting construction to support the City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Phase I Municipal Stormwater (NPDES) Permit compliance. **Policy EN–2.25:** Coordinate with the Port of Tacoma, businesses, and property owners in brown field remediation by assisting with planning and regulatory guidance and supporting funding applications. <
> Historic inequities have overexposed minority, low-income, tribal, and Indigenous communities to environmental harms, increasing their vulnerability to climate change. These communities are often located in areas with limited tree cover and vegetation, leading to greater exposure to urban heat and air pollution. In addition, underinvestment in infrastructure can make managing stormwater runoff and flooding more difficult, further compounding environmental and health risks. **Policy EN–2.26:** Require all development permit applications to disclose known or suspected contamination in addition to any State Environmental Policy Act requirements, and include remediation plans as part of permit applications. **Policy EN–2.27:** Develop, fund, and implement anti-litter campaigns, programs and policies to reduce littering within the city. Invest in public infrastructure, such as but not limited to trash, recycling and composting trash bins to reduce instances of littering. Facilitate coordination among Tacoma community members and agencies to keep our city clean. ### CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION AND ADAPTATION Climate change is impacting the services that ecosystems provide by altering the distribution and quantity of species and disrupting natural processes. Protecting Tacoma’s environmental assets means helping ecosystems adapt to or minimize climate change impacts. **Policy EN–2.28:** Incorporate climate data and known climate impacts and risks into all stages. Consider the impacts of climate change and the risks to the city’s environmental assets in all phases of planning, programming, and investing in order to protect Tacoma's environmental assets. **Policy EN–2.29:** Maintain, implement and periodically update the CAP and GHG inventory, and adjust GHG emission targets accordingly to ensure successful implementation and consistency with regional and state goals. **Policy EN–2.30:** Engage frontline communities in co-creating climate adaptation plans, leveraging lived experiences to shape solutions that address disproportionate vulnerabilities. Provide resources, training, and compensation to community members participating in this process. **Policy EN–2.31:** Collaborate with workforce development programs to train workers in renewable energy and green infrastructure sectors, with an emphasis on hiring communities historically excluded from economic opportunities. Establish local procurement targets for clean energy projects. **Policy EN–2.32:** Reduce GHG emissions from City operations and practices, setting an example for private operations to follow. **Policy EN–2.33:** Support the implementation of Tacoma's Climate Action Plan and its adopted target to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. ### SUSTAINABLE LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT As Tacoma continues to grow and develop, it is critical to plan and design in a way that minimizes negative impacts to the environment and Tacoma’s environmental assets. Sustainable land use and development can meet the needs of growing communities and ensure communities have access to the benefits of Tacoma’s natural resources. **Policy EN–2.34:** Restrict development on critical areas and important environmental assets where such development would pose hazards to life, property, or infrastructure, or where critical ecological functions or environmental quality would be adversely affected: <
> “ A HEALTHY, THRIVING, AND SUSTAINABLE URBAN FOREST IS A COMMUNITY PRIORITY, TO BE THOUGHTFULLY MANAGED AND CARED FOR BY PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN THE CITY AND ITS RESIDENTS TO MAXIMIZE PUBLIC SAFETY AND BENEFITS THAT INCLUDE A THRIVING ECOSYSTEM, VIBRANT ECONOMY, AND LIVABLE COMMUNITIES SHARED BY ALL TACOMANS.” ONE TACOMA URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN Exhibit 32. Tacoma Tree Canopy Coverage <
> Sources: City of Tacoma, 2025; Seva Workshop, 2025 * Floodways and 100-year floodplains * Geologic hazard areas * Wetlands * Streams * Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas * Aquifer recharge areas * Shorelines * Significant or heritage trees **Policy EN–2.35:** Mitigate the potential adverse impacts of proposed development on Tacoma's environmental assets, their functions, and the ecosystem services they provide. **Policy EN–2.36:** Require development projects to prioritize site design and construction techniques that avoid and minimize adverse impacts on Tacoma's natural resources, critical areas, and shorelines. Ensure projects incorporate practices to protect wildlife by providing safe fish and wildlife passage. **Policy EN–2.37:** Limit and discourage impervious surfaces, especially within and adjacent to open Space Corridors, shorelines, and designated critical areas, to reduce impacts on hydrologic function, air and water quality, habitat connectivity, and tree canopy. **Policy EN–2.38:** Enhance compact and livable neighborhoods by instituting smart growth principles while increasing tree canopy and open space. **Policy EN–2.39:** Develop anti-displacement strategies alongside climate resilience projects to ensure low-income residents and small businesses benefit from improved environmental quality without being priced out of their communities. **Policy EN–2.40:** Encourage energy-efficient buildings and installation of renewable energy sources and technologies. **Policy EN–2.41:** Protect habitat improvement project sites and cleanup sites in perpetuity. **Policy EN–2.42:** Reuse and reclaim water intended for irrigation and other non-potable water needs. **Policy EN–2.43:** Retain as many mature trees as practicable and appropriate during the development of City-owned land and street rights-of-way. **Policy EN–2.44:** Discourage removal of safe, healthy, and appropriate trees located on City property or within rights-of-way. **Policy EN–2.45:** Partner with Tacoma Public Utilities to reduce barriers for transportation electrification such as streamlining permitting for electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure deployment and promoting equitable access to EV technology. **Policy EN–2.46:** Discourage the development of new parking lots and the expansion of existing parking lots by imposing penalties and fees for parking lot owners that violate landscaping standards and who own rarely-used parking lots or vacant lots with excessive pavement. <
> The Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) is Tacoma’s action strategy to grow our urban tree canopy to 30% city-wide. This UFMP includes commitments to increase operational efficiencies, improve tree planting, and keep our existing trees healthy and thriving, while tracking and reporting progress toward our goals. The Urban Forest Manual (UFM) supports planning, design, installation, and maintenance of trees and landscaping when required by the Municipal Code as part of development. The UFM includes standards for plant selection, quality, quantity, and design, while incorporating flexibility to meet the needs of differing land uses and site conditions. Together, the UFMP and UFM ensure a healthy and thriving urban forest for all of Tacoma. URBAN FOREST AND TREE CANOPY GOAL EN-3: Tacoma’s urban forest is healthy and expansive. Policy EN-3.1: Resource and implement the Council-adopted Urban Forest Management Plan, prioritizing actions that have the most significant impacts on environmental justice and tree equity. Policy EN-3.2: Achieve the citywide tree canopy goal, which aims for all Tacoma neighborhoods to have a minimum tree canopy cover of 30% by 2050. Policy EN-3.3: Support the preservation of large healthy trees, native trees and vegetation, tree groves, and forested areas as an element of discretionary land use reviews. Policy EN-3.4: Improve tree species diversity and age diversity. Policy EN-3.5: Invest in tree planting and maintenance, especially in low canopy areas, neighborhoods with underserved or overburdened communities, and within and near open space corridors (Exhibit 32). Identify and address hazardous trees for proper end-of-life/removal and establish tree debris management, wood utilization, and wood waste diversion protocols. Policy EN-3.6: Identify priority areas for tree preservation and planting in the development of subarea, neighborhood, and watershed plans, especially trees of historic merit or heritage trees Policy EN-3.7: Increase public education on the value of Tacoma's urban forest to better support environmental stewardship among community members. Public education should focus on the relationships between Tacoma's urban forest, community health, and watershed health. Policy EN-3.8: Continue to leverage partnerships with the Tree City USA program, Washington State Department of Commerce, and the Department of Natural Resources Urban and Community Forest Program. Prioritize outreach and engagement in overburdened communities. Policy EN-3.9: Educate property owners on selecting species appropriate for site-specific conditions and supporting wildlife habitat, and about pests and disease susceptibility. Encourage property owners to use climate-adapted species to support climate resiliency. Policy EN-3.10: Continue to update City standards and specifications to be consistent with industry BMPs for tree health and to encourage “right tree right place” standards to avoid conflicts with essential infrastructure. Align updates to City standards and code to support tree protections with the objective of no net losses to Tacoma's urban forest. Policy EN-3.11: Develop a long-term pest and disease readiness plan for Tacoma’s urban forest. Policy EN-3.12: Utilize the Tree Risk Management Plan and Trees and Sidewalks Operations Plan to mitigate public hazards and inform routine inventories and maintenance schedules of street trees within the right-of-way. Policy EN-3.13: Provide additional guidance on post-planting tree care and maintenance through increased public education and engagement with local arborist communities. *** Moving from no net loss to net gains. Through WAC 365-196-830, protections for critical areas should ensure that there are no net losses in the ecological functions and services provided by critical areas. The City recognizes the importance of maintenance and preservation of Tacoma’s environmental assets, but strives to enhance the ecological functions and services these assets provide to communities across the city. Striving for net gains would move actions beyond simply mitigating negative impacts or stressors that can be detrimental to critical areas and other natural resources. Actions that support net gains include habitat restoration and species reintroduction. **Policy EN–3.14:** Ensure new development complies with tree planting and retention requirements in order to achieve a city-wide goal of 30% tree canopy coverage in each neighborhood. **Policy EN–3.15:** Increase the City's responsibility in the public right-of-way for planting and maintaining tress along pedestrian and bike routes, as well as the maintenance and replacement of sidewalks. ## Improve Environmental Quality **GOAL EN–4:** Net gains in environmental health are experienced by all Tacomans, especially those located in historically overburdened communities. ### STEWARDSHIP AND COORDINATED MANAGEMENT Protecting, maintaining, and improving Tacoma’s environmental assets is no small task and requires shared leadership, knowledge, resources, and commitment. Working together with partners and communities creates opportunities for inclusive decision making and equitable access to environmental benefits. **Policy EN–4.1:** Collaborate with federal, state, regional, local agencies, and community members to manage the city’s environmental assets and enhance watershed health through coordinated planning and investments to maximize environmental benefits. **Policy EN–4.2:** Coordinate transportation and stormwater system planning in areas with unimproved or substandard rights of way to improve water quality, prevent localized flooding, and enhance pedestrian safety and neighborhood livability. **Policy EN–4.3:** Work with partners and community-based organizations to identify strategies for expanding existing stewardship programs to further involve community members in enhancing watershed health and habitat functions. **Policy EN–4.4:** Where possible, manage areas of cultural and environmental importance with the Puyallup Tribe of Indians. **Policy EN–4.5:** Coordinate with state and federal agencies and Tribal governments when reviewing permits to ensure streamlined permit review and avoid redundant regulatory requirements. **Policy EN–4.6:** Streamline internal systems for efficient response to questions that arise during permitting, development, or environmental review processes. Exhibit 33. Open Space Corridors in Tacoma <
> Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2023 # HABITAT RESTORATION Urbanization and development have negatively impacted Tacoma’s environmental assets. Correcting these harms involve repairing and enhancing degraded ecosystems to their restored natural states. Engaging in habitat restoration ensures that ecosystems can thrive and continue to provide benefits. **Policy EN–4.7:** Restore surface waters that have become degraded to provide for fish, wildlife, plants, and recreational opportunities. **Policy EN–4.8:** Prioritize restoration of degraded areas along wetlands, rivers, streams, lakes, and marine shorelines in the identified priority watersheds. Restoration activities should include planting native vegetation, developing a canopy management plan, increasing the tree canopy, removing noxious weeds, soil remediation, and erosion control. **Policy EN–4.9:** Reconnect shorelines, upland areas, and water courses through habitat conservation and restoration efforts, property acquisition, and/or easements. **Policy EN–4.10:** Ensure buffer zones around restored habitats are maintained and monitored to protect environmental quality improvements from surrounding development impacts and potential encroachment. **Policy EN–4.11:** Prioritize climate-adaptive practices, such as reintroduction of native species, when engaging in habitat restoration. **Policy EN–4.12:** Where possible, remove invasive and aggressive species, such as knot weed and blackberries. **Policy EN–4.13:** Develop, fund, and implement invasive species management and removal plans for all public green spaces. Ensure sites are monitored for early and frequent intervention. # HABITAT CONNECTIVITY AND OPEN SPACE CORRIDORS Habitat connectivity refers to the ability for wildlife to safely move between habitats. Open space corridors, shown in Exhibit 33, play a crucial role in promoting connectivity. Since connected networks of lands are better suited to support biodiversity and ecological functions, working to expand habitats and corridors helps to protect and enhance Tacoma’s environmental assets. **Policy EN–4.14:** In open space acquisition, place the highest priority on acquiring properties with the following characteristics (in order of importance): 1. A high degree of habitat health and quality, location within identified open space corridors, presence of threatened or endangered species or habitats, and presence of wetlands. 2. The site’s habitat potential, offered sale prices, and manageability issues. 3. The site’s proximity to other protected sites, the presence of a volunteer restoration group, whether the site serves one or more valuable open space functions in addition to providing habitat, whether conservation of the site would support habitat health within or near a designated wetland or stream of local significance, and whether the site is within an area underserved by open space. 4. The site would aid in habitat restoration or contribute to the expansion of identified wildlife corridors or connects existing lands together to create corridors. Policy EN–4.15: Improve public access provisions to open space corridors that do not negatively disrupt fish, wildlife, and plants by leveraging stewardship and environmental education initiatives that focus on increasing access to youth, BIPOC communities, and low-income community members. Provisions can include traditional harvesting of plants, animals, and minerals to support Indigenous cultural and medicinal practices. Policy EN–4.16: Target habitat-related resources and programs within the designated open space corridors as depicted on the open space corridors map (see Exhibit 33) by prioritizing areas with the greatest potential to reach their target habitat community and condition. Policy EN–4.17: Identify potential regulatory approaches to providing greater protection for the habitat functions of habitat lands located within the designated open space corridors. Policy EN–4.18: Utilize dedicated funds generated through stormwater rates to conserve, restore, and manage the City’s natural open space inventory, pursuant to achieving stormwater management goals. Supporting tree planting programs and planting along public rights-of-way and other public properties can also help meet stormwater management objectives. Policy EN–4.19: Utilize the City’s Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program to conserve valuable city and regional assets and continue to develop and enhance the program. Lands meeting the City’s criteria for conservation, which are located within the designated open space corridors, and lands achieving other open space goals of this Plan are appropriate “sending areas” for TDR to other locations in the city, county, and region. Policy EN–4.20: Implement Landscape Conservation and Local Infrastructure Program, a state authorized policy tool combining TDR rights with tax increment financing, to bring resources to bear that can support Tacoma’s conservation goals. Policy EN–4.21: Promote incentive-based approaches to conserve designated open space corridors, such as the use of the Open Space Current Use Assessment and Pierce County Conservation Futures program. Policy EN–4.22: Enhance native vegetation along wetlands, rivers, streams, and lakes. When possible, require new planting of native vegetation and/or removal of noxious weeds to restore ecological functions of riparian buffers where such activities will enhance the corridor’s function. Policy EN–4.23: Consider goals and policies regarding habitat connectivity in all decisions regarding street vacation requests and disposition of surplus City properties. Policy EN–4.24: Require the use of native vegetation in landscaping where directly adjacent to Biodiversity Areas and Corridors. Recommend the use of native and/or climate-adapted vegetation in landscaping in all other areas. Policy EN–4.25: Utilize alternative mechanisms for preventing and reducing groundwater contamination. Policy EN–4.26: Create and maintain wildlife corridors for movement and use by species. These areas should use native plants that support native wildlife. Policy EN–4.27: Preserve public, open, green space within the Downtown Regional Growth Center. Identify emerging opportunities to acquire parcels that would expand existing green spaces or create new ones in the Downtown area. *** WHAT IS LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT? Low impact development is a stormwater and land use management strategy that strives to mimic pre-disturbance hydrologic processes by emphasizing conservation, use of on-site natural features, site planning, and distributed stormwater management practices that are integrated into a project design. Low impact development BMPs emphasize pre-disturbance hydrologic process of infiltration, filtration, storage, evaporation, and transpiration. Common low impact development BMPs include: bioretention, rain gardens, permeable pavements, minimal excavation foundations, dispersion, soil quality, vegetated roof, and rainwater harvesting. **Policy EN–4.28:** Preserve public, open, green space within the Tacoma Mall Regional Growth Center. Identify emerging opportunities to acquire parcels that would expand existing green spaces or create new ones in the Tacoma Mall area. ### WATER AND AIR QUALITY Clean water and air are essential for healthy communities. Tacoma’s growth and development has impacted water and air quality over time. Surrounding water bodies have become polluted and the release of chemicals and gases into the atmosphere harms people’s health and negatively impacts the natural processes of ecosystems. Continued development will pose an ongoing challenge to ensure communities in Tacoma have access to clean water and air. **Policy EN–4.29:** Encourage use of low-impact development, habitat-friendly development, and green infrastructure, both for existing private development and for City-owned, managed, or funded infrastructure. **Policy EN–4.30:** In the identified priority watersheds, collaborate with community members to co-design stormwater projects that align with community needs while enhancing access to environmental benefits. **Policy EN–4.31:** Acquire property for the purpose of planting trees to mitigate stormwater runoff impacts caused by development. **Policy EN–4.32:** Map tree canopy to support stormwater management and air quality on City-owned and operated properties and develop and follow a methodology to intentionally identify canopy for stormwater management and air quality purposes, which may be updated annually or as needed. **Policy EN–4.33:** Map overburdened communities in relation to stormwater treatment and flow control BMPs/facilities, outfalls, discharge points, air pollution levels, and tree canopy on City-owned and operated properties. **Policy EN–4.34:** Adopt and implement tree canopy goals and policies to support stormwater management and air quality improvements. Consider how existing or future tree canopies can support stormwater management, water quality improvements in receiving waters, and air quality readings. **Policy EN–4.35:** Establish a long-term (five and 10 year) goal for the tree canopy, to be used for stormwater management and air quality improvement. Specific considerations related to the canopy on City-owned and operated lands shall include maintaining or increasing canopy in overburdened communities and maintaining existing mature canopy. **Policy EN–4.36:** Ensure that the State Environmental Policy Act mitigation measures evaluate and respond to both indoor and outdoor air quality impacts for new development. **Policy EN–4.37:** Work with City partners and community members to identify opportunities for the removal and replacement of impervious surfaces in public right-of-way and on private property as an effort to restore habitat, manage stormwater runoff, and increase access to vegetated landscapes. **Policy EN–4.38:** Support the retrofit of existing pollution generating surfaces and establish standards for new development to eliminate discharges of untreated stormwater runoff from outfalls that drain directly into Puget Sound or other water bodies. Give priority to green infrastructure in the implementation of this policy. **Policy EN–4.39:** Partner with neighboring cities and other local municipalities to site, design, and create regional green stormwater parks in order to treat larger volumes of polluted runoff while creating habitat and outdoor recreation opportunities. **Policy EN–4.40:** Advocate for state and regional air quality standards that reduce impacts from mobile emissions sources, especially diesel particulate matter, on already overburdened communities, that consider and mitigate cumulative impacts from development and improve overall health outcomes for those communities. **Policy EN–4.41:** Develop permit review procedures to ensure that the health impacts of air toxics from facility and mobile emissions sources are fully evaluated and that significant adverse air quality impacts are mitigated to the fullest extent possible. Mitigation strategies should include consideration of indoor air quality investments for affected communities, enhanced electric vehicle readiness, investments in tree canopy, and other strategies as recommended by the Department of Ecology and/or Puget Sound Clean Air Agencies or other health age **Policy EN–4.42:** Explore the development of a pollution surcharge on annual emissions from major polluters to fund programmatic air quality improvement efforts in affected communities. **Policy EN–4.43:** Improve community information and action for air quality through strategies such as: * a) Implementation of community-based air quality monitoring (CBAQM). * b) Sponsoring Community Action Plans to address environmental justice and health impacts. * c) Requiring that new business or industries that register new air pollution equipment monitor annual air emissions. * d) Requiring new industries to provide an inventory of air toxics and greenhouse gas emissions, for both facility and mobile emissions, as part of permit review. * Sponsor community health impact assessments. # Manage Environmental and Climate Hazards **GOAL EN–5:** Tacoma is a resilient and safe city, with protections in place for communities and properties most at risk from climate events and natural hazards. ## GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS **Policy EN–5.1:** Geological hazards are natural events such as landslides, earthquakes, and soil erosion that pose risks to life, property, and (Exhibits 34-35). These events can also destroy habitats and displace species. Understanding and planning for geological hazards helps to minimize the risks and strengthens a community’s ability to respond and recover from natural disasters. Exhibit 34. Tacoma Environmental Hazards Map <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 Note: The Flood Hazard Areas layer represents areas that are subjected to a 1% Annual Chance Flood and a 0.2% Annual Chance Flood, also known as a 100-year Floodplain and a 500-year Floodplain, respectively. Areas shown in the Flood Hazard Area layer are also likely to flood during a tsunami event, except for a few scenarios where tsunami related inundation could reach major highways. Areas shown in the Liquefaction Susceptibility layer are also at risk for lahar flows in an event of a volcanic eruption. ONE TACOMA Chapter 04: Environment and Watershed Health **Exhibit 35. Environmental Hazards Within Each Watershed** <
> North Tacoma <
> Tideflats <
> Northeast Tacoma <
> Western Slopes <
> Lower Puyallup <
> Joes Creek <
> Leach Creek <
> Flett Creek <
> Foss Waterway **Environmental Hazards** * Landslide and Erosion Hazard * Flood Hazard Areas * Liquefaction Susceptibility * Watershed * Tacoma City Limits # WHAT ARE THE CLIMATE CHANGE RISKS TACOMA COULD FACE? <
> Rising levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (e.g., carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) have warmed the earth, causing a wide-range of impacts on our environment and ecosystems. In Tacoma, anticipated climate change impacts include more extreme precipitation events (i.e., wetter winters and drier summers), an increased risk of mudslides, and greater flood risk in the Green and Puyallup Rivers (Dalton et al. 2014, Snover et al. 2013). Meanwhile, changing amounts and timing of streamflow due to glacial retreat, reduced snowpack, and earlier snowmelt in the Cascades could affect Tacoma’s municipal water supply. Sea level rise and storm surge may result in greater coastal flooding, erosion and destabilization of shoreline bluffs. An anticipated average 4.3-to-5.8-degree Fahrenheit increase by mid-century will be accompanied by more frequent and prolonged summer heat events, contributing to increased wildfire risk as well as increased building cooling costs, and posing risks to the health of elderly residents and other particularly vulnerable individuals (Mote et al. 2013). **Policy EN-5.2:** Minimize the risk of damage to life and property by establishing robust development standards that ensure avoidance and/or minimization of potential geologic hazards. **Policy EN-5.3:** Require appropriate levels of study, technical analysis, and best available science as a condition to permitting construction within geologically hazardous areas. Ensure sound engineering principles are used based on the associated risk in these areas and limit land uses within or near geologically hazardous areas, completed by qualified professional geologists and engineers who are licensed in Washington. **Policy EN-5.4:** Employ special building design, construction, maintenance, operational measures, and critical area regulations to minimize the risk of structural damage, fire, and injury to occupants and impacts to natural resources, and to prevent post-seismic collapse in areas with severe seismic hazards. **Policy EN-5.5:** Require site-specific seismic hazard preparedness studies for essential public facilities and services that are vital to the health and safety of the community, such as power lines, water lines, roads, and communication channels. **Policy EN-5.6:** Promote soil stability by requiring the retention or protection of trees and existing native vegetation in erosion-prone areas, as well as the establishment, restoration, and enhancement of native vegetation within geo-buffers and on geologically hazardous slopes, and by increasing the use of native soils. **Policy EN-5.7:** Protect existing natural gulches, watercourses, ravines, and similar land features from the adverse erosional effects of increased storm water runoff that are generated by new development, consistent with the Stormwater Management Manual. **Policy EN–5.8:** Require minimum setbacks around the perimeter of site-specific landslide hazard areas and additional setbacks as determined through review by a Geotechnical Engineer to avoid the potential to undermine these areas, cause erosion and sedimentation problems to downstream or downhill land uses, and avoid the risk to human life and safety. Establish broader setbacks in areas at risk for mass wasting. ### FLOOD HAZARDS Flood hazards occur when intense rainfall or storm surges inundate low-laying areas. Flooding can damage property and infrastructure and pose a public health risk to communities. Planning for and adapting infrastructure to address flooding will help mitigate damage and protect communities. **Policy EN–5.9:** Regulate development in the 1% annual chance floodplain to avoid substantial risk and damage to life, public and private property, infrastructure, and fish and wildlife habitat. Ensure these regulations, as a minimum, comply with state and federal requirements for floodplain regulations. The map in Exhibit 30 identifies these areas. **Policy EN–5.10:** Direct uses that require substantial improvements or structures away from areas within the 1% annual chance floodplain. **Policy EN–5.11:** Require compensatory floodplain storage for all projects constructed within the 1% annual chance floodplain. **Policy EN–5.12:** Prohibit locating essential public facilities or services, such as hospitals and schools, within the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. **Policy EN–5.13:** Coordinate and work with community-based organizations, institutions, and other governmental agencies to ensure that plans and investments are consistent with, and advance, efforts to improve air quality and reduce exposure to air toxics, criteria pollutants, and urban heat island effects. Consider air quality related health impacts on all Tacomans. ### URBAN HEAT Addressing urban heat requires targeted policies and collaborative efforts across various sectors. Strategies to increase vegetation and shade, use of specific materials to cool roofs and pavements, as well as programs and facilities to strengthen heat resilience are needed. Heat mitigation and adaptation strategies can also improve air quality; however, air quality improvements will need more specific policies as well. **Policy EN–5.14:** Establish monitoring system to track urban heat island across Tacoma to identify existing environmental conditions and assist with establishing reduction metrics. **Policy EN–5.15:** Encourage planting shade-providing trees in neighborhoods with high exposure to urban heat island effects and air pollution. See map in Exhibit 36 for PM2.5 particulate measurements across Tacoma. **Policy EN–5.16:** Encourage new development to incorporate cooling features such as green roofs, cool roofs, and on-site tree and vegetation preservation and expansion to reduce heat absorption and improve local air quality. Support the goal of no net loss of the City tree canopy. **Policy EN–5.17:** Designate and prepare public facilities to serve as Resilience Hubs by upgrading buildings with air conditioning and air filtration systems. Ensure these facilities are accessible to heat-vulnerable communities by increasing hours of operation and locating facilities near transit. **Policy EN–5.18:** Partner with community organizations to distribute supplies such as portable fans and water bottles during heat waves. Prioritize outreach in communities with the highest risk and exposure to heat. **Policy EN–5.19:** Require new and existing parking lots to offset their contribution to Urban Heat Island through tree-planting requirements that shade at least 50% of the parking lot. **Policy EN–5.20:** Identify publicly-owned parking lots, roads, and other paved surfaces that can be removed and converted into community green spaces. ## AIR POLLUTION Tacoma has implemented several policies and initiatives to improve air quality, focusing on monitoring, regulation, and collaboration. The policies below are intended to support these efforts and identify additional ways to improve the city’s air quality. **Policy EN–5.21:** Avoid locating new facilities serving sensitive populations, such as schools or hospitals, within 500 to 600 feet of sources of pollution (e.g., Interstate-5, Interstate-705, State Route-509, State Route-16, State-Route 7, truck routes, rail yards, manufacturing/industrial centers) and vice versa. When new facilities are located in proximity to sources of air pollution, use building design, construction, and technology to mitigate the negative effects of air pollution on indoor air quality. **Policy EN–5.22:** Partner with community organizations to distribute supplies such as N95 masks and air purifiers during wildfire season and portable fans and water bottles during heat waves. Prioritize outreach in communities with the highest risk and exposure to heat and air pollution. **Policy EN–5.23:** Continue to collect real-time data on air quality to inform climate change mitigation efforts. **Policy EN–5.24:** Continue to control residential wood smoke, manage fugitive dust, and enforce industrial source controls. **Policy EN–5.25:** Collaborate with the Port of Tacoma on strategies to reduce emissions from seaport activities through implementation of the Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy. **Policy EN–5.26:** Collaborate with the TPCHD to protect public health during wildfire smoke events. **Policy EN–5.27:** In recognition of the effects of climate change on Tacoma’s urban tree canopy as well as the risk posed to neighborhoods during a wildfire, encourage the Tacoma Fire Department to identify areas with wildfire potential (e.g., large forested and/or vegetated areas) and create a wildfire response plan. Exhibit 36. Air Pollution Levels Across Tacoma, 2009–2011 <
> **PM2.5 Concentration** Rank of Tracts in WA * 9 - 10 * 7 - 8 * 5 - 6 * 3 - 4 * 1 - 2 * Overburdened Communities Impacted by Air Pollution * Tacoma City Limits *Note: Locations and boundaries of areas identified as overburdened communities highly impacted by air pollution for the Improving Air Quality in Overburdened Communities Initiative (RCW 70A.65.020 of the Climate Commitment Act), as of March 1, 2023.* *Sources: Washington Tracking Network, 2009-2011; WA State Department of Ecology, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024.* # SEA LEVEL RISE Sea level rise is a long-term consequence of climate change, which threatens coastal communities with increased flooding, erosion, and inland storm surges. Understanding and planning for climate change impacts such as sea level rise encourages communities to adapt and builds more resilient systems. **Policy EN–5.28:** Increase coastal ecosystem restoration to help protect against soil erosion, storm surges, and sea level rise. Prioritize restoration in areas where natural habitats provide additional flood protection to nearby communities or within the identified priority watersheds. **Policy EN–5.29:** Identify opportunities to encourage soft shore armoring and adaptive strategies that support restoration activities and address sea level rise. **Policy EN–5.30:** Discourage the use of hardened shoreline armoring and sea walls as the primary approach to protecting infrastructure from sea level rise. First assess options to strategically relocate infrastructure further inland and restore the impacted shoreline. **Policy EN–5.31:** Coordinate with the Port of Tacoma and the Puyallup Tribe of Indians on sea level rise mitigation and adaptation. Ensure shared strategies integrate protections for port infrastructure, habitat restoration, and cultural sites. # Watershed Health **GOAL EN–6:** Watershed-scale planning restores and protects natural resources that will maximize the net gains in ecological functions of Tacoma's environmental assets. **Policy EN–6.1:** Develop management plans for each of the city’s watersheds, starting with the priority watersheds identified in the City's Urban Watershed Protection Plan. Coordinate and partner with community-based organizations, institutions, other government entities and jurisdictions. **Policy EN–6.2:** Monitor the existing ecosystem health, existing hydrology and water quality, and fish and wildlife habitat processes and functions with the Tacoma Watershed Insights Tool. **Policy EN–6.3:** Improve protections to watershed processes by tailoring zoning and subdivision regulations, sensitive area protections, clearing and grading limitations, and stormwater mitigation requirements that are appropriate for each watershed based on the findings of the watershed-based analysis, the community’s vision for population and job growth and the requirements of the GMA. Maintain the educational outreach program and voluntary incentives that encourage property owners to use low impact development BMPs for improved stormwater systems and continue to rely on partnerships with not-for-profit organizations and governmental agencies. **Policy EN–6.4:** Engage with community members and watershed stakeholders, with focused efforts that engage underserved and overburdened communities, to ensure that improvements to the watershed are experienced and accessible to the community. **Policy EN–6.5:** Consult with the Puyallup Tribe of Indians to understand priorities, coordinate on best practices for watershed management, and collaborate on watershed management projects to ensure treaty rights and obligations are honored. **Policy EN–6.6:** Ensure adequate resources, such as staff and funding, to manage Tacoma’s environmental assets and to educate the public about the benefits of Tacoma’s natural resources. **Policy EN–6.7:** Study City stormwater systems and water quality to identify opportunities to restore and enhance flows to salmon-bearing streams. Focus on modifying stormwater infrastructure to support seasonal flow needs critical to juvenile rearing and adult salmon migration. ## 4.3 Priority Actions | ACTION STEP | LEAD DEPARTMENT | | :--- | :--- | | Periodically review and update the City's Critical Areas Ordinance, Groundwater Protection District, and SMP based on the best available science, giving special consideration to sea level rise and climate resiliency in updating buffer standards, shoreline armoring and soft shore stabilization standards, and flood hazard protections. | PDS | | For the required Comprehensive Plan review in 2029, develop a climate and resiliency element addressing the requirements of RCW 36.70A.070(9). | PDS, OEPS | | Develop and implement a Climate Ready Urban Landscape and Habitat Plan to guide strategic land acquisition and investments to preserve and enhance urban open space and tree canopy in priority neighborhoods. | ES, PDS, OEPS | | Implement the City's Urban Watershed Protection Plan, including prioritized stormwater management activities and treatment retrofits in areas with the highest pollutant loading potential. Coordinate stormwater investments with other planning and environmental programs. | ES | | Incorporate recommendations from the Puget Sound Partnership Action Agenda and Water Resource Inventory Area Salmon Recovery/Habitat Protection plans into City plans, programs, and regulations. | ES | | Create a proactive habitat restoration plan for Commencement Bay to achieve a net gain of ecological functions during the Plan horizon. | OEPS | | Continue to implement the PSRC Four-Part Strategy to reduce GHG emissions. | PDS, OEPS | | Periodically update the City's CAP and support the implementation of identified priority actions. | OEPS | | Work with the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency and WA State Department of Ecology to establish appropriate regional air toxic standards and mitigation approaches for facility and mobile emission sources. Include standards for limiting cumulative air quality impacts. Seek opportunities to expand community-based air quality monitoring to inform policy and regulatory development. | PDS, OEPS | <
> ### What is a watershed? A watershed is a geographic region within which water drains into a particular river, stream, or body of water. Tacoma is located within the lower watershed of Puyallup and Chambers/Clover Watersheds. The upper watershed receives the highest amount of rain and snow, which feeds numerous small, steep mountain streams. In the middle watershed, smaller streams flow together to form larger streams. These streams are less steep, often located in small valleys with wetlands, and provide fish and wildlife habitat. The lower watershed has larger rivers with broader floodplains that drain into the Puget Sound. The Puget Sound, the rivers, and their floodplains provide critical salmon habitat. There are nine different basins, or watersheds, located within the city limits of Tacoma. | ACTION STEP | LEAD DEPARTMENT | | :--- | :--- | | Update the City’s tree canopy and landscaping standards to ensure that that all future development contributes towards the City’s 30% citywide canopy coverage and update standards to implement best practices for tree preservation and post-development tree care. Consider adoption of an open space corridor overlay district to support the preservation of large, contiguous urban forest. | ES, PDS | | Consider expansion of existing programs, such as Grit City Trees, which provides financial and logistical support for people who want to plant trees in public rights-of-way, as well as programs to increase tree planting on private property or to support voluntary restoration efforts. | ES | | Implement citywide programs to monitor the health of the city’s environmental assets. Provide updated environmental assessments as part of the five and 10-year periodic review of the Comprehensive Plan. This could include:
a. GHG inventories
b. Tree canopy assessments
c. Water quality modeling
d. Permit data and tracking
e. Air quality monitoring | Citywide | | Consider the resourcing needs to fully implement the City’s environmental programs and seek funding via grants or partnership opportunities to expand the City’s environmental programs capacity. | Citywide | | Continue to implement the Urban Forestry Management Action Plan to achieve a healthy, thriving, and sustainable urban forest. | ES | (blank page) # Technical Report City of Tacoma, Washington # ONE TACOMA A Comprehensive Plan for a Vibrant, Connected, and Sustainable City Environment and Watershed Health Baseline Conditions | June 2025 # CONTENTS Contents | i --- | --- **Exhibits** | **ii** **1 Baseline Conditions** | **1** 1.1 Climate Change | 3 1.2 Environmental Assets and Hazards | 6 1.3 Watersheds | 9 Flett Creek | 11 Leach Creek | 18 Joe’s Creek | 24 Northeast Tacoma | 28 North Tacoma | 34 Thea Foss Waterway | 41 Tideflats | 46 Lower Puyallup | 51 Western Slopes | 58 1.4 Habitat Restoration | 63 1.5 Critical Areas | 64 Aquifer Recharge Areas | 64 Fish + Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas | 65 Wetlands + Estuaries | 65 Geologically Hazardous Areas | 66 Flood Hazard Areas | 67 Mineral Resource Lands | 67 1.6 Open Space | 68 1.7 Urban Forest | 71 **2 Data Dictionary** | **76** # EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Tacoma Environmental Assets and Hazards Map. 2 Exhibit 2: Tacoma Environmental Assets Map. 7 Exhibit 3: Tacoma Environmental Hazards Map. 8 Exhibit 4: Tacoma Watersheds Map. 10 Exhibit 5: Land Use Designations within Flett Creek Watershed. 11 Exhibit 6: Environmental Assets, Flett Creek Watershed. 12 Exhibit 7: Environmental Hazards, Flett Creek Watershed. 14 Exhibit 8: Fish Populations in Flett Creek Watershed. 18 Exhibit 9: Land Use Designation within Leach Creek Watershed. 19 Exhibit 10: Environmental Assets, Leach Creek Watershed. 21 Exhibit 11: Environmental Hazards, Leach Creek Watershed. 22 Exhibit 12: Land Use Designation within Joe’s Creek Watershed. 25 Exhibit 13: Environmental Assets, Joe’s Creek Watershed. 26 Exhibit 14: Environmental Hazards, Joe’s Creek Watershed. 27 Exhibit 15: Land Use Designation within Northeast Tacoma Watershed. 29 Exhibit 16: Environmental Assets, Northeast Tacoma Watershed. 30 Exhibit 17: Environmental Hazards, Northeast Tacoma Watershed. 31 Exhibit 18: Land Use Designation within North Tacoma Watershed. 35 Exhibit 19: Environmental Assets, North Tacoma Watershed. 37 Exhibit 20: Environmental Hazards, North Tacoma Watershed. 38 Exhibit 21: Land Use Designation within Thea Foss Waterway Watershed. 42 Exhibit 22: Environmental Assets, Thea Foss Waterway Watershed. 43 Exhibit 23: Environmental Hazards, Thea Foss Waterway Watershed. 44 Exhibit 24: Land Use Designation within Tideflats Watershed. 47 Exhibit 25: Environmental Assets, Tideflats Watershed. 48 Exhibit 26: Environmental Hazards, Tideflats Watershed. 49 Exhibit 27: Land Use Designation within Lower Puyallup Watershed. 52 Exhibit 28: Environmental Assets, Lower Puyallup Watershed. 53 Exhibit 29: Environmental Hazards, Lower Puyallup Watershed. 54 Exhibit 30: Land Use Designation within Western Slopes Watershed. 59 Exhibit 31: Environmental Assets, Western Slopes Watershed. 60 Exhibit 32: Environmental Hazards, Western Slopes Watershed. 61 Exhibit 33: Tacoma Passive Open Space and Stormwater Basin Map. 71 Exhibit 34: Urban Heat Island Index by Neighborhood | 73 Exhibit 35: Tacoma Tree Canopy Coverage, 2017. | 75 # 1 BASELINE CONDITIONS Before Western contact and settlement, the Puyallup people lived in villages from the foothills of təqʷuʔməʔ (Mount Tahoma), residing along the rivers that lead to Commencement Bay and into the South Puget Sound. The Puyallup Tribe, an independent sovereign nation, is the original steward of the land where Tacoma sits today, tending to the land where plants and animals were abundant and nurturing the waters where salmon, shellfish, and other marine resources were cultivated and harvested. Over time, however, the colonization, development, and industrialization of Tacoma have significantly worsened day-to-day life support systems, marginalized indigenous peoples, and resulted in extreme short-term gains for some at great cost to others, including plants and animals. Tacoma's history of logging and a lack of environmentally conscious City policies have contributed to an underdeveloped tree canopy. Some industries and transportation have polluted and continue to pollute air, soils, and waters, affecting culturally and economically important species and public health. Wood smoke pollution in the winter months impacted not only Tacoma but the greater Pierce County area. While the City has made some progress in addressing pollution, like the facilitated widespread wood stove change-outs that occurred almost a decade ago, other forms of pollution have worsened. Tacoma’s natural resources provide an array of ecologically, economically, and culturally valuable ecosystem services. The river, streams, aquifers, and floodplains convey and store water and provide critical habitat for native fish and aquatic species. The deep waters of Thea Foss waterway support international trade and commerce. Many of these resources also trap carbon and reduce the effects of urban heat islands. Today, greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution threatens the well-being of Tacoma’s interdependent web of life for generations. Climate-warming gases are causing and worsening natural disasters. However, the City acknowledges these facts and is pursuing action to address climate issues through meaningful and intentional action and stewardship. Indigenous communities and other Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) groups are valued role models and collaborators in this process to improve stewardship and overall community wellbeing. In December 2019, the Tacoma City Council, in coordination with the Puyallup Tribal Council, declared a climate emergency as a means to commit to protecting environmental assets and local communities. The resolution emphasized goals related to reducing GHG emissions, preparing for and mitigating climate impacts, and initiating a departure from fossil fuel reliance. ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 # Exhibit 1: Tacoma Environmental Assets and Hazards Map. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space Corridors; Landslide and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility* 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (*Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands*), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. The City has committed to restoring and maintaining a high-quality environment; however, many of Tacoma’s natural resources have been lost over time or are currently at risk. Development increases stormwater runoff, eroding stream channels and polluting waterways, making them unable to support healthy habitats. There is concern that anticipated growth and development TACOMA 2050 2 will result in substantial tree removal, continued habitat loss, and negative impacts on at-risk plant and animal species. The City’s land use plans and investments have been and will continue to be instrumental in helping guide and understand effective approaches to preserving natural resources. In addition, the City has invested time and money to restore our watersheds. With thoughtful guidance, the community can work together to face new challenges and achieve and sustain healthy watersheds and a healthful environment for all Tacomans as the city grows. # 1.1 Climate Change Climate change is significantly impacting the Puget Sound region, resulting in extreme heat waves, increased year-round temperatures, diminished snowpack, rising sea levels, wildfire and smoke, and flooding from extreme precipitation and storm surges. Potential climate impacts to Tacoma’s community include: Social & Health impacts: * Displacement of communities due to sea level rise flooding (as seen in Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 3) * Communities and businesses located in the West End, North End, and Tideflats are at higher risk of displacement due to flooding than inland communities.[^p45-1] * Public health risks from wildfire smoke and heat * Water-borne illnesses * Diseases such as salmonella and other bacterial and parasitic pathogens can have increased survival and growth due to increased air and water temperatures. E. coli and fecal pathogens can experience increased mobilization and dispersion due to flooding, drought, or storm surge and sea level rise.[^p45-2] Natural System impacts: * Stream pollutants * Less shade and carbon storage from vegetation loss * Marine habitat degradation [^p45-1]: Tacoma Climate Change Resilience Study, Executive Summary, May 2016 [^p45-2]: Waterborne Diseases That Are Sensitive to Climate Variability and Climate Change, The New England Journal of Medicine, https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra2300794 Infrastructure impacts: * Transportation shutdowns due to the flooding and inundation of roadways, rail lines, and ports[^p46-3] * Strained energy supply * Flooding of low-lying infrastructure, such as buildings, roads, and other essential structures Economic impacts: * Mobility (people and goods) impacted by flooding * Damage to critical infrastructure due to sea level rise * Property value losses * Risks to resource losses in agriculture, forestry, food * Business operations affected by flooding The effects of these impacts can be far-reaching and often disproportionately impact vulnerable communities. Impacts could potentially be intense for our unhoused neighbors, outdoor workers, kids, seniors, pregnant people, low-income households, BIPOC community members, people with breathing or heart issues, as well as other species, like salmon and orcas. The cost of climate impacts, which includes the loss of human life, reduction in quality of life, disruption of critical services, and loss of economic assets from natural hazards and extreme events under future climate change conditions, is projected to reach $3 billion by 2050 and over $250 million by 2080.[^p46-4] Although reducing emissions may appear costly, the resulting economic growth and benefits for Tacoma’s ecosystems and human well-being will enable the community to prosper in the future. While Tacoma is actively working to reduce GHG emissions, some climate effects are already irreversible, and the city will face these challenges for years to come. The City of Tacoma is dedicated to fostering a climate-resilient future, building on its established history of climate action. Key initiatives include the Tacoma Community Climate Action Plan (2008) the Tacoma Environmental Action Plan (2016), the Tacoma Climate Adaptation Strategy (2021) and the 2030 Tacoma Climate Plan (2021). During the Environmental Action Plan (EAP) from 2016 to 2020, many actions were taken to help address climate concerns and future impacts. For example, the City and Pierce County have added 20 percent more community gardens in low-income, at-risk communities, developed and shared educational resources related to waste prevention and electric vehicles, and planted 4,500 trees in Tacoma’s hottest neighborhoods.[^p46-5] However, the EAP goals and investments were not aggressive enough to feasibly attain a net-zero emissions future. Thus, in 2021, the City formed a more aggressive approach in the Tacoma Climate Action Plan, which committed [^p46-3]: United Nations Environment Programme (2024). Climate Risks in the Transportation Sector. Geneva, https://www.unepfi.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Climate-Risks-in-the-Transportation-Sector.pdf [^p46-4]: Source: 2030 Tacoma Climate Action Plan, 2021; Tacoma Climate Adaptation Strategy, 2021 [^p46-5]: City of Tacoma, 2030 Tacoma Climate Action Plan, 2021 ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 Tacoma to a 2050 net-zero emissions goal. This goal aligns with targets set by many other communities across the U.S. and the global target needed to increase the chances of avoiding catastrophic climate change. The Tacoma Climate Action Plan describes the steps that the City will take to reach its net-zero emissions goal, including strategies, actions, and targets to measure progress toward this goal.[^p47-6] According to Tacoma’s 2019 GHG emissions inventory, the city’s GHG pollution amounted to approximately 1.7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (MtCO2e) or 7.8 MtCO2e per person. To reach net zero, the city would need to reduce its emissions by 33 percent by 2030. To ensure transparency and accountability, the City of Tacoma develops an annual progress report that tracks 2030 Indicator Targets. These indicators are often easier to relate to than measurements of tons of GHG pollution, are trackable, and usually show more immediate community impact. The metrics include things like the number of trees planted in neighborhoods, public electric vehicle charging stations installed, and miles of sidewalks built or repaired. Actions are categorized by the following strategy categories: - Better Together (community welfare and collaboration) - Better Living (improving the general quality of life) - Better Breathing (air quality) - Better Resource Use (related to consumption, waste prevention, and reuse) - Better Opportunities (economic health) - Better Prepared (resiliency) The actions found in the above categories were determined to be high impact as they would either contribute to a significant reduction in GHG emissions, center historically underserved communities in development and implementation, or deliver substantial co-benefits that contribute to an enhanced quality of life. The 2023 progress report indicated that the City has made strides towards achieving 2030 goals. According to the report, since 2022, the City: - Increased community-led climate equity projects and programs by almost 72 percent - Added 19 additional community food projects (including gardens, food forests, orchards, farms, food rescue efforts, and farmers markets) - Increased miles of sidewalks (14 percent) and bicycle infrastructure (80 percent) - Increased the number of green certified commercial buildings (2 percent) and housing units (10 percent), preserved housing units (7 percent), and new affordable units (13 percent) [^p47-6]: Ibid., page 2 TACOMA 2050 5 - Increased acres of actively managed open space habitats (21 percent) and protected open space ecosystem habitats (53 percent) - Increased natural heat island intervention projects (68 percent) - Reduced GHG from municipal fleet by 36 percent # 1.2 Environmental Assets and Hazards Tacoma’s natural resources include the marine ecosystems of the Puget Sound, the Puyallup River and its tributaries, urban wetlands, open spaces, parks, and urban forests. Together, these resources play an important role in stormwater management, air and water purification, habitat for diverse fish and wildlife species, and climate change mitigation and adaptation. Tacoma also faces a variety of environmental hazards that pose risks to both its natural and built environment. Across the city, there are areas at risk of landslides, erosion, flooding, and liquefaction. Development and increasing extreme weather events due to climate change can place stressors on the environment that can create vulnerabilities. Areas at risk of landslides, erosion, flooding, and liquefaction are vulnerable to potential property damage and disruption in services. As Tacoma continues to grow and face environmental challenges, thoughtful and proactive management of the city’s environmental assets and hazards will be important to ensure communities are thriving and resilient. ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 ### Exhibit 2: Tacoma Environmental Assets Map. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space Corridors*) 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (*Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands*), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. TACOMA 2050 7 ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 ## Exhibit 3: Tacoma Environmental Hazards Map. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility*) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. # 1.3 Watersheds[^p51-7] The nine watersheds located in Tacoma are described below and mapped in Exhibit 4: Flett Creek, Foss Waterway, Joe’s Creek, Leach Creek, Lower Puyallup, North Tacoma, Northeast Tacoma, Tideflats, and Western Slopes. The watersheds in Tacoma are also a part of Washington State’s Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA). Roughly half of the watersheds are either part of WRIA-10 Puyallup-White Watershed or WRIA-12 Chambers-Clover Creek Watershed. [^p51-7]: Section 1.3 Watershed is informed by the City of Tacoma’s Urban Watershed Protection Plan. Description of waterbodies and facilities as well as any charts or tables included in this section originates from the Urban Watershed Protection Plan. Exhibit 4: Tacoma Watersheds Map. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024, Seva Workshop, 2024. The maps in Exhibit 5 through Exhibit 32 zoom into each of Tacoma’s nine watersheds and identify land use designations; known environmental assets including wetlands, streams, open space corridors, aquifer recharge areas, shorelines, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, and potential restoration sites; and environmental hazards including geologically hazardous areas, and flood hazard areas. # Flett Creek The Flett Creek Watershed is approximately 7,930 acres with 7,130 acres within the City of Tacoma limits and is the largest watershed in the city. The Flett Creek watershed is one of two watersheds in Tacoma that do not contain saltwater shorelines. The watershed is predominately residential with commercial and light industrial uses in localized areas as illustrated in Exhibit 5. The watershed is 43 percent impervious. **Exhibit 5: Land Use Designations within Flett Creek Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Future Land Use Designation*), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 Flett Creek itself occurs within the City of Lakewood and flows into Chambers Creek, but the historic headwaters of the creek are located in Tacoma. Flett Creek Watershed is bordered by the Thea Foss Watershed to the east, Leach Creek Watershed on the west, and Pierce County to the south. Flett Creek Watershed is also part of WRIA-12 Chambers-Clover Creek Watershed. **Exhibit 6: Environmental Assets, Flett Creek Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways*; *Aquifer Recharge Areas*; *Open Space Corridors*; *Priority Subbasins*) 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (*Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands*), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. The watershed includes Snake, Wapato and Wards Lakes, Hosmer and 84th Street Holding Basins, the Flett Creek Holding Ponds, portions of Interstate 5 and State Route 16, the South Tacoma Groundwater Protection District, and the South Tacoma Channel Superfund Site. The Delong Pond wetland, an isolated waterbody, is also located in this drainage basin. The Pierce County Conservations Futures Program purchased part of the Delong Pond wetland to be preserved as wildlife habitat and open space. All 7,930 acres of the watershed drain into the Flett Creek Holding Basins, which are pumped from a single pump station into the Flett Dairy Wetlands and Flett Creek. ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 **Exhibit 7: Environmental Hazards, Flett Creek Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. **Receiving Waterbodies and Stormwater Facilities** TACOMA 2050 14 # Snake Lake Snake Lake is a 17-acre urban lake and wetland. The water from Snake Lake discharges to the South Tacoma Channel and, during high flow events, to the Flett Creek Holding Basins. The lake is the central feature of the Tacoma Nature Center, a 54-acre facility dedicated to nature education and research. The facility is operated by Metro Parks Tacoma. The lake does not support fishing or swimming, but the surrounding area around Snake Lake does offer other recreational opportunities such as walking trails and wildlife viewings. The nearby urban residential watershed (approximately 584 acres) drains into the lake. Eighty percent of the water that flows into the lake over a year comes from stormwater runoff. Large impervious areas in this drainage basin include the eastern portion of Cheney Stadium, Foss High School, and a Fred Meyer shopping center. Cheney Stadium was recently retrofitted with a pervious pavement parking lot and bioretention facilities; as a result of the retrofit, most of the stormwater now infiltrates and no longer directly discharges to the lake. # Wapato Lake Wapato Lake is a small, shallow 23-acre urban lake that drains 900 residential and commercial acres from the north. The lake is the central feature of Wapato Park, an 80-acre facility owned by Metro Parks Tacoma. As the only recreational lake in the City, Wapato Lake is the target of intense watershed and in-lake maintenance and management. The goal of these activities is to reach and maintain a clear-water state to support fishing and boating. Water quality in Wapato Lake is a challenge, due to its shallow nature and urban setting. While stormwater pollutants largely bypass the lake, Wapato Lake still experiences pollutants from other sources like birds and the release of phosphorus from lake sediments. The lake is listed by Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) as a Category 5 “impaired waters” for fecal coliform bacteria. A water quality improvement plan, technically known as a total maximum daily load (TMDL) and is required by the Clean Water Act, to address the fecal coliform bacteria has not been scheduled. Wapato does have a TMDL for phosphorus and an Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Category 4a TMDL. # Flett Wetland and Creek Flett Creek is approximately 3.0 miles long and is located in the City of Lakewood. The historic headwaters of the creek were located at least partially in Tacoma but were ditched and/or piped long ago. The Flett Pump Station transfers water from the Flett Ponds to the effective headwaters of Flett Wetland and Creek. Flett creek flows to Chambers-Clover Creek which ultimately discharges to the Tacoma Narrows. The Flett Wetlands are extremely flat and the creek channel slope is 0.06 percent for the first mile downstream of the pump station. The Flett Dairy dug and maintained this channel yearly until 1979. Post-maintenance, farm road culverts collapsed, and the creek channel filled in with swamp smartweed, reed canary grass, and cattails. The collapsed culverts and the presence of beaver and vegetative dams caused water to backup and cross the emergency spillway leading water to re-enter the Flett Ponds in 2009 and 2011, respectively; this event caused adjacent and upstream properties to become flooded. Invasive species dominance and blockages reduce the water quality and habitat complexity within the Flett Wetland. Summertime water temperatures can reach 80°F and the few fish present (bullhead and stickleback) become stranded and die during low water periods. Multiple projects are executed yearly in an effort to increase flow rate while enhancing fisheries habitat. Projects include removal of two roads/collapsed culverts, beaver dams, barbwire tangles and clearing of invasive reed canary grass from the creek channel. The creek is very weakly confined, the banks are planted yearly with willow in an effort to start hummock formation, eventually providing a substrate for shade producing woody plant species. While water levels remain high in the wetland, water has not passed back over the dike separating the ponds from the wetland since 2011 and cutthroat trout were observed the last two years in the channel (after lack of observed presence from 2009-2017). ## Hosmer Holding Basin The Hosmer Holding Basin was constructed in 1965 and drains approximately 2100 acres. The basin consists of two cells. The southern cell receives the majority of discharge and drains residential areas to the north, south and east of the basin. The north basin receives local discharges and largely acts as an equalization basin – or balancing reservoir. ## Flett Holding Ponds Stormwater runoff from the entire watershed ultimately flows into the Flett Creek Holding Basins, located in the City of Lakewood. In 1957, before widespread development, the Flett Creek Holding Ponds were originally called the “South Tacoma Swamp,” a natural depressed area that was the headwaters of Flett Creek. The South Tacoma Swamp spanned from South 48th Street to South 74th Street. A threaded channel within the wetland buffer ran from the South Tacoma Swamp location to Bridgeport Way. From 1903-1979, Flett Creek above Bridgeport Way was maintained as a distinct channel to support hay production and pasture for the Flett Dairy. After maintenance by Flett Dairy ended in 1979, channel flow became blocked due to overrun vegetation and beaver dams. The current Flett Creek Holdings Ponds and pump station were constructed in 1981 to alleviate localized flooding. The Flett Creek Holding Basin system consists of four consecutive connected cells, approximately 4,500 feet in length, with associated piping, and a pump station. Water entering the Flett Creek Holding Basin is pumped to the Flett Dairy Wetlands and Flett Creek. Flett Creek converges with Chambers Creek which ultimately discharges to the Puget Sound. The Flett Ponds have an extensive monoculture of swamp smartweed (Polygonum hydropiperoides), which impedes the ponds’ performance as active storage. The plants cover over 90 percent of two of the ponds, and approximately 50 percent of the other two pond. In addition to loss of active storage, the plants break off during fall/winter storms blocking transmission pipes between the ponds and intake screens of the pump station. Herbicide applications are scheduled to assist with managing the growth of the monoculture. # Wards Lake Wards Lake is a single cell basin which receives water from the Hosmer Holding Basin, WSDOT right-of-way, and Wapato Lake. Water entering Wards Lake from the Wapato and Hosmer outfalls is impacted by an expanding sediment delta, which is 60 percent of the outfall pipe(s) height. The delta forms the eastern edge of Owens Marsh, which deepens to become Wards Lake at the far western end of the property. The marsh will continue to fill in as a result of natural succession. The City of Tacoma is looking at multiple flood control options to address this impediment within the Hosmer-Wards-80th Street Holding Basin system. Water exits Wards Lake to the north through a pair of gates, one designed for normal flow conditions and one designed as an emergency overflow. # 80th Street Holding Basin (Gravel Pit) The 80th Street Holding Basin (formerly known as the Gravel Pit Holding Basin) was originally an open pit gravel extraction facility during the 1950s. When gravel mining ceased in 1959, the City began using the gravel pit as a regional stormwater detention facility. The Gravel Pit is a single cell holding basin, which receives water from the Wards Lake Holding Basin and a small portion of water from the City of Lakewood. The City expanded the holding capacity of the existing Gravel Pit Holding Basin in 2016. The expansion was enrolled in the Payment In-Lieu-of Construction Program, which allows the City to accelerate environmental improvements in the Flett Creek Watershed and to Flett Creek. New development and redevelopment projects within the Flett Creek Watershed have the option of participating in the Payment In-Lieu-Of Construction Program by paying a system development charge instead of constructing individual site-specific flow control facilities. # South Tacoma Channel Superfund Site The South Tacoma Channel Superfund site is located between South Tacoma Way and Tyler Street and extends between South 56th and South 38th Streets. The western edge of the site contains a long, linear channel extending from South 38th Street to South 50th Street. The channel is not entirely under City management, but it serves an critical role in detaining and infiltrating flood flows, without damaging nearby structures. The South Tacoma Channel Superfund site has recently been delisted but continues to be subject to deed restrictions. # ESA-Listed Fish Species Critical Habit The Flett Creek and Chambers Creek are the only waterbodies connected to the Flett Creek Watershed that have confirmed fish populations. Neither Flett Creek nor Chambers Creek are considered Critical Habitat for Puget Sound Chinook or Puget Sound Steelhead. However, based on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (WDFW) WRIA, South Sound Tributaries Winter Steelhead, which can be found in the WRIA-12 Chambers-Clover Creek Watershed, are considered threatened species. Salmonid spawning habitat can be found from Chambers Creek up to Bridgeport Way and there is one fish hatchery located on Chambers Creek. The following table lists the populations of fish present in both Flett Creek and Chambers Creek: **Exhibit 8: Fish Populations in Flett Creek Watershed.** | Location | Fish Population | | :--- | :--- | | Flett Creek | Coho, documented spawning | | | Summer/Fall/Winter Chum, presence | | | Winter Steelhead, presumed presence | | | Fall Chinook, presumed presence | | Chambers Creek | Coho, documented spawning | | | Summer/Fall/Winter Chum, presence | | | Fall Chinook, potential presence | | | Winter Steelhead, presence | | | Kokanee, presence | Source: City of Tacoma, 2024 # Leach Creek The Leach Creek Watershed within the City boundaries cover 1,728 acres. It is located in the west-central section of Tacoma and is bordered by the Western Slopes and North Tacoma Watersheds to the north, the Flett Creek Watershed to the east, and the Cities of Fircrest and University Place to the southwest. Like the Flett Creek Watershed, this watershed does not contain any saltwater shorelines. Leach Creek Watershed is also part of the WRIA-12 Chambers-Clover Creek Watershed. Leach Creek has a drainage area of approximately 1,867 acres or 6.5 square miles. Exhibit 9 shows that much of the land use within Leach Creek Watershed is residential and commercial. A portion of the Tacoma Landfill Superfund site is also included in this watershed. China Lake and a system of 16 wetlands on the Tacoma Community College campus are the significant waterbodies in this watershed within City limits. # Exhibit 9: Land Use Designation within Leach Creek Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Future Land Use Designation*), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 Ecology detected several instances of elevated bacteria and mercury concentrations at the mouth of Leach Creek during routine water quality monitoring in 2007-2008. Total mercury levels exceeded (did not meet) the Washington State chronic water quality criterion during four sampling events. Dissolved copper levels also exceeded the chronic criterion during two sampling events. Sources appear to lie towards the upstream end of the Leach Creek watershed. In March 2015, Ecology proposed that Leach Creek, from the holding basin to the confluence with Chambers Creek, be placed in Category 5 on the 303(d) list of the State Water Quality Assessment as being water quality limited for mercury, copper, and bacteria based on the 2007-2008 and the 2009-2010 sampling data. Offsite groundwater extraction wells were installed along Leach Creek to intercept and monitor any contaminants that may be traveling through the groundwater from the unlined portions of the Tacoma Transfer and Recovery Center, a Superfund site. Currently, groundwater at this location is no longer being re-directed to the wastewater treatment plant. The monitoring well data indicated that groundwater elevations have returned to pre-remediation elevations, and groundwater contaminants monitoring analytical results were meeting Consent Decree groundwater performance standards. Consequently, EPA approved decommissioning selected offsite groundwater extraction wells in 2010, with the last offsite extraction well decommissioned in March 2018. ### Exhibit 10: Environmental Assets, Leach Creek Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space Corridors; Priority Subbasins* 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (*Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands*), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. # Exhibit 11: Environmental Hazards, Leach Creek Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility* ) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. # Receiving Waterbodies and Stormwater Facilities ## Leach Creek Holding Basin The Leach Creek Holding Basin covers approximately 42 acres and contains 32 acres of wetlands. The holding basin collects 2,500 acres of the WRIA-12 Chambers-Clover Creek Watershed. In 1961, the holding basin was built by the City of Tacoma to control stormwater runoff into Leach Creek and help prevent downstream property flooding and stream scouring. A 1,100-foot earthen dam was constructed across a naturally depressed swampy area below Fircrest where natural springs made up the headwaters of Leach Creek. A lawsuit in the mid-1980’s resulted in the construction of a pump station that would relieve downstream flooding by pumping water from the holding basin to the Thea Foss Waterway during high flow events. An open channel emergency spillway was also added to prevent dam breaching. The holding basin has a normal operating storage capacity of approximately 80 acre-feet. During extreme storms (3.5 inches or more in 24 hours), the pond level will continue to increase and may discharge over the emergency spillway to Leach Creek. Depth over the emergency spillway may range from 6 to 12 inches, which leaves one foot of freeboard on the dam. The total emergency storage is approximately 120 acre-feet to top of dam. Over the years, the capacity of the holding basin has decreased due to sedimentation and vegetation growth. However, the need for stormwater storage capacity within the Leach Creek Watershed has increased as the area has continued to develop. A holding basin maintenance project to increase capacity and hydraulic connectivity from the pump station to the outlet is planned for construction in 2024. ## Chambers Creek System Chambers-Clover Creek Watershed is designated as Water Resource Inventory Area 12 (WRIA 12) by the State of Washington and includes the following major water bodies: Steilacoom Lake, Leach Creek, Flett Creek, Clover Creek and Chambers Creek. Clover Creek discharges into Steilacoom Lake while Chambers Creek flows from Steilacoom Lake northward to the confluences with Flett and Leach Creeks. Turning westward, Chambers Creek then flows rapidly through steep wooded ravines to a short estuary and out to Puget Sound. Chambers Creek is a fish-bearing creek, and there are two fish hatcheries located on Chambers Creek. ## Leach Creek Leach Creek is a little over 2 miles long. Before construction of the Leach Creek Holding Basin, Leach Creek flowed through a flat marshy valley land. Presently, Leach Creek proper begins south of the holding basin dam. After passing through residential areas, Leach Creek passes through a wetland, to steep-sided and heavily wooded ravines, and finally joins Chambers Creek, just downstream of the confluence of Flett and Chambers Creek. The upper portions of Leach Creek also have pockets of spawning grounds; however, the elimination of vegetation, channelization by streamside homeowners, and erosion during storm events has impacted these areas. ## China Lake China Lake was formed by a natural depression and receives surface runoff from the surrounding area. Stormwater from a large portion of the upper Leach Creek watershed (about 840 acres) is piped to China Lake, which has an overflow piped to Leach Creek Holding Basin. However, overflows from China Lake have not been observed in recent years because water in the lake infiltrates into the underlying soils. ## ESA Listed Fish Species Critical Habitat Leach Creek nor Chambers Creek are considered Critical Habitat for Puget Sound Chinook and Puget Sound steelhead. Salmonid spawning habitat can be found along the lower portion of Leach Creek from Chambers Creek up to Bridgeport Way. The upper end of Leach Creek also has pockets of spawning grounds; however, habitat quality is impacted by the elimination of vegetation, channelization by streamside homeowners, and erosion from high storm flows. WDFW’s Fish Passage Program has identified the Leach Holding Basin dam as a partial blockage to fish passage. No ESA-listed fish species utilize Leach Creek within the holding basin. However, WDFW has determined presumed presence or documented presence of the following salmonids in Leach Creek: * Coho, documented spawning * Summer/Fall/Winter Chum, presence * Winter Steelhead, presumed presence * Fall Chinook, presumed presence ## Joe’s Creek The Joe’s Creek Watershed covers 434 acres making it the smallest watershed in Tacoma. It contains primarily single and multiple-family residential land uses with some open space and undeveloped land. Only two percent of this Tacoma watershed is commercial. The watershed borders unincorporated Pierce County and the City of Federal Way to the north and the Northeast Tacoma Watershed to the south. The Joe’s Creek Watershed is part of WRIA-10 Puyallup-White Watershed. ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 # Exhibit 12: Land Use Designation within Joe’s Creek Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Future Land Use Designation*), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 While named the Joe’s Creek Watershed, only the eastern portion of the watershed drains to Joe’s Creek while the western portion drains just south of Dumas Bay from Dash Point State Park. Joe’s Creek is the main freshwater creek in this area. Joe’s Creek itself is located in Federal Way, though it receives stormwater discharges from the City of Tacoma. The City is working closely with Federal Way to address nutrient concerns in this watershed. ### Exhibit 13: Environmental Assets, Joe’s Creek Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space Corridors*) 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (*Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands*), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. **Exhibit 14: Environmental Hazards, Joe’s Creek Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Landlines and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. ## Receiving Waterbodies and Stormwater Facilities ### Joe’s Creek Sub-basins Joe’s Creek Watershed in Tacoma is divided into three distinct sub-basins. Sub-basin JC01 is the northern most sub-basin draining an area of approximately 243 acres. The land use in this basin is residential with small pockets of open space steep sloped areas bordering Dash Point State Park. Stormwater from this basin discharges to several gulches leading to freshwater creeks in Dash Point State Park prior to discharging into the Puget Sound just south of Dumas Bay. The JC02 Sub-basin covers 97 acres and is the only sub-basin that discharges directly to Joe’s Creek. Single-family residence is the predominant land-use in this sub-basin. While not showing on the City’s watershed boundary maps, the northern pond from the North Shore Golf Course in Northeast Tacoma discharges to headwaters of Joe’s Creek. The additional drainage area includes residential areas discharging to this pond. The JC03 sub-basin covers 93 acres and while the predominant land-use is residential, this sub-basin contains the only pocket of commercial land use in the Joe’s Creek Watershed. The City is in the process of requesting GIS information from the City of Federal Way to determine how the water flows through this stormwater conveyance system. It appears that the discharge from the area combines with flows from Joe’s Creek and ultimately discharges to Dumas Bay. ## Joe’s Creek Joe’s Creek is a highly modified urban stream that flows north from its origins in the City of Tacoma and through Federal Way for approximately 0.75 miles to Lake Lorene. Lake Lorene discharges over a distance of approximately 700 feet into Lake Jean. These lakes are located in Federal Way and known as the Twin Lakes. Lake Jean discharges into Lower Joe’s Creek, which flows north for approximately 1.1 miles to Dumas Bay in the Puget Sound. The lower part of the creek is used by salmonid species. While this use is moderate, the lowermost portion of the creek provides the largest and best quality reach of salmonids spawning and rearing habitat in the southwest portion of King County. This habitat is threatened by loss and degradation of riparian conditions, excessive sedimentation, and trash deposits where it discharges into the Puget Sound in Dumas Bay. Three streams drain into the urban 40-acre Dumas Bay, including Joe’s Creek. ## Northeast Tacoma The Northeast Tacoma Watershed covers 2,641 acres. Pierce County and the City of Federal Way border the area to the north and east, the City of Fife borders the south, and the industrial Tideflats Watershed borders the west of this watershed. Much of the watershed contains steep slopes and bluffs with several intermittent streams that flow into Commencement Bay. Marine View Drive (Highway 509) separates the steep sloped areas of the NE Tacoma Watershed from the Hylebos Waterway. The upper watershed consists primarily of residential land uses with open spaces and undeveloped land while the lower watershed supports industrial uses along the Hylebos Waterway, which connects Hylebos Creek with Commencement Bay. The Northeast Tacoma Watershed is part of WRIA-10 Puyallup-White Watershed. ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 ## Exhibit 15: Land Use Designation within Northeast Tacoma Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Future Land Use Designation), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 The gulches and wetlands in this area generally have intermittent water flow due to seasonally fluctuating groundwater. Groundwater seepage combined with sandy soils and steep slopes creates a large potential for erosion and results in frequent landslides occurring during winter months along Marine View Drive. In order to reduce water flow and prevent flooding of nearby businesses, detention systems were built in the gulches. Although some of the gulches have adequate flow to support fish, culverts and other obstructions block fish passage. TACOMA 2050 29 The City actively manages the vegetation in a few Open Space properties in this watershed including Julia’s Gulch. The vegetation in these areas is dominated by invasive and noxious weeds including poison ivy and poison oak. **Exhibit 16: Environmental Assets, Northeast Tacoma Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space Corridors; Priority Subbasins* ) 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (*Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands*); Seva Workshop, 2024. **Exhibit 17: Environmental Hazards, Northeast Tacoma Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. # Receiving Waterbodies and Stormwater Facilities ## Northeast Tacoma Sub-basins The Northeast Tacoma Watershed is divided into six drainage sub-basins. Five of these sub-basins discharge to the south of Brown’s Point into the Hylebos Waterway and Commencement Bay, while sub-basin NE01 discharges directly into the Puget Sound north of Brown’s Point. The NE01 sub-basin receives discharges from a small residential area in the northern portion of this watershed bordering Joe’s Creek and the Pierce County-side of Brown’s Point. Stormwater runoff from this basin discharges to Dry Gulch. The gulch begins at the end of 52nd Street Northeast and crosses into Pierce County prior to discharging north of Brown’s Point into the Puget Sound. The gulch primarily receives stormwater discharges from three locations: a 54-inch pipe discharging at the top of the gulch behind 1509 51st Street, a 12-inch pipe discharging to the gulch at 53rd Street, and an 18-inch pipe discharging near Overlook Avenue. Fish passage is not possible in this gulch since baseflow is intermittent and due to steep slopes and fish passage barriers. The NE02 sub-basin receives runoff from a completely residential area of Northeast Tacoma and borders the Pierce County-side of Brown’s Point to the west. Almost half of this sub-basin consists of steep slopes with some wetlands, but no significant stream systems. The NE03 sub-basin drains to the northern side of Hylebos Waterway. This is a primarily residential basin with steep slopes and wetlands on the southern border along the shoreline. There are two large stormwater-fed gulches that discharge at 5002 and 4606 Marine View Drive. Both sites have erosion, flooding, excessive sedimentation, and invasive species. The three smaller gulches to the southeast drain residential areas in this sub-basin and discharge into the Hylebos Waterway: Charlie’s Gulch, Ole’s Gulch, and Loma Court Gulch. All three gulches have issues with erosion along the steep slopes. These gulches do not receive discharges from the City’s stormwater systems with the exception of a 10-inch pipe discharging into Loma Court Gulch from Loma CT NE. As the gulches receive very little piped stormwater flow, the majority of stormwater in this basin discharges into the Hylebos Waterway at an outfall near 3622 Marine View Drive. The NE04 sub-basin drains directly to the Hylebos Waterway. The area bordering Federal Way is primarily residential and either discharges directly into the Hylebos or drains into one of the six gulches in this sub-basin. The area at the bottom of the gulches along the Hylebos Waterway is occupied by industrial uses. The majority of the industries along the northern side of the Hylebos Waterway are privately-owned and discharge stormwater runoff directly to the Hylebos Waterway. McMurray Gulch is located at the head of the Hylebos Waterway. This large gulch receives stormwater runoff from a 10-inch pipe off 45th Avenue Northeast and there is extreme erosion associated with this outfall. Coski Gulch, Morning Side Ditch, and Manke Gulch also receive discharges from the City’s stormwater collection system. Julia’s Gulch, Metal Gulch, and McBride Gulch do not receive piped stormwater. All of the gulches in this sub-basin have varying severity of erosion and invasive species issues. None of the gulches are accessible to fish due to low baseflows, steep slopes, and physical barriers such as culverts, roadways, and pipes; therefore, the area is not considered viable fish habitat. The NE05 sub-basin contains mainly industrial properties at the head of the Hylebos Waterway. This sub-basin includes the lower reach of Hylebos Creek, the only fish-bearing stream in the Northeast Tacoma Watershed. The NE06 sub-basin makes up the portion of land discharging into the Hylebos Waterway on the southern side of the waterway. Land use in this area is industrial with all properties discharging directly into the Hylebos Waterway. The Port of Tacoma owns the majority of properties in this sub-basin. This sub-basin also includes the federally-listed contaminated Superfund site of Occidental Chemical. ## Commencement Bay Information on Commencement Bay is found in the Lower Puyallup Watershed Section and Thea Foss Waterway Watershed Section. ## Hylebos Creek Hylebos Creek is the major tributary to the Hylebos Waterway and drains approximately 12,000 acres from tributaries in Federal, Milton, Edgewood, King County, Pierce County, and Fife to the mouth of the creek at the Hylebos Waterway in Commencement Bay. The lower portion of the Hylebos moves through Puyallup Tribal lands. The Muckleshoot Tribe also maintains fishing rights on Hylebos Creek. The Hylebos Creek Watershed consists of approximately 350 miles of streams and 250 acres of wetlands and is believed to have been one of the most productive small stream systems in the southern Puget Sound. Historical accounts indicate the system supported several thousands of Coho and Chum plus hundreds of chinook, steelhead, and cutthroat trout. Overtime this fish habitat was severely altered from its historical natural state due to development and urbanization. Residential development, erosion, channelization, and frequent flooding threaten the creek and associated riparian habitat. The Hylebos Creek Mitigation Site is located in the intertidal reach of Hylebos Creek on the right bank of the lower Hylebos Creek and is part of the Thea Foss and Wheeler-Osgood Waterways Remediation Project. Non-native invasive species were removed from this site and replaced with native plants. Where possible with the least disturbance to native vegetation, small off- channel “fingers” were excavated into the existing bank to allow water inundation during periods of high freshwater flows or tidal surges. This site provides habitat for out-migrating juvenile salmonids that pause here while acclimatizing to saltwater. The Place of Circling Waters is a National Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) mitigation site located along Hylebos Creek at the foot of Northeast Tacoma. Together, this off-channel habitat and the preserved upland areas support local Coho, Chinook, and Chum salmonid species. Amphibians and bird species will also benefit from the wetland enhancement. The Hylebos Creek Estuarine Restoration Project is a 6.7-acre site located adjacent to Hylebos Creek near Commencement Bay. Historically, the site supported tidal wetlands; however, by 1996 the site had been isolated from Hylebos Creek by a fabricated berm, was dominated by non-native species, contained several structures, and a significant amount of debris. The Restoration Project converted the property into a functioning estuarine marsh featuring intertidal channels and forested upland. The re-established estuarine habitats have replaced a limited resource within the Hylebos Creek Watershed and have restored natural habitat-forming processes for the benefit of Chinook salmon, steelhead, bull trout, and other native fish and wildlife species. ## Hylebos Waterway The Hylebos Waterway is one of seven waterways situated within the Commencement Bay Tideflats, an estuary that receives fresh surface water from Hylebos Creek. Aquifers within the Puyallup Valley and the adjacent uplands also contribute fresh water to the waterway. The Port of Tacoma extended the Hylebos Waterway in the 1960s to a 200-foot wide, 3-mile long waterway. Only 25 percent of that surface water remains due to filling, channeling, and underground piping of surface waters. Hylebos Waterway also receives the direct runoff from the surrounding Tideflats. The industrial development of the area and the straightening and channeling of Hylebos Creek to form the current Hylebos Waterway destroyed much of the historic juvenile salmon and wildlife habitat. The Hylebos Waterway is currently listed as a Category 5 on the State’s 303d list for dieldrin, PCBs, chlorinated pesticides, DDT, and HPAH. The Hylebos Waterway is also listed as a Superfund site as part of the Commencement Bay Nearshore Tideflats Superfund site. EPA placed Commencement Bay on the Superfund National Priorities List in 1983 after discovering widespread contamination. Fifty-eight percent of the area (167 of the 285-acre area listed) requires cleanup. In addition to the cleanup of the waterway, environmental cleanup occurred at several contaminated upland sites along the Hylebos at the Wasser Winters site and Occidental Chemical Corp site. ## North Tacoma The North Tacoma Watershed drains approximately 4,766 acres and encompasses the northern portion of Tacoma and the City of Ruston. The watershed is part of WRIA-12 Chambers-Clover Creek Watershed. The area is predominately residential with some commercial areas as seen in Exhibit 18. Notable places within this watershed include Point Defiance Park, the North End Wastewater Treatment Plant, and the former ASARCO smelting site, which is part of the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Superfund site. ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 **Exhibit 18: Land Use Designation within North Tacoma Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Future Land Use Designation), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 In 2015, the City collaborated with Metro Parks Tacoma to install a Regional Stormwater Treatment Facility at Point Defiance Park. This stormwater facility is designed to improve the quality of stormwater discharging to Commencement Bay, treating up to 8 million gallons per day from the watershed’s 754 acres. The treatment facility uses bioretention soil mix to filter stormwater and reduce the load of fine sediment, metals, oils and grease from cars, and nutrients and bacteria from pet waste, and landscape maintenance. TACOMA 2050 35 There are several water bodies within this watershed including Ruston Creek, Asarco Creek, Puget Creek, Mason Creek. and the stream associated with Garfield Gulch. Puget and Mason Creeks are perennial and have steep slopes associated with them. Critical issues in the North Tacoma watershed include impaired nearshore habitats along the shoreline of Commencement Bay, erosion and sediment problems on steep slopes in the northern portion of the watershed, historic contamination, and fish access. Exhibit 19: Environmental Assets, North Tacoma Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space Corridors; Priority Subbasins) 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands); Seva Workshop, 2024. ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 **Exhibit 20: Environmental Hazards, North Tacoma Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. TACOMA 2050 38 # Receiving Waterbodies and Stormwater Facilities ## Schuster Parkway and Garfield Gulch There are four sub-basins discharging to Commencement Bay from the Schuster Parkway area. The southernmost sub-basins encompass the residential and commercial areas of downtown Tacoma to the Stadium District and include discharges from Tacoma General Hospital and Wright Park. There is extensive re-development planned for this area, including underground utility replacement and the extension of the downtown Sound Transit Link light rail system. There has also been significant restoration work along the open space area of Schuster Parkway to assist with slope stabilization. Garfield Gulch has a low flow intermittent stream. Fish passage is not feasible in this area due to the physical barriers of the culvert and limited flow. Stormwater from the sub-basins is conveyed through stormwater pipes that ultimately connect to the stormwater mainline located under Garfield Gulch, which continues through a culvert under Ruston Way, and discharges to an outfall into Commencement Bay near the head of the Foss Waterway. ## Buckley Gulch Drainage Area and Buckley Creek Historically, the mouth of Buckley Creek was located where Old Town Park sits today. As sawmills moved into the area, the creek was altered to create a fresh water pond for the Dickman Mill operation at the creek’s mouth. In 1925, Ruston Way was built, and the creek was directed into a culvert pipe discharging into the Puget Sound near Hamilton Park. There is another small side-channel stream that extends to the east between Carr Street and Orchard Road and crosses over privately owned parcels. This stream combines with the main channel of Buckley Creek near Ursich Park where it enters the City’s stormwater system. The stormwater pipes collect runoff from the residential and commercial areas of this sub-basin and discharges to a marine outfall near Hamilton Park after crossing under Ruston Way. Unlike other gulches in North Tacoma, there is no designated trail or public use access through Buckley Gulch. The open space area of Buckley Gulch (sometimes known as “Old Town Gulch”) originates near N 16th and Junett. ## Puget Gulch Drainage Area and Puget Creek Puget Creek is approximately 1,600 feet long with perennial flows averaging about 2.9 cubic feet per second (cfs). Most of the historical flow is collected and conveyed through City’s stormwater system, which runs under the length of the Puget Gulch and discharges into Commencement Bay near Dickman Park under Ruston Way. In March 2002, a wetland delineation was conducted; the delination identified and classified the wetlands located in the lower section of Puget Gulch where the Puget Creek originates and downstream of the area. There are multiple wetlands ranging in scale from Category II to Category III wetlands. Over the past decade, Puget Creek has been the subject of interest by several groups concerned with restoring this open space, including the Puget Creek Restoration Society. This group worked with the City to reintroduce salmon to Puget Creek by improving fish access and vegetative cover in Puget Gulch and worked to restore the trail connecting the Proctor Area with Ruston Way. A fish ladder was installed in 1997 to provide fish access to the creek, which is designed to provide access to the creek by salmonids during high tide. Members of the Puget Creek Restoration Society stated that spawning Coho was observed in Puget Creek in 2001 and 2003. WDFW has documented the presence of both Coho Salmon and Residential Coastal Cutthroat Trout in Puget Creek. Puget Gulch provides beneficial habitat for a variety of wildlife including muskrats, Cooper’s hawks, red foxes, great horned owls, raccoons, possums, deer, eagles, red tail owls, bard owls, mountain beavers, and numerous birds, as referenced in the Puget Creek Watershed Management Plan. Eelgrass beds exist in Commencement Bay near the mouth of the creek and are important habitat for salmon fry. ## Mason Gulch Drainage Area and Mason Creek Mason Creek drains Mason Gulch, a 36-acre undeveloped ravine located in the North Tacoma Watershed. This drainage sub-basin is mostly residential, and stormwater runoff is collected and conveyed through several outfalls located along Ruston Way. Both the stormwater and wastewater collection systems are located around the upland edges of the gulch and do not follow the alignment of Mason Creek, which flows down the center of the gulch. The creek is collected in the stormwater inlet structure at the lower end of the gulch just above the North End Wastewater Treatment Plant. The main stem of Mason Creek flows perennially, primarily fed by groundwater seeps and water discharging from a pipe on the northeastern hillslope near the upper end of the gulch. The creek channel is approximately 8 feet wide. There are also small tributary streams in the gulch approximately 2 to 5 feet in channel width. The tributaries are generally steep, fast-moving riffles, but in some areas contain step-pool channels formed by large woody debris. Approximately 1,170 feet downstream of its headwaters, Mason Creek enters a 980-foot-long culvert at the western edge of the North End Wastewater Treatment Plant. Stream flows at culvert inlet have been measured at rates between 2 to 16 cfs. In 2014, management of the properties in Mason Gulch were transferred to the City’s Environmental Services Department Open Space Management Program with the intent of improving both water quality and quantity through restoration of this site. As of December 2019, the City has restored close to one acre of steep slopes at the top of the gulch. This work included removing invasive weeds, installing natural erosion control materials across the entire area, and installing 4,352 plants. An additional 1.5 acres of invasive plant species were treated in the lower reaches of the gulch, and 30 native evergreen trees were planted in this area. The creek’s steep gradient, shallow water depths, and non-fish-passable culvert make it inaccessible to anadromous fish and is therefore of limited habitat value for many species of salmon. Nonetheless, the creek and Mason Gulch do provide habitat for a variety of other species, including songbirds, mammals, insects, and amphibians. ## Point Defiance and Ruston Drainage Area The Point Defiance and Ruston drainage areas contain the northern most sub-basins in this watershed, which have various current land uses and a diverse history. This drainage area contains the historic Asarco Smelter Site, which is part of the Commencement Bay Near Shore/TideFlats Superfund site. Point Ruston LLC is in the process of cleaning up the former smelter property as part of a large mixed use residential and commercial Built Green community, under EPA’s continued oversight. ## Commencement Bay and Dalco Passage Commencement Bay is surrounded by the Port of Tacoma at the southern end, Point Defiance on the west, and Browns Point on the east separating Commencement Bay from the open Puget Sound. Commencement Bay is one of the most active ports in the region. The Asarco Smelter Area in Commencement Bay was identified by the EPA as a priority area requiring remediation by EPA through Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly referred to as the Superfund Program, as part of the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats site. The North Tacoma stormwater asset sub-basin NT-02 currently outfalls near the old Asarco Smelter site at the Dalco Passage and East Passage. This nearshore area is listed as an impaired waterbody for arsenic, copper, lead and zinc. ## Thea Foss Waterway The Thea Foss Waterway Watershed, also known as the “Foss Watershed,” covers approximately 5,864 acres and drains most of south-central Tacoma. There are currently no streams or creeks remaining in the watershed. Foss Waterway Watershed is part of the WRIA 10 Puyallup-White Watershed and is located in the South-Central Puget Sound action area for Puget Sound Recovery. The two major receiving waterbodies, Thea Foss and Wheeler-Osgood Waterways, were transformed from the original Puyallup River Delta into waterways with a variety of marine industrial uses, and more recently into today’s Downtown Tacoma. The watershed is bordered by the North Tacoma Watershed on the north, Lawrence Street on the west, and East F to East K Streets on the east side of the Thea Foss Waterway. The area extends to the southeast corner of the City limits at 86th Street. The land use in this watershed is residential and commerical as seen in Exhibit 21. Currently, the Foss Watershed is approximately 53 percent impervious. ### Exhibit 21: Land Use Designation within Thea Foss Waterway Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Future Land Use Designation), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 Until 1995, there were approximately 65 public and private stormwater outfalls that discharged to the Foss Waterway. Stormwater discharges from the Foss Watershed ultimately reach the waterways and the southeastern margin of Commencement Bay. With redevelopment of the area, the number of known outfalls has decreased to 35, which includes 15 municipal outfalls and 20 private outfalls. Ninety-eight percent of the watershed drains through 8 outfalls. Natural drainages containing creeks and groundwater flows, were sewered in the 1960s and currently exist as baseflow in several of the stormwater pipes that discharge into the waterway. In addition, several of the outfalls discharging to Foss Waterway are tidally-influenced and portions of the pipe are inundated with marine water twice a day depending on the pipe elevations and the high tide elevation. **Exhibit 22: Environmental Assets, Thea Foss Waterway Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space Corridors; Priority Subbasins) 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands); Seva Workshop, 2024. ### Exhibit 23: Environmental Hazards, Thea Foss Waterway Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. ## Receiving Waterbodies and Stormwater Facilities ### Thea Foss and Wheeler-Osgood Waterways Prior to the late 1800s, what is now Thea Foss Waterway (formerly the City Waterway) was the old west channel branch of the Puyallup River delta. In 1891, the Tacoma Land Company dredged portions of the waterway to construct a navigation channel. The flood of 1981 caused the Tacoma Land Company to further divert the Puyallup River, resulting in the upper portion of the remnant mouth of this branch of the Puyallup River to become what is now known as the Wheeler-Osgood Waterway. The Thea Foss and Wheeler-Osgood Waterways are estuarine waterways on the southeastern margin of Commencement Bay. The Thea Foss Waterway lies generally north-south along the City’s downtown corridor. The Wheeler-Osgood Waterway lies west-east and connects to the east side of the Thea Foss Waterway just south of the Murray Morgan (11th Street) Bridge. The Thea Foss and Wheeler Osgood Waterways were identified by EPA as Problem Areas requiring remediation under the CERCLA as part of the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats site. The City of Tacoma took the lead in remediating sediments in a large portion of the Thea Foss and Wheeler-Osgood Waterways under the oversight of EPA with work completed in 2006. Sediments were actively remediated with a combination of dredging and capping at various locations within the waterways, and are monitored routinely under a Long Term Monitoring Plan to ensure that the remedy remains protective. The waterways are the discharge point for a highly urbanized drainage basin with residential, commercial, and industrial land uses and transportation corridors. Sources of Contaminants of Concern (COCs) continue to exist in the drainage basins and are conveyed to the waterway via stormwater runoff from municipal right-of-ways and private properties, aerial deposition, marinas, and groundwater discharges. The contaminants identified as having the greatest potential to affect sediment quality following the cleanup action include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and phthalates. Since stormwater is one of the potential sources of contamination, the City has been implementing a comprehensive monitoring and source control strategy in the Foss Waterway Watershed since 2001. Stormwater monitoring is required under the Thea Foss Waterway Consent Decree (CD) with EPA. It also meets the monitoring requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) Permit. As part of the Thea Foss and Wheeler-Osgood Waterways Remediation Project, habitat mitigation sites were constructed along the Foss Waterway, in the Lower Puyallup and Tideflats Watersheds, and along Hylebos Creek in the City of Fife. In the Foss Waterway Watershed, habitat enhancement sites were constructed at four locations along the shoreline of the waterway as part of the remediation project that was completed in 2006. These sites are the Johnny’s Dock Habitat Enhancement, Head of Thea Foss Shoreline Habitat, SR 509 Esplanade Riparian Habitat, and Log Step Habitat Enhancement. Additionally, slope rehabilitation along the shoreline of the Thea Foss Waterway was also performed by the City to provide more suitable habitat in these intertidal areas. Habitat improvement areas are routinely maintained (garbage and invasive removal) and periodically qualitatively monitored to ensure that they continue to provide the intended habitat function. ## ESA Listed Fish Species Critical Habitat Foss Waterway, Commencement Bay, and the South-Central Puget Sound are rearing and migratory areas for several fish populations including several species of salmon. A complete list of ESA listed species for WRIA-10 Puyallup-White Watershed is included in the Lower Puyallup ESA Section. # Tideflats The Tideflats Watershed covers 2,112 acres and is the most highly industrialized and commercialized portion of Tacoma. The watershed is also part of WRIA-10 Puyallup-White Watershed. Historically, the area was a salt marsh, mudflat, and wetlands; however, over the centuries of industry led to the straightening of the Puyallup River as well as dredging and infill of the estuary. Most of the city's heavy industrial facilities are located here along the Sitcum, Blair, and Hylebos Waterways. The Tideflats Watershed is bordered by the Lower Puyallup Watershed on the south and west, Foss Waterway Watershed to the west, Northeast Tacoma Watershed to the northeast, and the City of Fife to south. Significant navigable waterways in this watershed include the Middle Waterway, Sitcum Waterway, and Blair Waterway, which allow deep-water berthing by shipping vessels, and the Puyallup River. Wapato Creek discharges into the head of the Blair Waterway. Although the Thea Foss and Hylebos Waterways are proximal to the Tideflats waterways, they are connected to neighboring watershed drainage basins and are discussed in other sections. The Tideflats is zoned for Port Maritime and Industrial uses, which are principally dominated by Port of Tacoma operations, but also include other businesses. The Port of Tacoma supports 24-hour operations to accommodate regional and international shipping and distribution schedules, raw materials processing and manufacturing, transport of raw materials, transport of finished products, and freight mobility infrastructure. The entire area is served by road and rail corridors designed for large, heavy truck, and rail loads. As a result of the industrial uses, the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats site was identified by EPA as a Superfund site requiring remediation CERCLA. Within the Tideflats Watershed area, the Middle and Sitcum Waterways were identified as cleanup sites. Sediments in these waterways have undergone remediation under the oversight of EPA with work completed in the Middle Waterway in 2004 and in the Sitcum Waterway in 1994. Exhibit 24: Land Use Designation within Tideflats Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Future Land Use Designation), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 ### Exhibit 25: Environmental Assets, Tideflats Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways*; *Aquifer Recharge Areas*; *Open Space Corridors*; *Priority Subbasins*) 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (*Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands*); Seva Workshop, 2024. TACOMA 2050 48 ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 ## Exhibit 26: Environmental Hazards, Tideflats Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. TACOMA 2050 49 # Receiving Waterbodies and Stormwater Facilities ## Tideflats Watershed Sub-basin The watershed is divided into six sub-basins, with some sub-basins having more than one marine outfall. Stormwater from this watershed discharges into the Middle, Sitcum, and Blair Waterways, and the Puyallup River. In addition, there are some private discharge points in Wapato Creek. TF-01 is the western-most of the Tideflat sub-basins and includes a municipal discharge point to the head of the Middle Waterway. A small area of this sub-basin discharges directly to the Puyallup River at East 11th Street. There are several small public ditches and inlets east of East Portland Avenue and north of East 11th Street. that tie to a private system. TF-02 is located north of Lincoln Avenue with two public outfalls to the Sitcum Waterway located on the east and west sides of the head of that waterway. The western outfall discharges water from Milwaukee Way while the eastern outfall discharges stormwater from the Thorne Road. area, East 11th Street from the Sitcum Waterway to Port of Tacoma Road. and a small portion of Port of Tacoma Road. TF-03 is the largest of the Tideflats sub-basins and is located south and east of TF-02. The Lincoln Avenue ditch is located in this sub-basin. This combined piped and ditched system discharges near Port of Tacoma Road into a private conveyance, which then discharges to the Blair Waterway. TF-04 is located at the south end of the sub-basin. City of Tacoma storm pipes in this area discharge along Port of Tacoma Road into a private system, which then discharges into the head of the Blair Waterway. TF-05 is also located at the south end of the sub-basin. Wapato Creek is within TF-05. TF-06 is located on the peninsula between the Blair and Hylebos Waterways. There are four public discharge points to the east side of the Blair Waterway in addition to several private discharge points. ## Puyallup River Information on the Puyallup River can be found in the Lower Puyallup Watershed Section. ## Blair Waterway The Blair Waterway is an industrial and commercial shipping channel and is dredged periodically to maintain depths for shipping. During pre-dredging testing in 2013, a hazardous substance, tributyltin (TBT), was found in the sediments, which led the Port of Tacoma to enter into a settlement agreement with the EPA to remove these contaminated sediments. There are four City-owned outfalls and at least 19 private and Port-owned outfalls discharging to the Blair Waterway. # Sitcum Waterway The Sitcum Waterway, an industrial and commercial shipping channel, was identified as one of the areas of contamination as part of the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Superfund site. The waterway was remediated in 1994. There are two City-owned outfalls and several Port of Tacoma outfalls that discharge to the Sitcum Waterway. # Middle Waterway The Middle Waterway contains one of the last remnant mudflats in the tideflats area. The waterway is an industrial and commercial shipping channel and was identified as a remediation site as part of the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Superfund site. The waterway remediation was completed in 2004. Significant habitat restoration has occurred in this waterway along the entire eastern shoreline of the waterway, around the head of the waterway, and along the southern half of the western shoreline. In the outer portion of the western shoreline, industrial uses remain. There is one City-owned outfall to the head of the Middle Waterway, as well as several small private outfalls. # Wapato Creek The habitat in Wapato Creek, and specifically the instream flow is listed in Category 4C (impaired by a non-pollutant) for inadequate instream flow. In addition, the water in the creek is listed as Category 5 for bacteria and dissolved oxygen based on data received from the Puyallup Tribe of Indians indicating that a TMDL or other approved water quality improvement project is required for the water bodies. Wapato Creek was also listed as Category 2 for benzene. # Lower Puyallup The Lower Puyallup Watershed in Tacoma drains the lower reaches of the Puyallup River Watershed, discharging to what was historically the Puyallup River Estuary. The Lower Puyallup Watershed is located in the southeast portion of Tacoma and borders the Thea Foss Waterway Watershed, the Tideflats Watershed, Pierce County, and the Puyallup River. Significant water bodies within the Lower Puyallup Watershed include the Puyallup River, Swan Creek, and First Creek, which are part of the larger WRIA-10 Puyallup-White Watershed. The Lower Puyallup watershed covers 2,982 acres, with 939 acres of impervious surface. At present, portions of the watershed are predominately residential with some undeveloped open space and a few small commercial areas while industrial activity dominates the former estuary now identified as the Tideflats. ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 **Exhibit 27: Land Use Designation within Lower Puyallup Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Future Land Use Designation), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 The lower reaches of the Puyallup River were historically straightened with levees due to extensive flooding. The estuary was filled and dredged to create property for industrial activities and navigable waterways for use by the Port of Tacoma. In recent years, there has been a noticeable increase in dumping debris and human waste associated with homeless encampments in the First Creek area, which creates a human health risk, degrades water quality, and interferes with needed utility maintenance activities. TACOMA 2050 52 ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 ## Exhibit 28: Environmental Assets, Lower Puyallup Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space Corridors; Priority Subbasins) 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands); Seva Workshop, 2024. TACOMA 2050 53 ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 ## Exhibit 29: Environmental Hazards, Lower Puyallup Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. TACOMA 2050 54 # Receiving Waterbodies and Stormwater Facilities ## First Creek First Creek is a perennial stream flowing north towards the Puyallup River. First Creek is a non-fish bearing stream and has areas with perennial flow and seasonal flow. First Creek consists of the main channel, located west of East T Street, and two tributaries: the West Tributary and the “West-West” Tributary. All three channels of First Creek are largely located in 20- to 30-foot-deep ravines. The creek system includes several associated wetlands as well as a number of wildlife species and habitats. Historically, First Creek likely contained a hydrological connection to the Puyallup River and was accessible to fish. However, during the development of the City, a large portion of First Creek was piped, which eliminated any potential fish access. Although threatened, endangered, sensitive and candidate species have not been observed in the First Creek system in recent years, the creek system is regulated by the City of Tacoma Critical Areas Preservation Ordinance (CAPO) and other state and federal agencies. The First Creek drainage basin encompasses approximately 2,500 acres of residential and commercial area. The majority of the basin is within the City of Tacoma and approximately 600 acres lie within unincorporated Pierce County. The First Creek corridor is bordered by residential development, two schools, Portland Avenue Park and The Puyallup Tribe of Indians Emerald Queen Casino. A significant portion of the corridor is within the Puyallup Reservation lands. Several City roads cross the creek, including Fairbanks Street, E 34th Street, and other key arterial roadways. First Creek and its tributaries contain stormwater and sanitary conveyance pipes, manholes, stormwater outfalls, and several utility access roads managed by the Environmental Services Department (ESD). In the 1990s, ESD completed channel modifications to control erosion, which included rock armoring and piping to prevent channel erosion in the lower gulch. It has been estimated that 70 percent of the stream channel has been armored to reduce erosion. Approximately 60 percent of the stormwater system in the gulch is open channel, and roughly 40 percent is piped. While these stormwater system modifications within the gulch were necessary to address erosion concerns, these changes may have affected habitat conditions in First Creek. The First Creek outfall receives stormwater runoff from the east side of the Lower Puyallup Watershed, which is primarily residential with some commercial land use. This includes stormwater discharging from the Tacoma Dome, Portland Avenue, First Creek neighborhood, and the Salishan affordable and sustainable housing development. ## Cleveland Way Pump Station The Cleveland Way Pump Station is located west of the Cleveland Way right-of-way, immediately south of the Puyallup Avenue Bridge and receives stormwater discharges from the northern industrial/commercial area of the watershed, including stormwater draining from the City’s Central Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Cleveland Way Pump Station was designed and constructed in the early 1960s to pump the stormwater to a high enough grade to discharge to the Puyallup River. Flow from the overflow structure (manhole 6777476) is conveyed north to the First Creek Outfall except during high flow conditions when it is diverted west to the ditch on E 29th and then the Cleveland Way Pump Station. Due to outdated mechanical equipment and flooding concerns, the City upgraded the pump station in 2015. While the system was not designed to reduce sediment loading to the Puyallup River, the system acts like a sediment trap and needs to be periodically cleaned of sediment and debris. Since the installation and upgrade of the higher capacity pumps, flooding has not been a concern in this area. ## Puyallup River The Puyallup River is the largest river in Tacoma and a regionally significant waterway in South Puget Sound. The river along with its tributaries serve as major migration routes for a variety of salmonids, including Spring Chinook and bull trout, which have both been listed as endangered species. There are four fish hatcheries located in this system upstream of Tacoma. The associated drainage basin occupies approximately 1,065 square miles in the Puget Lowlands. Its two major tributaries are the White and Carbon Rivers. The lower portion of the river from its mouth to approximately two miles upstream is located within the City of Tacoma. The lower Puyallup at Commencement Bay is a salt-wedge estuary, with deeper marine water overlain by a layer of fresh water. Centuries of urbanization has extensively modified the estuary. Below River Mile 2.0 in the Tideflats Watershed, industrial activity is the dominant land use and 99 percent of the estuarine wetland has been lost. The Puyallup River is listed as impaired (303d list) for fecal coliform and subject to a fecal coliform TMDL. Upstream tributaries in other jurisdictions are noted as needing a reduction in fecal coliform bacteria loading. There is a load allocation monitoring point at the Lincoln Avenue Bridge crossing, but Tacoma has not been identified as contributing to any water quality violations in this area. Recent habitat restoration efforts completed with efforts of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, the Port of Tacoma, the City of Tacoma, and others have resulted in increased wetland acreage including a project at the Simpson Pulp Mill site and the creation of the Gog-le-hi-te wetland located near the mouth of the river on the east side across from the City’s main wastewater treatment plant. As part of the Thea Foss and Wheeler-Osgood Waterways Remediation Project habitat mitigations sites were constructed along other waterways within the Puyallup River Watershed. The Puyallup River Side Channel Project provides off-channel habitat intended for use by juvenile salmonids for rearing and refuge during their outward migration to the Puget Sound. The project merged an existing isolated wetland and excavated an adjacent parcel, creating an off-channel habitat area. The existing flood control levee structure was breached following construction of a new levee to allow the river and associated tidal hydrology to enter. ## Swan Creek Swan Creek is a moderate sized tributary located within the larger Clear Creek basin. Swan Creek originates in Pierce County south of Highway 512. It flows north towards the Puyallup River and along the City of Tacoma-Pierce County boundary. Swan Creek eventually flows into Clear Creek, which then flows into the Puyallup River. The Swan Creek basin drains mostly residential neighborhoods and open spaces including Swan Creek Park with a drainage basin of about four square miles. Most of the drainage area is located in unincorporated Pierce County. A small portion of the basin lies along the City of Tacoma’s eastern border. Much of the land located within the lower portion of the drainage basin is located within Swan Creek Park, which is owned and operated by Metro Parks Tacoma. Chum salmon and cutthroat trout are the most common species present, with chum spawning in the lower creek. Swan Creek has a B-IBI score classified as poor (average of 21 between 2001 and 2009). Swan Creek is listed as impaired (303 d list) for fecal coliform. In the Puyallup River fecal coliform TMDL, the creek is noted as needing a reduction in fecal coliform bacteria loading. The City restored a large habitat site near the mouth of Swan Creek through the NRDA Consent Decree. A recently completed fish barrier removal project by Tacoma Public Utilities is also helping to open the creek for salmon use. Stream Team volunteers monitor water quality in Swan Creek for the City. An annual Salmon Homecoming celebration is also hosted at Swan Creek to increase community awareness of this valuable resource. ## ESA Listed Fish Species Critical Habitat Foss Waterway, Commencement Bay, and the South-Central Puget Sound are rearing and migratory areas for several fish populations. The Puyallup River, which also discharges into Commencement Bay within 1 mile of the waterway, has seven fish populations including: * Coho, documented presence and rearing * Spring and Fall Chinook, documented presence and rearing * Fall Chum, documented presence * Winter Steelhead, documented presence * Sockeye, documented presence * Pink Salmon (odd year), documented presence * Bull Trout, documented presence The WDFW’s listed fish population for the Puyallup-White Watershed are: | Population Name | Species | Federal Status | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | White River (Puyallup) Bull Trout | Bull Trout | Threatened | | Puyallup Chinook | Chinook | Threatened | | White River Chinook | Chinook | Threatened | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Puyallup/Carbon Winter Steelhead | Steelhead | Threatened | | White River (Puyallup) Winter Steelhead | Steelhead | Threatened | | Fennel Creek Fall Chum | Chum | Not Warranted | | Hylebos Creek Fall Chum | Chum | Not Warranted | | Puyallup/Carbon Fall Chum | Chum | Not Warranted | | Puyallup Coho | Coho | Not Warranted | | White River (Puyallup) Coho | Coho | Not Warranted | | Puyallup Coastal Cutthroat | Cutthroat | Not Warranted | | Puyallup Pink | Pink | Not Warranted | Source: City of Tacoma, 2024 ## Western Slopes The Western Slopes Watershed covers 2,090 acres and is the only Tacoma watershed that drains to the Narrows Passage. The watershed is also part of WRIA-12 Chambers-Clover Creek Watershed. The watershed is predominately residential with many steep slopes that contain underground springs and near surface groundwater. The Burlington Northern Sante Fe (BNSF) railway system runs along the entire length of the waterfront along the base of the steep slope areas. Many culverts have been placed under the tracks to collect and convey the stormwater runoff; the creek flows under the tracks to the Puget Sound. Exhibit 30: Land Use Designation within Western Slopes Watershed. <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Future Land Use Designation), 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024 Multiple short creeks are present along the slopes in this area. Significant creeks identified in the 2000 Tacoma Urban Creek Assessment Report include Gold Creek, Narrows Creek, Crystal Creek, Crystal Springs Creek, Marinera Creek and Titlow Park Gulch Creek. There are additional gulch systems that contain very little flow. The Western Slopes forms a green belt between Point Defiance Park and Titlow Beach. This wildlife migration corridor is of great importance in Tacoma. Evidence of a large deer population as well as raccoons, river otter, and other small animals are present along this corridor. Critical habitat issues in this watershed include development near steep slopes and the removal or topping of trees to enhance views to the Puget Sound. **Exhibit 31: Environmental Assets, Western Slopes Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (*Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Open Space Corridors* 2024; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (*Biodiversity Areas and Wetlands*); Seva Workshop, 2024. ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 **Exhibit 32: Environmental Hazards, Western Slopes Watershed.** <
> Sources: City of Tacoma (Landslides and Erosion Hazards; Flood Hazard Areas; Liquefaction Susceptibility) 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024. ## Receiving Waterbody and Stormwater Facilities ### Western Slopes Sub-basins There are four distinct sub-basins in the Western Slopes Watershed discharging stormwater to the Narrows Waterway. The northern most sub-basin (WS01) discharges stormwater from the TACOMA 2050 61 western portion of Point Defiance and the residential neighborhoods between Pearl Street and the Narrows. There are several small gulches in this sub-basin. The WS02 is a small sub-basin discharging stormwater from a residential area along North Narrows Drive between North Mildred and North 17th Streets. The gulch systems draining this sub-basin area include Stormwater Pipe Alley, Deer Haven Gulch, Chinese Mining Gulch, and Jason’s Gulch. The WS03 sub-basin is the largest sub-basin in this watershed and receives discharges from both residential and commercial areas as well as Highway 16. The gulches in this system include Water Memorial Park Gulch, Tacoma Outboarder Association (TOA) Gulch, and the Pedestrian Bridge Gulch. This sub-basin also includes Narrows Creek. The WS04 sub-basin is the southernmost basin in this watershed and borders University Place. This sub-basin receives stormwater discharges from areas with both residential and commercial development. The basin also includes most of Titlow Park and Titlow Park Gulch, Crystal Springs Creek, and Crystal Creek, which collects and conveys through the Day Island Marina storm system at the end of S. 19th Street. Stormwater runoff from a significant area of commercial and residential development in University Place drains north; it also is collected and conveyed by the City stormwater system in S. 19th Street. ### Tacoma Narrows The Narrows is a strait that is part of the Puget Sound, separating the Kitsap Peninsula from the City of Tacoma and separates the South Sound from the Main Basin. Due to the large tidal exchange and the narrow passage, the strongest currents in the Narrows can reach up to 5 knots. The Narrows is currently listed as a Category 5 on the 303d list for dissolved oxygen. ### Marinera Stream This stream and gulch runs parallel to the south of Marinera Street, just north of Gold Creek Gulch. Access to this a small gulch can be found at the end of Marinera Street or from the Vassault Park trail. There is a 10-inch stormwater pipe that drains Marinera Street. According to the Urban Creek Study, there is a possibility that the stream is fish accessible when the culvert is submerged during high tide. ### Narrows Creek Narrows Creek originates at Jackson Avenue and Highway 16 off-ramp intersection. The creek parallels Highway 16 and slopes into the stormwater inlet structure behind the closed Western Slopes Treatment Plant. The large gulch system is accessible from the entrance to the old treatment plant. There are impassable fish barriers including a trash rack on the storm line and a long culvert from the stormwater inlet structure to the outfall discharging to Puget Sound. # Titlow Park Lagoon and Beach Titlow Park is the only beachfront park on the west side of Tacoma. The park contains a large 75-acre grassy and forested open space located at the base of 6th Avenue. The park contains marine shoreline, 25 freshwater wetlands, and four forested perennial streams: Titlow Park Creek, Crystal Springs Creek, Pedestrian Bridge Gulch, and Tacoma Outboard Association (TOA) Gulch. The mature forest in the area provide beneficial wildlife habitat for birds, fish, and other wildlife. Currently, the Titlow Lagoon is connected to the Puget Sound through two 40-inch culverts that pass under the BNSF railroad. A railroad bridge is being proposed to replace the culverts and allow open access from nearshore habitat to the lagoon. The City is investigating the potential for a regional stormwater treatment facility located in the park, which would treat the stormwater discharging into the lagoon. Titlow Park Creek begins in a ditch on Sunset Drive, travels through a residential area, and crosses 6th Avenue where it enters Titlow Park. The creek discharges to Upper Titlow Lagoon. Crystal Springs Creek is a highly urbanized stream and its receiving water contain many culverts, channelized reaches through residential backyards, and other fish barriers along the length of the creek. Crystal Springs Creek headwaters are in University Place at approximately 22nd St. Ct. W and Crystal Springs Road. Crystal Springs Creek enters the stormwater system at the top of Titlow Road, where stormwater and creek flow are co-mingled. Crystal Spring Creek discharges to the Narrows and Lower Titlow Lagoon. Pedestrian Bridge Gulch is a small creek located west of Narrow’s Glen Retirement Center near 6th Avenue and Laurel Lane. Due to the steep gradient, culvert barrier under the railroad tracks, and low flows, this creek is not accessible to fish. The creek associated with the TOA Gulch is located north of Pedestrian Bridge Gulch and west of Sunset Drive. Similar to Pedestrian Bridge Gulch, due to the culvert under the railroad tracks and low flows, there is small possibility that this stream is accessible to fish. There are no stormwater pipes draining into this gulch. # 1.4 Habitat Restoration Habitat restoration is a purposeful effort by people to reestablish ecological functions in an area where ecological functions were degraded, impaired, or lost because of industrialization, population growth and/or development. Tacoma is a highly urbanized city with most of the ecosystems and natural processes that were present historically eliminated or significantly altered due to urbanization. Habitat restoration efforts in Tacoma aim to restore valuable ecological functions to benefit the environment, wildlife and people; and to create a more climate resilient community. There are many types of restoration projects. Restoration projects vary by the group or organization performing the work, future land use planned for the restoration site, the type of habitat or function being restored, permitting complexity, the amount of work needed to complete the project, and other factors. Restoration of wetlands and riparian habitats are often prioritized because these habitats provide gains in ecologic functions and values. Restoration projects in Tacoma can be categorized as follows: * Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Habitat Sites * Commencement Bay Natural Resource Trustees Sites * The Foss Waterway Cleanup Habitat Mitigation Sites * Port of Tacoma Habitat Sites * Compensatory Mitigation Sites * Metro Parks Tacoma Projects # 1.5 Critical Areas Critical areas, as defined by the Growth Management Act, include wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and fish and wildlife conservation areas. They are briefly characterized below. Descriptions and accompanying figures indicate the general locations of these features in Tacoma. Figure 2 and Figure 3 show the location of known critical areas. Critical areas provide many important functions and protect communities from hazards. The functions mentioned in this section, and detailed further in the Best Available Science (BAS) Review report (Facet 2024) tend to focus on ecosystem processes and services. However, critical areas also provide social, cultural, and economic benefits including recreational and educational opportunities, and aesthetic value. For more information on the functions, values, anticipated climate change impacts, and protection mechanisms for critical areas, refer to the Best Available Science Review report (Facet 2024). ## Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas Critical aquifer recharge areas are areas with a recharging effect on aquifers used for drinking water. Aquifers also discharge groundwater to wetlands and streams. This groundwater helps maintain base stream flows during the dry season. The Central Pierce County Aquifer Area is a large groundwater resource area which encompasses central Pierce County, areas to the south and west of Tacoma and extends into Tacoma city limits, most notably in the South Tacoma area. Numerous individual and public water systems in Pierce County, including the City of Tacoma, use this aquifer as a water supply. Therefore, protection of both the quantity and quality of this aquifer is imperative. The Central Pierce County Aquifer Area supplies Tacoma with approximately five percent of the City’s annual water requirements[^p106-8]. [^p106-8]: Source: https://www.mytpu.org/about-tpu/services/water/water-source/ground-water-wells/ Groundwater and surface water interact through recharge, storage, and discharge. Aquifers support aquatic resources like streams and wetlands. In addition to potable water uses, the City is required to manage and balance groundwater use to support and maintain adequate stream flow for anadromous fish (Streamflow Restoration Act RCW 90.94). Climate change will continue to impact water resources in Tacoma, led by changes to the timing and quantity of precipitation and snow accumulation in the Cascade mountains, soil moisture, and streamflow. Changes in water availability in turn will impact all resources that rely on surface water for recharge such as aquifer recharge areas. In general, higher temperatures will likely cause an increasing portion of precipitation to fall as rain rather than snow, resulting in continued decreases in spring snowpack and earlier snowmelt to west side rivers. The frequency and intensity of extreme precipitation events, like atmospheric rivers, are projected to increase. At this time, it is unknown if these changes will have any effect on the City’s drinking water supply. # Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas (FWHCAs) include lands and waters necessary to support viable populations of fish and wildlife species within their natural ranges. They occur where endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a primary association with habitat. FWHCAs also include important habitats, regardless of species’ use, like streams, ponds, and Oregon white oak woodlands. Major streams and other waterbodies in Tacoma, which are types of FWHCAs, are described under Section 1.3 Watersheds. Notable FWHCAs present in Tacoma include the Puyallup River and other streams; habitat contained within the Puget Sound waters adjacent to the City; Point Defiance Park; and forested steep slopes and bluffs that meet the classification of Biodiversity Areas and Corridors. Urban development has severely reduced the quantity and quality of habitat available for wildlife use in the City. Preservation of FWHCAs is important for protecting sensitive species and Tacoma’s remaining high-value habitat patches. The changing climate affects fish and wildlife habitats in many ways including changes in water availability, temperature, and precipitation that affect forest species composition and overall plant assemblages, growing season for some plants, and the volume and timing of stream flows and stream temperatures. Among other effects, these changes are expected to affect the habitat needs of aquatic species and alter the timing of migration for some salmonid species (Snover et al. 2013). Sea level rise, saltwater intrusion, habitat loss and modification, the spread of pests and invasive species, and loss of biodiversity are collectively projected to negatively impact FWHCAs due to climate change (Sattar et al. 2021). # Wetlands Wetlands are areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration to support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands are often found near small lakes, ponds, streams, and wet meadows. They include swamps, marshes, bogs, and estuaries. Wetlands are productive biological systems and provide numerous ecological functions. Wetland functions can be grouped into the following categories: improving water quality, hydrologic functions, and functions related to wildlife habitat. Wetlands can slow or retain stormwater runoff which can reduce downstream erosion potential and help recharge groundwater supplies. Wetlands desynchronize surface water flows by retaining and slowly releasing surface and groundwater. Wetlands function naturally to improve water quality by filtering out sediments, using excess nutrients, and breaking down some toxic chemicals. Historically, Tacoma contained many more wetlands than are present today. Many of Tacoma’s wetlands were filled and developed for commercial, industrial or residential land uses prior to the adoption of regulations that now protect these important natural areas. Current wetland areas in Tacoma are scattered throughout the City. North and west of Downtown Tacoma, remaining wetland areas are generally confined to undeveloped vegetated slopes and ravines, parks (e.g., China Lake Park and Snake Lake Park), and the Tacoma Community College campus. In East Tacoma and South Tacoma, wetlands are present in the vicinity of First Creek and Swan Creek, at Wapato Lake and Charlotte’s Blueberry Park, and in small, isolated patches in residential neighborhoods. Similarly, wetland patches are interspersed across the Tideflats area and in Northeast Tacoma, mainly along the steep slopes facing the sound. The wetland patches in the Tideflats area include several wetland restoration sites (see Section 1.4). Climate change is projected to increase frequency and intensity of extreme weather evens and shift seasonal weather patterns. Wetlands are vulnerable to these changes. Watershed scale changes, such as reduced snowpack and the altered runoff timing can impact wetland hydroperiods. Changes in timing and depths of wetland inundation are projected to stress established vegetation and wetland-dependent wildlife.[^p108-9] Coastal wetlands are under additional risk from increased inundation and erosion due to sea level rise, which are expected to cause habitat loss and shifts in habitat types (NRC, 2012). ## Geologically Hazardous Areas Geologically hazardous areas are areas that are susceptible to erosion, sliding, earthquake, or other geological events. They are regulated to protect public health and safety. The geologically hazardous area designations present in Tacoma include the following: * Landslide hazard areas: areas potentially subject to landslides based on a combination of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors such as the type of bedrock, soil, slope, slope aspect, structure, or hydrology. * Erosion hazard areas: areas where the combination of slope and soil type makes the area susceptible to erosion. [^p108-9]: Source: https://ecology.wa.gov/water-shorelines/wetlands/tools-resources/wetlands-climate-change ■ Seismic hazard areas: areas subject to severe risk of damage as a result of earthquake induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil liquefaction, debris flows, lahars, or tsunamis. Landslide and erosion hazard areas occur throughout the City, primarily where steep slopes are present. They are mapped along much of the Puget Sound shoreline, along stream corridors and in limited pockets throughout the City. High liquefaction susceptibility, areas likely to be inundated from modeled tsunamis, and lahar hazard zones—all types of seismic hazard areas—are located along the Puget Sound shoreline and Puyallup River Valley, overlapping the Port of Tacoma and Tacoma’s largely industrial Tideflats Subarea. Climate change is expected to increase frequency and intensity of extreme rainfall events and raise sea level, both of which could cause an increase in potential landslides in Tacoma. Increased rainfall intensity could also make erosion-sensitive areas more susceptible to erosion. Extreme heat and precipitation changes are also expected to stress plants and cause mortality of some vegetation currently contributing to slope stability. ## Flood Hazard Areas Flood hazard areas generally include lands within the 100-year floodplain and other areas susceptible to flooding from high groundwater. Consideration for these areas is important for minimizing adverse impact to public health, safety, and public infrastructure. Frequently flooded areas also provide important habitat functions for fish and wildlife. Tacoma’s flood hazard areas are located along Puget Sound shorelines, the waterways within the Tideflats Subarea including the Puyallup River, streams that flow to the Tideflats Subarea (i.e., Swan Creek, First Creek, Wapato Creek, Hylebos Creek), and relatively isolated patches located in Central and South Tacoma (e.g., China Lake, South Tacoma Swamp, Snake Lake, Wapato Lake). Climate change is expected to increase the risk of flooding which will increase the chance of damage to infrastructure located in or near current floodplains. For coastal areas, such as Commencement Bay and Puget Sound, sea level rise will exacerbate these risks. Direct impacts may increase storm surge resulting in temporary flooding of low-lying areas. ## Mineral Resource Lands Mineral resources in Tacoma consist of rock and gravel deposits. These resources support industries that are an important part of Tacoma’s economy, providing jobs and needed products for local use and export. # 1.6 Open Space Open space lands in Tacoma provide multiple benefits contributing to a complete and livable urban environment. Benefits of having open space lands include: * Habitat value for rare or endangered species * Opportunity for low-impact recreation (such as bird and wildlife observation) and community stewardship * Increased property values * Heightened sense of community ownership and recognized value * Stormwater retention and treatment * Increased air and water quality * Aesthetic relief from an urbanized environment * Improved public health as a result of better air and water quality and opportunities for a more active lifestyle These benefits are often referred to as “ecosystem services.” Without functional and healthy habitat areas, benefits would not be available or would have to be provided by human intervention. There are a wide variety of open space lands in Tacoma including: * Parks and recreational lands with active uses like trails and viewpoints * Natural areas regulated under the City’s CAPO * WDFW priority habitats and/or biodiversity corridors * Areas used for the conservation of plant and animal life, including habitat for fish and wildlife species * Areas used for ecologic and other scientific study purposes * Areas of outstanding scenic, historic, cultural, scientific, and/or educational value * Areas providing a natural separation or buffer between land-uses * Rivers, streams, wetlands, bays, and estuaries * Forested areas, oak woodlands, and meadows * Areas providing important habitat connectivity, including utility easements and unimproved rights-of-way * Marine beaches, lake shores, banks of rivers and streams, and watershed lands The City of Tacoma classifies its types of open spaces into two categories: active and passive.[^p110-10] * Active parks and open spaces, like playgrounds, playfields, waterfront areas, and nature centers, have developed amenities and features for formal active use. *The Parks and Recreation Element discusses active open spaces in greater detail.* * Passive open spaces are typically undeveloped lands with vegetation and other natural features such as wetlands, rivers, and streams. [^p110-10]: City of Tacoma, Environmental Services Department, Strategic 20-Year Passive Open Space Plan, January 2017 Tacoma Metro Parks properties and recreational facilities provide many opportunities for outdoor activities in the urban landscape. The Metro Parks Strategic Master Plan has identified a “10-minute walk” level of service intending to provide Tacomans with easy access to nearby parks. Additionally, many of Tacoma’s shoreline waterfront areas offer public access to further recreational opportunities and enhance the City’s livability. Historically, Tacoma’s unique passive open space areas, characterized by wetlands, buffers, and/or steep and unstable slopes, have remained undeveloped and dedicated to open space. These areas, due to their terrain and lack of development feasibility, are now under threat from increased pressure to infill to meet the demands of population and density increases. The Critical Areas Preservation Ordinance of the Tacoma Municipal Code (TMC 13.11) guides activities within critical areas (e.g., steep slopes, wetlands, wetland buffers, streams, stream buffers, and biodiversity areas/corridors.). As assessed, 47 percent of the passive open space acreage is considered a “steep” slope. Steep slope areas (≥40 percent slope) have special considerations that must be met before restoration work can begin. Geotechnical study, erosion control, and a detailed landscape management plan must be created and permitted prior to the start of work. Coordinating work along wetlands, streams, and their buffers is crucial to ensure the health of these resources. While some restoration work can occur without a permit, areas greater than 1,000 square feet require a city permit before work can begin. This coordinated approach is important to the success of restoration efforts and the health of these resources. Many of the functions and values provided by habitat areas depend on connectivity with other habitat areas and habitat quality. Open Space Corridors often contain critical areas such as streams, wetlands, steep slopes, and animal and plant habitats. Thus, there is a strong link between the City’s critical area and open space goals. Passive open space areas continue to face threats from invasive species, habitat fragmentation, adjacent land impacts, and other influences that prevent native species from regenerating. Active management and restoration are key to maintaining the overall health and ecosystem functions of these passive open space areas. In the past, many passive open space areas have been neglected and subject to mismanagement. In some areas, historic vegetation management techniques included the topping of trees, which is currently prohibited within critical areas (TMC 13.11.210). This management technique was often used to enhance views and reduce a tree’s height with minimal time or skill. However, this method damages the overall tree canopy as it leads to weaker, dense re-growth and provides opportunities for pathogen and disease entry. This technique is not sustainable or healthy for trees, and where trees are located on a steep slope, these actions increase the likelihood of slope instability by reducing soil binding root mass. Another critical factor impacting Tacoma’s forested areas is invasive plants. Invasive plants are opportunistic and easily take hold when the ground is disturbed. The dominance of non-native plant species, such as Himalayan blackberry, English ivy, and Scot’s broom, is reported to be a significant cause of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation.[^p112-11] These invasive plants lack natural population controls (e.g., predators) and are capable of rapid reproduction; they can quickly blanket the understory and prevent native plants from reseeding/regenerating. The result of invasive plant dominance is the creation of monocultures of invasive plants with little or no native plants in the understory.[^p112-12] Timber trespass is also a challenge. Steep slope vegetation is sometimes illegally removed from City-owned properties to improve views.[^p112-13] The policing and enforcement of this activity is difficult, and the tree damage is irreparable in the short term while the safety risk is high. Open spaces experience other undesirable activities like dumping household waste and transient encampments. Often, undesirable activities are seen to decrease by initiating restoration activities and improving the site conditions through increased community involvement. Dumping yard waste and other materials into gulch areas is also frequently noted. It can be problematic on slopes as it adds weight and can cause slope instability and failure.[^p112-14] Outreach and education campaigns often minimize these adjacent impacts. Most of Tacoma’s undeveloped open space is clustered on steep slopes and around gulches and often restricts access and use, especially within a stream or wetland buffer or biodiversity corridor under the City’s CAPO.[^p112-15] In 2014, the City’s ESD acquired approximately 520 acres of passive open spaces to manage, maintain, and conduct restoration activities. Exhibit 33 below is a spatial visualization of Tacoma’s passive open space sites. [^p112-11]: City of Tacoma, Environmental Services Department, Strategic 20-Year Passive Open Space Plan, January 2017 [^p112-12]: Ibid. [^p112-13]: Ibid. [^p112-14]: Ibid. [^p112-15]: Ibid. Exhibit 33: Tacoma Passive Open Space and Stormwater Basin Map. <
> Source: City of Tacoma, Tacoma Urban Forest Plan, 2017. # 1.7 Urban Forest Trees are an integral part of Tacoma’s communities and the ecological systems in which they exist. They provide significant economic, social, and environmental benefits, such as carbon sequestration, reduction of the urban heat island effect, energy savings, stormwater runoff reduction, water quality improvement, psychological healing and calming qualities, and increased value of business and residential properties. Planting and maintaining trees help a city become more sustainable and offsets the negative impacts of urban development. Trees are as necessary as water, infrastructure, and energy to sustain healthy communities. The health of the urban forest is directly linked to the health of the Puget Sound. Urban forests and forests in developing areas face a unique set of challenges that rural or wilderness forests do not. Unlike a rural forest area, which is often owned by a single owner or a limited number of owners and can be managed through simple single-purpose policies. In contrast, urban forests overlap with a complex set of ownerships, values, and goals. This complexity, coupled with differing maintenance levels and approaches to planting and preservation, requires a multi-faceted approach to the management of the urban forest. Tacoma’s urban forest exists on different types of property that are managed differently depending on ownership (public vs. private), uses (commercial, residential, industrial, open spaces, etc.), and the vegetation present (invasive, native, climate-adapted). Climate change is a significant factor influencing the structure and function of forest ecosystems. The projected changes in climate may lead to shifts in the species composition of urban forests, with some species being lost or gained depending on their climatic suitability. It is anticipated that periods of drought could increase, potentially affecting the growth, reproduction, and physical location of some species. However, the overall impact of climate change on urban forests in Tacoma is currently unknown. This uncertainty underscores the need for proactive planning and management to ensure the resilience and health of the city’s urban forest in the face of these challenges. In city environments, more heat from the sun is absorbed and retained by impervious surfaces. This can intensify temperatures locally, creating health impacts and impacting neighborhood livability. When an area has fewer green spaces and more impervious surfaces like roads, parking lots, buildings, etc., it absorbs and retains more heat from the sun and can create a heat island. The urban heat island effect is a phenomenon where built infrastructure in urban areas causes higher temperatures compared to their surroundings. A 2020 analysis by Earth Economics found that neighborhoods in Central and South Tacoma may be as much as 14°F hotter than neighborhoods in North Tacoma, including regional climate effects.[^p114-16] Urban heat islands in Tacoma increase maximum temperatures by as much as 6.2°F above the local baseline.[^p114-17] According to Tacoma Urban Forestry, higher-opportunity neighborhoods have 15 percent more tree cover than lower-opportunity neighborhoods. Inversely, lower-opportunity neighborhoods have 19 percent more impervious surfaces than higher-opportunity neighborhoods.[^p114-18] Further, neighborhoods burdened with the worst extreme heat typically suffer from the worst economic and health inequality. Trees, urban forestry, thoughtful development, and street design are all key tools to mitigate this urban heat island effect and create a more [^p114-16]: Urban Heat Island Analysis, Tacoma, Washington 2020, Earth Economics https://cms.cityoftacoma.org/enviro/UrbanForestry/TacomaWA_HeatIslandAnalysis.PDF [^p114-17]: Ibid. [^p114-18]: City of Tacoma, Urban Forestry, Tacoma Community Forestry: The Intersection of Trees, Equity, and Human Health, September 2024, https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/0b0e009ae2bf4fc3850161bfdfce5740 ONE TACOMA Environment and Watershed Health | June 2025 livable city. Exhibit 34 below shares the urban heat index scores by Tacoma neighborhood in comparison to the City-wide average. ### Exhibit 34: Urban Heat Island Index by Neighborhood | Neighborhood | Urban Heat Index | Difference from City-wide Average | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Central | 86.9 | 0.52 | | Eastside | 87.2 | 0.81 | | New Tacoma | 86.0 | (0.35) | | North East | 85.8 | (0.59) | | North End | 85.9 | (0.53) | | South End | 86.8 | 0.38 | | South Tacoma | 86.6 | 0.18 | | West End | 85.5 | (0.87) | | Tacoma | 86.4 | | Sources: City of Tacoma, Equity Index 2022, 2020 by block group; Earth Economics The 2018 Tacoma Urban Tree Canopy Assessment established a baseline for the city’s tree canopy. The results of this study indicated that in 2017, the City of Tacoma contained 20 percent urban tree canopy (or 6,406 of the city’s 31,607 total acres); 13 percent non-canopy vegetation (4,257 acres); 14 percent soil/dry vegetation (4,469 acres); 52 percent impervious (16,344 acres); and less than 1 percent water (132 acres).[^p115-19] Of the city’s 80 percent of land area not presently occupied by tree canopy, 13 percent (4,604 acres) was suitable for future tree plantings, and 67 percent (21,006 acres) was unsuitable due to its current land use or other restraint surfaces.[^p115-20] Compared to other communities assessed in the Puget Sound Region, Tacoma has the least amount of tree canopy as a percentage of land cover.[^p115-21] The City of [^p115-19]: City of Tacoma, Plan-it Geo, Urban Tree Canopy Assessment, December 2018, https://cms.cityoftacoma.org/enviro/UrbanForestry/TreeCanopy/Tacoma_UrbanTreeCanopyReport_2018.PDF [^p115-20]: Ibid. [^p115-21]: City of Tacoma, Plan-it Geo, Urban Tree Canopy Assessment, December 2018, https://cms.cityoftacoma.org/enviro/UrbanForestry/TreeCanopy/Tacoma_UrbanTreeCanopyReport_2018.PDF Tacoma Urban Forestry team has committed to a goal of increasing this tree canopy cover to 30 percent by 2030. This increase in coverage is crucial for the health and sustainability of Tacoma’s urban forest and wellbeing of communities in Tacoma. In an effort to increasing the city’s tree canopy, the City developed the Urban Forest Management Plan, which established six strategies to preserve and increase the tree canopy in Tacoma. Changes to existing codes and policies were an identified strategy, resulting in the update of the municipal code in 2023. The changes included updating permit requirements for pruning, removing, and planting street trees, updating policies for reviewing public tree pruning requests, establishing the heritage tree program, impositions for penalties for violations, and updating the appeals process for tree permits.[^p116-22] Various incentive programs and community partnerships were formed to help the City and wider Tacoma community reach its goal. First, Tacoma Urban Forestry developed a Tree Planting Priority Tool that utilizes City data to identify areas where tree planting would have the biggest impact.[^p116-23] Incentive programs that give free or discounted trees to residents, along with basic care resources, have been established, along with the Community Tree Program, focused on community engagement related to tree planting projects in Tacoma’s low opportunity neighborhoods. Considerations for tree preservation have been factored into new housing zoning code amendments to protect older trees, set minimum tree-canopy cover requirements, and requirements related to the fee-in-lieu program.[^p116-24] Since the goal was established in 2018, an average of 3,500 trees have been planted annually by six City departments. [^p116-22]: Title 9 – Public Ways, Tacoma Municipal Code, City of Tacoma, June 2024 https://cms.cityoftacoma.org/cityclerk/Files/MunicipalCode/Title09-PublicWays.PDF#page=33 [^p116-23]: City of Tacoma, Urban Forestry, Tacoma Community Forestry: The Intersection of Trees, Equity, and Human Health, September 2024, https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/0b0e009ae2bf4fc3850161bfdfce5740 [^p116-24]: City of Tacoma, Affordable Housing, Home in Tacoma Project, Landscaping Code Coordination, https://www.cityoftacoma.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/cms/Planning/Affordable%20Housing/AHAS%20Planni ng%20Actions/HIT%20Landscaping%20Code%20Updates%20Analysis.pdf Exhibit 35: Tacoma Tree Canopy Coverage, 2021. <
> Sources: USDA Forest Service, 2021 Seva Workshop, 2024. # 2 DATA DICTIONARY ## Environmental Assets * **Streams, Wetlands, and Waterways**. City of Tacoma, 2024. One Tacoma Plan Map (web map link) * **Fish + Wildlife**. WA Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2024. PHS on the Web Map (map link) * Note: To match the original map, PHS dataset was filtered to include both Biodiversity Areas and Corridor, as well as Wetlands * **Aquifer Recharge Area**. City of Tacoma, 2024. One Tacoma Plan Map (web map link) * Note: The city included a different aquifer recharge layer with the requested data, which covers the majority of the city, minus most of the North East neighborhood. * **Open Space Corridor**. City of Tacoma, 2024. Data request * **Surfacewater Subbasins**. City of Tacoma, 2024. Data request * **Tree Canopy**. USDA Forest Service, 2021. ## Environmental Hazards * **Landslide and Erosion Hazard**. City of Tacoma, 2024. Data request * **Flood Hazard Areas**. City of Tacoma, 2024. Data request * **Liquefaction Susceptibility**. City of Tacoma, 2024. Data request --- ## Open Space — One Tacoma Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 8: Parks and Recreation (adopted June 24, 2025) - Source: https://cms.tacoma.gov/Planning/Comprehensive%20Plan/Tacoma%20Comp%20Plan%2008_P.pdf - Pages: 20 - Covers: open_space # 08 # Parks and Recreation **PARKS AND RECREATION GOALS** * **GOAL P–1** All Tacomans have safe, convenient, and equitable access to high-quality parks, natural areas, trails, and recreational opportunities within a 10-minute walk. * **GOAL P–2** The physical, mental, emotional, and social health of Tacomans of all ages and abilities is supported through spending time outdoors and in public spaces. In particular, youth experience socio-emotional development and a stronger sense of belonging through recreational programming. * **GOAL P–3** Public and private partnerships expand the variety of community services and programs, provide open space, and enhance quality of life. * **GOAL P–4** Long-term planning efforts maintain and expand Tacoma’s parklands and facilities to ensure quality service for current and future populations. * **GOAL P–5** The development and operation of park and recreational facilities responds to the needs of the site and of the community. * **GOAL P–6** Tacomans can connect with nature in well-managed natural areas. Urban forests and natural areas protect the unique habitat and biodiversity of Tacoma. * **GOAL P–7** Neighborhood and community parks serve the diverse needs of the Tacoma community within a safe, 10-minute walk. Areas identified as underserved are prioritized for future investments in new and improved parks and trails. * **GOAL P–8** Urban parks serve the diverse needs of the Downtown and Regional Growth Center communities. * **GOAL P–9** Regional parks serve the region's diverse needs and attract visitors from across the Puget Sound. * **GOAL P–10** Community gardens serve the diverse needs of residents and play a role in addressing food insecurity. * **GOAL P–11** A connected and well-maintained network of trails offers safe and beautiful corridors for walking, biking, and rolling across Tacoma. * **GOAL P–12** The public shoreline and waterfront system is well maintained, balancing needs for environmental sustainability and public access and fostering a sense of connection between the community and the water. * **GOAL P–13** Opportunities for education and continuous learning about Tacoma’s environment assets and geographic setting are widely available. * **GOAL P–14** Site-specific plans and subarea plans guide the unique needs of certain facilities and sites. # Parks and Recreation ## 8.1 Introductory Context ### What is this chapter about? The goals and policies in this chapter convey the City’s intent to: * Set clear standards for service delivery and improvements to parks and recreation facilities and services. * Provide more equitable service delivery in areas that are currently deficient in services or are anticipated to be deficient in services based on anticipated growth and development. * Promote park and recreation facility designs that reflect the city’s unique cultural communities and ecological settings. * Achieve interagency and intergovernmental coordination in the provision of park and recreation facilities. ### Why is this important? Parks and natural areas give life and beauty to the city and are essential assets that connect people to place, self, and others. Parks promote health and wellness, encourage early childhood development, build community connections, and contribute to resilience and ecological health. The City of Tacoma and Parks Tacoma together manage almost 3,000 acres of developed parks and natural areas, as well as local and regional trails, the urban tree canopy, and community gardens. Their goal is to manage all park properties, regardless of ownership, as a cohesive park system. This approach enhances the framework and direction of parks and open space management in Tacoma, guided by the policies outlined in this chapter, as well as the Parks Tacoma System and Strategic Plan. Programs are offered for all ages at community centers, swimming pools, and other recreational facilities. The following policies ensure this legacy is preserved for all Tacomans and future generations and that the City and Parks Tacoma will rise to meet the challenges posed by growth and change within the city and region. *** **Book I: Core Policy Elements** 1 Introduction and Vision 2 Growth Strategy 3 Complete Neighborhoods 4 Environment and Watershed Health 5 Housing 6 Transportation 7 Economic Development 8 Parks and Recreation 9 Public Facilities and Services 10 Historic Preservation 11 Engagement and Administration **Contents** 8.1 Introductory Context 8.2 Goals and Policies 8.3 Priority Actions # What we heard Community members across Tacoma support the vision of 15-minute neighborhoods and want access to parks they can easily walk, bike, roll, or bus to. Community outreach findings for One Tacoma emphasize that residents wish to have access to diverse green spaces like small neighborhood parks, community gardens, trails, and large parks where children can safely play. This project’s online discussion board featured many different comment threads with topics related to parks and open space, such as adding bigger parks and micro parks, turning parking lots into green spaces, and increasing tree canopy. Certain themes emerged specific to the different neighborhoods of Tacoma. The residents of Northeast want more parks, along with additional services and shops nearby. South Tacoma would like to see more places that contribute to a sense of place, including parks, places for kids to play, and outdoor recreation like soccer fields, swimming pools, and community centers. The residents of South End want to enhance bicycling safety by establishing greenways that link as bike corridors and provide wayfinding to green parks. According to the past engagement conducted by Parks Tacoma, pedestrian access to park spaces is a high priority, even though the parks that households use the most are not always located within a 10-minute walk. In some cases, the amenities and facilities offered at a site outweigh the location convenience, which speaks to the importance of taking a holistic approach when reviewing the provision of facilities and amenities across the system. Additionally, community members rated clean park spaces and amenities, trash disposal, shade trees, and public/inclusive restrooms as some of the most valuable park items. Collectively, this information provides guidance for the goals and policies outlined in the Parks and Recreation Element, focusing on ensuring equitable access to park <
> “ We need to prioritize green space when increasing housing to ensure there are parks within each 15-minute walk as well.” -IDEAS WALL COMMENT ### PARKS TACOMA Parks Tacoma is an independent government agency, created in 1907, that provides park and recreation services to Tacoma and adjacent areas. The City and Parks Tacoma work very closely together in planning for park services. Concurrent with this Comprehensive Plan update, Parks Tacoma developed a new system and strategic plan, “City in a Park.” These two plans are highly aligned with focus on increasing equitable access to parks. The 10-minute walk LOS is a core access metric driving strategic decisions. The Parks Tacoma strategic plan aims to address access gaps by focusing on areas with high environmental health impacts and limited access. <
> and recreational facilities that enhance the health and well-being of all Tacomans. It emphasizes promoting partnerships to expand and improve programs, protecting natural areas to give all community members a chance to connect with nature, and establishing and maintaining a comprehensive parks and recreation system to serve diverse needs. # How does this chapter address key themes? Quality accessible parks, open and natural spaces, and recreation services impact the experience of living in a city in a multitude of ways. They are an essential part of complete neighborhoods, providing engaging opportunities for play and recreation, safe places to gather and socialize, exercise opportunities, and the calming effects of greenspace to residents of all ages. Equity in the geographic distribution of parks and ensuring accessibility is so important precisely because parks are so desirable and contribute so much to a healthy lifestyle. (**Equity and Opportunity**) The availability of and access to parks and green spaces contribute to human health on many levels. At the most basic level, they act as venues for contact with nature, which has been shown to combat anxiety and depression, and even promotes better health outcomes. Urban parks and green spaces, in particular, are essential because they can deliver contact with nature to people who would not otherwise have the time, income, or transportation resources to travel to outlying natural areas. Parks also invite active use and recreation through trail networks and facilities such as playgrounds, gyms, and sports fields, contributing to better physical and mental health among users. These positive effects are again compounded when these recreational activities are done with friends, neighbors, and community members. As gathering spaces, parks are an antidote to feelings of social isolation that escalated over the last decade and spiked with the COVID-19 pandemic (Foreraro and Klein, 2023). (**Public Health and Equity**) Parks and open spaces provide green infrastructure and help manage the impacts of climate change in many ways. As highlighted in Tacoma’s Climate Adaptation Strategy and the CAP, parks provide permeable surfaces. They are part of a multi-faceted plan to combat the ill effects of phenomena like heat waves and air pollution, which are becoming more frequent in recent years. Parks and open spaces manage stormwater, provide habitat for birds and animals, filter air, light, and noise, and mitigate urban heat island effects, among many other ecological services. However, as parks are also affected by climate change, the long-term effects of climate change on open spaces and their sustainability have become a more prominent consideration in Parks Capital Planning. (**Public Health and Sustainability**) According to the 2024 Community Survey, only 10.4% of Tacomans ranked access to parks and recreational activities among their four priority neighborhood issues. Meanwhile, community safety was one of the most common priorities, with 50.5% of respondents putting it in the top four. However, these are not competing priorities. How parks and natural spaces are designed and managed matters a great deal for the experience of community safety in a neighborhood. The most active parks are the safest parks in terms of perception and reality. Attracting users throughout the day means offering diverse programming and facilities that are responsive to local community desires, maintaining good sightlines and lighting, and investing in beautification, maintenance, and groundskeeping. Well-done parks can anchor the identity of a neighborhood and support an overall feeling of safety and belonging. (**Community Safety**) EQUITY OPPORTUNITY PUBLIC HEALTH SUSTAINABILITY SAFETY <
> “We must continue to prioritize increasing our urban forest and protect our existing mature trees in Tacoma! We know of the countless benefits from increased safety, to natural privacy, decreased erosion and flooding, protecting salmon habitats by increasing biodiversity in general, the list goes on and on! Projects must be funded in areas with low tree density, particularly South Tacoma.” -IDEAS WALL COMMENT # What are some baseline conditions and opportunities? ### INVENTORY Tacoma’s parks system includes 97 properties, including highlights such as Tacoma Nature Center; Point Defiance Park, which includes an accredited zoo, aquarium, a marina, an old-growth forest, and Fort Nisqually Living History Museum; Meadow Park Golf Course; W. W. Seymour Botanical Conservatory, located inside an arboretum; Tacoma Nature Center; sports complexes; and five swimming pools (Metro Parks Tacoma, 2024). The system’s full range of parks is distributed across the city. In addition to official park space, school grounds provide opportunities for outdoor recreation. Through these areas have more limited hours for public access, they represent an important partnership opportunity for enhancing public access to park space, facilities, and amenities. The vision map in Exhibit 63 depicts current and potential future open spaces in the city. <
> <
> **Exhibit 66. Tacoma Parks and Open Space Vision Map** *Note: The signature trail routes shown on this map are in the process of updates, to reflect the City’s full inventory of separate and shared use active transportation routes.* *Sources: Parks Tacoma; City of Tacoma; Seva Workshop, 2024.* LEVEL OF SERVICE One key change with this comprehensive plan update is alignment around the goal that all Tacomans live within a 10-minute walk of a park. Exhibits 67 and 68 captures the existing walkshed coverage of the park system. Areas in gray are current “gap areas.” Purple sites are publicly owned parcels and schools (orange hatched) that have the potential to contribute to publicly accessible open space. Partnerships with the sites and schools in current walkshed gap areas should be prioritized to improve the citywide coverage rate, which is currently measured at 64% when removing industrial areas such as the Tideflats. Exhibit 67. 10 Minute Walkshed Coverage, 2024 <
> *Sources: Seva Workshop, 2024.* ### 10-MINUTE WALKSHED COVERAGE A focus for expanding park access in Tacoma is improving the 10-minute walkshed coverage across the city. This metric is roughly equivalent to an able-bodied person walking half a mile. Improvements can be made by acquiring properties that serve areas currently outside of the walkshed boundary and by partnerships with institutions, such as K-12 schools and private property owners, to improve public access to existing green spaces in these underserved areas. In the baseline conditions report for this plan, the gap areas are overlaid with population density mapping on page 23. This analysis, in combination with the equity priority communities identified in the Community Profile, identifies the following priority neighborhoods for access improvement: * Walkshed gap focus areas are the southern and northwestern gap areas in South End, the southern portion of Eastside, and the western areas of South Tacoma. * Second-tier priority gaps are in the southern and central portions of West End, the central area of North End, and the eastern edge of North East. <
> **Exhibit 68. Tacoma Parks and Walksheds Map** *Notes: This walkshed analysis includes all properties from Parks Tacoma inventory, as well as City-owned parks in Downtown. The 10-minute calculation begins with the analysis conducted by Trust for Public Land and further refines by considering accessible entry points for the park and pedestrian barriers, such as I-5. The industrial M1 zoning is excluded from the analysis.* *Sources: Parks Tacoma, 2023; Seva Workshop, 2024.* FUTURE DEMANDS AND SYSTEM NEEDS As Tacoma’s population grows and changes, the demands and system needs for its park network evolve as well. Looking to the future, considerations for the size, accessibility, quality, and variety of offerings in Tacoma’s park system are all considered to promote health and well-being across the city. Today’s population is served by 12.6 acres of park space and 0.72 miles of trail per 1,000 population. * If no expansions to the park system are made, Tacoma’s 2050 population will have an LOS of 8.0 acres and 0.46 miles of trails per 1,000 population. * While regional parks may not scale with population growth, the acreage of community and neighborhood parks can be tracked so that park space adequately serves new development. * Metrics that track other elements of parks and recreation quality, such as walking and rolling access, program offerings, and the quality and variety of facilities available, are also valuable considerations for envisioning the future of Tacoma’s park system. The strategy outlined in this Parks and Recreation element, consistent with Parks Tacoma, focuses on acquiring additional spaces that address existing gaps in the 10-minute walkshed access map and maximizing the use of other existing public areas, including public school grounds, utility sites, and rights-of-way, which cover over a quarter of the city’s surface area. By integrating these elements with the total size of the park system, the City can improve equitable access and enhance the quality of life for future generations of Tacomans. In addition to addressing walkshed access gaps, Parks Tacoma also identifies programming as an important focus, aiming to maintain at least 40% of its classes at 75% registration capacity or higher. ## 8.2 Goals and Policies GOAL P–1: All Tacomans have safe, convenient, and equitable access to high-quality parks, natural areas, trails, and recreational opportunities within a 10-minute walk. Policy P–1.1: Provide and maintain a variety of parkland and recreational facilities to serve the city’s current and future population based on identified level-of-service standards and community needs. Policy P–1.2: Prioritize investment in the acquisition and development of parks and recreation facilities in areas where need is greatest, including: a. Where availability and access to facilities is lowest; b. Where the greatest population growth is occurring or forecasted, such as the MUCs; c. Where high environmental health impacts to the local population have been identified; d. Where access to public transit is limited. Policy P–1.3: Foster social equity by providing a wide range of accessible, inclusive, affordable, convenient, and safe opportunities to meet the diverse recreation needs of the changing community. Policy P–1.4: Establish and manage special recreational facilities within the park system to respond to identified public needs and take advantage of land assets. **Policy P–1.5:** Consider the community's varied cultural and demographic needs in park and recreational facility design and promote public involvement in park and recreation planning. **Policy P–1.6:** Encourage the multiple use of recreation and open spaces to meet community demands where compatible with regulations and environmental protections. **Policy P–1.7:** Maintain special recreational facilities, such as golf courses and sports stadiums, as enterprises to maximize public benefit and financial self-sufficiency. **Policy P–1.8:** Periodically review trends in park and recreation facility use and adapt plans and investments to respond to changing community needs. **Policy P–1.9:** Ensure all active parks are accessible to people of all ages and abilities by incorporating continuous accessible sidewalks and curb ramps that meet ADA standards. Additionally, provide secure and conveniently located bike parking at parks and trailheads to encourage multi-modal access, promoting active transportation and equitable park access. **Policy P–1.10:** Partner with Pierce Transit to enhance transit service across Tacoma’s park system. **Policy P–1.11:** Keep an up-to-date inventory of parklands, trails, and facilities in coordination with Parks Tacoma that can be used to measure the LOS as accurately as possible. Regularly update this inventory for accuracy and to track progress toward equity outcomes. **GOAL P–2:** The physical, mental, emotional, and social health of Tacomans of all ages and abilities is supported through spending time outdoors and in public spaces. In particular, youth experience socio-emotional development and a stronger sense of belonging through recreational programming. **Policy P–2.1:** Provide a variety of recreational activities, facilities, and services that contribute to health and well-being. Consider the needs and preferences of Tacomans of all ages and abilities. **Policy P–2.2:** Partner with public and private entities to provide new recreational programming and facilities. Prioritize programs and facilities that address an identified gap, service deficiency, or emerging community interest. **Policy P–2.3:** Invest in the distribution of recreation spaces and programs in a manner that facilitates equitable participation in our community’s parks and recreation system. **Policy P–2.4:** Incorporate the voices and experiences of youth and children in the decision-making process for system expansion and program development. **Policy P–2.5:** Provide a seamless ecosystem for youth sports that creates space for and attracts all youth in Tacoma to participate in daily, engaging physical activity. **Policy P–2.6:** Help youth, including both teens and young children, to more deeply connect with the place they live, especially via interactions with the spaces designed for community and through participation in decision-making for the future. **Policy P–2.7:** Ensure that older adults are well served by the parks system, both in capital facilities and available programs. *** **SPECIAL RECREATIONAL FACILITIES** Examples of special recreational facilities include multi-purpose centers and mission-led specialty centers, such as sports complexes, athletic fields, golf courses, outdoor and indoor pools, boathouse marinas, nature centers, zoos and aquariums, wildlife parks, botanical conservatories, and historic interpretative centers. **GOAL P–3: Public and private partnerships expand the variety of available services and programs, provide open space, and enhance quality of life** **Policy P–3.1:** Continue to work in close partnership with Parks Tacoma, including supporting updates to long-term plans for the parks and open space system. **Policy P–3.2:** Encourage public-private partnerships to develop and operate publicly accessible recreational facilities that meet identified public needs. **Policy P–3.3:** Partner with public and private cultural organizations to encourage, sponsor, and support a range of public activities and cultural events within appropriate open spaces, as well as within temporarily closed streets, such as markets, festivals, and parades. **Policy P–3.4:** Support and encourage the use of streets and sidewalks, on a temporary and intermittent basis, for a range of activities, such as markets, festivals, shopping, dining, and recreation, while ensuring safety and balancing street and sidewalk use for transportation. **Policy P–3.5:** Coordinate the planning and improvement of the trail system to enhance and complement the parallel development of safety and access improvements to the active transportation network. **Policy P–3.6:** Recognize public school fields and play areas as a valuable part of the city’s park system. Partner with the school districts to enhance the recreational value of these facilities, especially in areas that are underserved with park access. **Policy P–3.7:** Identify opportunities to integrate small commercial activities within parks, such as food trucks or vendors, kayak rentals along waterfronts, etc. **GOAL P–4: Long-term planning efforts maintain and expand Tacoma’s parklands and facilities to ensure quality service for current and future populations.** **Policy P–4.1:** Maintain a long-range park capital improvements program that balances acquisition, development, and operations; provides a process and criteria for capital improvement projects selection; and emphasizes creative and flexible financing strategies. **Policy P–4.2:** Invest in capital projects that honor community diversity and cultivate inclusivity for all Tacomans. **Policy P–4.3:** Seek funding for new parks and recreation facilities through a variety of sources and consider innovative strategies for the provision of new facilities: a. Develop zoning incentives, controls, and/or funding mechanisms, such as TDR, to create highly functional urban parks and amenities within MUCs, Downtown, and planned residential developments. b. Consider adopting a fee-in-lieu program that would allow development to contribute toward open space, parks, community gardens, or recreational space within the same neighborhood, rather than providing on-site open space. **Policy P–4.4:** Pursue opportunities to acquire and/or develop lands declared surplus by other public agencies, offered as donation by private owners, or purchased properties that are condemned/foreclosed, if consistent with policies herein. <
> **PARTNERSHIPS** With a history of successful partnership that extends over 100 years, the City and Parks Tacoma are committed to working together to create healthy opportunities for Tacoma residents to play, learn, and grow. Other key partners include the Port of Tacoma, TPS, TPU, and other public and private partners. **Policy P–4.5:** Continue to work toward fully transferring ownership and management of the active parks system from the City to Parks Tacoma. This does not include passive open spaces that the City owns and operates for habitat and stormwater management or shared-use paths that are part of the city’s transportation network. **GOAL P–5:** The development and operation of park and recreational facilities responds to the needs of the site and of the community. **Policy P–5.1:** Employ a diverse array of community outreach methods that increase convenience and recognize different communication styles, languages, and cultural competency. **Policy P–5.2:** Improve parks, recreational facilities, and natural areas in accordance with current master plans, management plans, or adopted strategies that reduce gaps affecting underserved community groups, align with development priorities and approved funding mechanisms, expand program opportunities, and respond to community input. **Policy P–5.3:** Encourage the design of park and recreation facilities that complement the site's natural features. **Policy P–5.4:** Provide the amenities necessary such as restrooms, lighting, seating, drinking fountains, trash receptacles, bicycle parking, and shelters to support the activities designed at the park location. <
> **Policy P–5.5:** Incorporate green building practices into park design and construction, including deconstruction/ green demolition and disposal practices, facility decarbonization, use of local and recycled products, and low-impact development techniques. **GOAL P–6:** Tacomans can connect with nature in well-managed natural areas. Urban forests and natural areas protect the unique habitat and biodiversity of Tacoma. **Policy P–6.1:** Preserve natural areas and resources to protect and improve their ecological health and to provide compatible public access. **Policy P–6.2:** Manage natural areas to support environmental co-benefits for public health, enjoyment of nature, climate resilience, and future generational benefits. **Policy P–6.3:** Encourage public access provisions in open space corridors where such access will complement and not negatively disrupt fish,, wildlife, and plants. **Policy P–6.4:** Provide opportunities for Tacomans to learn how to engage with and experience nature and wildlife in various natural settings. **Policy P–6.5:** Design parks and recreational activities that integrate with nature, are context-sensitive, and enhance the area's natural qualities. **Policy P–6.6:** Increase everyday access to nature for all Tacomans by integrating urban forest improvements into and throughout neighborhoods. # Complete Park System Functioning within a highly urbanized setting, the City of Tacoma and Parks Tacoma partner together to offer a complete park and recreation system, ranging from low-impact, natural resource-driven habitat areas to recreation-oriented, high-impact parks and sports complexes. The City uses a classification system that includes six different park types to help organize and describe the LOS provided in the community. Below is a brief description of each type of facility, together with supporting policies. These are similar, though not identical, to the the classification system used by Parks Tacoma. Policies are also specific to the city’s waterfront areas, signature facilities, and specific areas where additional planning efforts provide guidance for stewardship priorities. ## NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS Neighborhood parks provide daily convenient access to basic recreation opportunities for nearby residents who are walking, biking, or rolling. Generally small in size, neighborhood parks are developed primarily for spontaneous and non-structured recreation activities. Sawyer Tot Lot and Optimist Park are examples of neighborhood parks. ## COMMUNITY PARKS Community parks are typically, although not always, larger than neighborhood parks and provide visitors with access to high- and low-impact recreation opportunities. Community parks should be designed to enhance community identity and preserve community open space. As a sub-category of community parks, signature community parks have a broader community appeal, providing a unique benefit that often contributes to the identity of a planning area and enhances the quality of life of district residents. McKinley Park is an example of a community park and Wapato Park is a signature community park. <
> ### KEY DEFINITIONS **Passive open spaces** are typically undeveloped lands with vegetation and other natural features such as wetlands, rivers, and streams. They do not encourage visitation to the same degree as other open spaces, which might include trails, picnic areas, or playgrounds. **Open space corridors** are lands that support, nurture and preserve natural and wildlife habitats and native vegetation. Open space corridors usually contain environmental assets, such as wetlands, streams, wildlife, and native and forested habitats, that are managed for stewardship and conservation via BMPs. These lands often provide opportunities for environmental research and interpretative programs, in addition to low-impact recreational activities. Tacoma’s **urban forest** is comprised of trees along streets, in parks, open spaces, backyards, and across the city. These trees are cared for by the City’s Urban Forestry Program. URBAN PARKS Offering opportunities for gathering, rest, and recreation within the urban core, urban parks are a special type of open space serving the unique lifestyles and recreation needs of those who live or work in or close to Downtown or Regional Growth Centers. While urban parks often serve as neighborhood parks for nearby residents, they may also provide opportunities for community events and district-wide gatherings. They contribute to place-making by enhancing the quality of life and the identity of the urban core and the mixed-use districts. Creating a network of linear urban parks connected with public squares, gardens, and plazas will allow urban residents or workers to walk to public spaces or destinations designed for art displays and other leisure pursuits. Urban parks may be developed and/or managed by other public or private agencies or in partnership with them, depending on their locations and forms of development. Tollefson Plaza and Pugnetti Park are examples of urban parks. REGIONAL PARKS Regional parks, usually over a hundred acres, provide visitors with access to unique regional features and attractions. Regional parks often accommodate large group activities and have infrastructure to support special events and festivals. Regional parks can enhance the economic vitality and identity of the entire region by contributing to economic development through tourism. Point Defiance Park, with 760 acres and a wide variety of attractions, is an example of a regional park. COMMUNITY GARDENS Community gardens are lands gardened by a community group for food, plant, or fiber production, either for personal or charitable uses. Community gardens provide access to fresh produce; encourage a connection to the environment; support general health and well-being through outdoor activity and the therapeutic benefits of gardening; provide safety and beautification benefits; create healthy soil, which helps with stormwater management; and add to a neighborhood’s livability. Properly designed and managed, community gardens enhance a neighborhood’s vitality. They can be independent spaces or integrated within existing parks, housing developments, or apartment complexes. TRAILS Trails serve both a recreation and an active transportation function. Walking, rolling, and bicycling provide many benefits to individuals as well as to the community. In Tacoma, trails provide opportunities for walking, bicycling, jogging, in-line skating, dog walking, and wildlife watching. An integrated, safety-oriented, multi-purpose trail increases mobility choices, reduces reliance on single-occupant vehicles, provides convenient access to schools, centers, transit, parks, and other destinations, and encourages regular physical activity to enhance health and wellness. The City defines a few different types of trails within its system. Shared use paths are trails that are paved and ADA-accessible, serving both transportation and recreation needs. See the Transportation element for a map of existing and planned shared use paths. Some shared use paths are designated as regional trails, based on their contribution to community connectivity. These trails represent the spine of the City’s trail network. Natural trails are unpaved and primarily support recreation and access to open space. Signature trails and natural trails are mapped in this element along with parks and open spaces (Exhibit 69). **GOAL P–7:** Neighborhood and community parks serve the diverse needs of the Tacoma community within a safe, 10-minute walk. Areas identified as underserved are prioritized for future investments in new and improved parks and trails. **Policy P–7.1:** Prioritize and plan neighborhood and community parks in areas identified as underserved. Where land acquisition opportunities are not available, consider opportunities such as linear parks within the right-of-way. **Policy P–7.2:** Design neighborhood parks to enhance neighborhood identity, preserve neighborhood open space, and improve the quality of life of nearby residents. Enhance existing spaces with densified tree canopy and consider water features. **Policy P–7.3:** Locate and distribute neighborhood parks to provide convenient, daily pedestrian access to basic recreational opportunities for nearby residents living within a 10-minute walk of the park. **Policy P–7.4:** Site and design community parks to provide a wider range of recreational opportunities to accommodate large group activities, structured recreation programs, major outdoor recreation facilities, such as sports facilities, and complimentary amenities, such as restrooms and parking for vehicles and bicycles. **Policy P–7.5:** Site community park fronts onto a public street, preferably a collector or arterial, designed as a Complete Street with sidewalks, bicycle lanes, safe crossings, bicycle facilities, and street trees, and that is easily accessible by public transit. **Policy P–7.6:** Integrate more community gardens across neighborhoods and community parks. **Policy P–7.7:** Partner with local artists and arts organizations for more art in parks, creating unique and vibrant community spaces. **Policy P–7.8:** Integrate stormwater management through regional stormwater treatment facilities within parks, creating a multi-faceted approach to managing stormwater quality and quantity harmoniously with active parks and open spaces. **GOAL P–8:** Urban parks serve the diverse needs of the Downtown and Regional Growth Center communities. **Policy P–8.1:** Plan for the acquisition and design of urban parks within the Downtown and Regional Growth Centers based on forecasted growth and adopted growth assumptions. a. Establish specific targets for open space, parks, and recreation facilities to meet needs within Regional Growth Centers. b. Identify potential locations and opportunities for further action and use innovative methods and partnerships to fund the identified needs. c. Ensure park and recreation opportunities are provided in the Regional Growth Centers as the population increases. **Policy P–8.2:** Locate and design urban parks to create a focal point and distinctive sense of place for each center. **Policy P–8.3:** Coordinate the development of linear urban parks to incorporate designated corridors and signature trails. *** **TACOMA’S COMPLETE STREETS** Complete Streets refers to streets and sidewalks that are designed, operated, and maintained for the safety and convenient access of all potential users, including pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders. There is also an increased emphasis on public realm improvements such as street trees, landscaping, and low-impact stormwater infrastructure. In 2017, Tacoma added a Complete Streets Policy chapter in the Municipal Code. This policy has influenced the development of key streets such as Stadium Way and Pacific Avenue. <
> **Exhibit 69. Tacoma Natural and Regional Trail Networks** *Note: This trails map is in the process of updates, to reflect the City’s full inventory of separate and shared use active transportation routes.* *Sources: City of Tacoma, 2024; Seva Workshop, 2024* GOAL P–9: Regional parks serve the region's diverse needs and attract visitors from across the Puget Sound. Policy P–9.1: Design unique and high-quality amenities in regional parks, such as landscape improvements and gardens, infrastructure to support events and festivals, and sports fields. Policy P–9.2: Prioritize locating new special recreation facilities in areas that are currently underserved and ensure access is provided to those in the surrounding community. Policy P–9.3: To the extent feasible, locate new destination facilities within or in close proximity to designated centers and transit corridors. GOAL P–10: Community gardens serve the diverse needs of residents and play a role in addressing food insecurity. Policy P–10.1: Enhance existing and support new community gardens within parks and on appropriate public and private lands. Policy P–10.2: Support creative approaches to managing gardens, such as support by educational institutions or volunteer management by community organizations. Policy P–10.3: Prioritize the location of new community gardens in areas currently lacking options for fresh produce and healthy food access. GOAL P–11: A connected and well-maintained network of trails offers safe and beautiful corridors for walking, biking, and rolling across Tacoma. Policy P–11.1: Maintain, improve, and plan for a citywide system of public trails that is integrated into a larger network of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, seamlessly connecting communities and important destinations across the city. Policy P–11.2: Identify and address the current gaps in the public bicycle and pedestrian networks by establishing: a. A system of shared-use facilities to connect neighborhoods and connect to major transit hubs. b. Natural trails within parks and open spaces that bring people closer to nature. c. A bicycle and pedestrian system that supports the integration of parks and recreation into the citywide bicycle and pedestrian network to facilitate greater access to these destinations. Policy P–11.3: Provide adequate bicycle parking facilities at all Parks Tacoma facilities and along Tacoma’s trail network to promote access and ease of use. Policy P–11.4: Recognize the value of linear parks, which integrate green amenities and recreational opportunities along trails and right-of-way, and identify opportunities to create them, especially in places where linear parks can fill connectivity gaps and ensure equitable access to parks. WATERFRONT Tacoma’s shorelines and waterfront areas are a source of economic activity, entertainment, and recreation, and possess invaluable ecological and cultural functions. As such, promoting shoreline access and recreation is a major priority for Tacomans. The city’s waterfront provides opportunities for recreation and the experience of nature that cannot be replicated in other areas of the city and region. Recognizing the multiple benefits and values of its shorelines, the City and others have made substantial investments to clean up environmental pollution and improve shoreline access, recreation, and cultural opportunities. Given the strong connection many people feel to shorelines, investments like these will provide benefits that many people will enjoy and appreciate, improving Tacoma’s livability and long-term prosperity. GOAL P–12: The public shoreline and waterfront system is well maintained, balancing needs for environmental sustainability and public access and fostering a sense of connection between the community and the water. Policy P–12.1: Utilize Tacoma’s natural topography to connect Tacomans to natural areas and the waterfront. Policy P–12.2: Locate and develop bicycle and pedestrian facilities that are sensitive to habitat areas, safe for users, and provide transportation and recreation for the community. Policy P–12.3: Develop active transportation facilities along the waterfront that support high usage, multiple modes, and variable speeds – recognizing that these facilities serve as critical transportation and recreation connectors. Policy P–12.4: Develop and enhance opportunities for swimming and boating, including the use of Tacoma’s water trails, fishing, scuba diving, educational activities, wildlife observation, and other shoreline and water-dependent activities. Policy P–12.5: Implement the priority actions identified in the SMP Public Access Alternatives. Policy P–12.6: Support safe and accessible active transportation and transit access to the waterfront from all Tacoma neighborhoods. GOAL P–13: Opportunities for education and continuous learning about Tacoma’s environmental assets and geographic setting are widely available. Policy P–13.1: Recognize Indigenous connections to Tacoma’s shorelines and waters as cultural, historical, recreational, educational, economic, natural, and aesthetic assets of tremendous value. Policy P–13.2: Enhance Tacoma’s identity as a waterfront community, including designating and enhancing shoreline areas for educational and interpretive displays, public art, community events, habitat restoration, and other activities. Policy P–13.3: Inspire and engage the community to care about and steward the natural environment through educational programming, guided walking tours, community volunteer days, and partnerships with local schools and environmental organizations. DISTINCTIVE PARKS AND OPEN SPACES Over time, the City and its partners have identified ways to enhance their ability to meet the goals of this element by creating plans for specific areas. This list is intended for larger, distinctive parks and open space sites. It is not exhaustive and is intended to be updated regularly. Other public agencies, particularly Parks Tacoma, maintain separate project lists, which should also be consulted. This section is intended to convey the City Council’s support for and recognition of the policy direction in these plans and to convey that they are planning and implementing priorities. It lends support to applications for City approvals, such as conditional use permits, rezones, and development regulation agreements, that meet the intent of these plans and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. This section also provides a forum for the Council to refine its policy direction on a given site in consultation with the Planning Commission and other stakeholders. GOAL P–14: Site-specific plans and subarea plans guide the unique needs of certain facilities and sites. Policy P–14.1: Recognize the unique role of Point Defiance Park as a citywide and regional destination, and provide alternative review processes such as Development Regulation Agreements to allow for more intensive, destination-oriented features within areas designated as active open spaces within the park. Policy P–14.2: Support the unique function of distinctive sites within the urban context. Land use needs and regulations are likely to require special exemptions or review processes for the ongoing development of these places. Examples include Wapato Hills, First Creek, the shoreline (including public access to areas managed by the Port), capped landfills, and Swan Creek. Some of these site-specific planning efforts expand recreation functions with new facilities, while other plans emphasize long-term protection of critical natural areas. Regulations should follow the intent and guidance provided by planning documents. Policy P–14.3: Implement open space and recreation priorities based on subarea plans, neighborhood plans, and EIS documents, such as those for South Downtown, Hilltop, North Downtown, Tacoma Mall, Tideflats, Pacific Ave, McKinley, Proctor, and South Tacoma. Policy P–14.4: Coordinate with all site-specific and long-range planning development processes to promote equitable practices in community engagement and alignment with best practices identified in the Engagement and Administration element of the Comprehensive Plan. # 8.3 Priority Actions | ACTION | LEAD | | :--- | :--- | | Develop a strategy for addressing any current deficiencies in LOS and identify opportunities to provide new park and recreation opportunities to close access gaps. | PT | | Invest in trails and bike and pedestrian connections for people of all ages and abilities, such as closing sidewalk gaps, installing bike parking, and enhancing trail maintenance, to enhance access to parks and provide opportunities for active transportation and recreation. | PT, TT | | Assess unused or underutilized public land for opportunities for parks, trails, and linear parks. | PT | | Explore funding mechanisms to address both current service needs and enhancements to meet new service demands, including consideration of grants, bond issuance, impact fees, or other funding mechanisms. | PT |