Burien planners present North of Neera rezoning study session as residents warn of displacement

Burien's Planning Commission on April 22 heard a status briefing on the "North of Neera" rezoning proposal, a project staff says is intended to implement the comprehensive plan's industrial land-use designation and to create zoning capacity for about 700 net new jobs in the area.

Senior planner Traney Skatson told the commission the project area contains roughly 265 lots with about 247 residential units and that staff has assumed 700 of the citywide allocation of 4,770 jobs would be accommodated there. Skatson said staff used the Washington State Department of Transportation's airport land-use compatibility manual to assess risk and found detached single-family dwellings are considered incompatible in some airport influence zones that overlap the study area.

Why it matters: the city must demonstrate enough zone capacity to meet regional job and housing targets in its comprehensive plan. Skatson said the rezoning work will propose code changes, reformat industrial zoning sections of title 19 and aim to balance job capacity with measures to limit impacts on existing residents.

Residents called for more involvement. Karen Sincula, a Burien resident, said during public comment: "I believe the rezoning plan for our neighborhood is a mistake," and urged the commission to revisit the comprehensive plan designation so the neighborhood can retain a residential option. Lindsey Harris, another resident, said the proposal "would affect about 264 homes in Boulevard Park" and recommended a "jobs without displacement" approach focused on helping existing businesses grow rather than large land-use changes that risk pushing residents out.

Skatson reviewed engagement to date: mailers to property owners, a translated online survey with 54 responses so far, focus groups and outreach events at Boulevard Park Library. She reported common public concerns about displacement, noise, traffic, liability for insurance and loss of neighborhood character, and widespread opposition to large warehouses, data centers and other heavy industrial uses that residents say would be incompatible with the area.

Airport compatibility and zoning approach: Skatson described several airport influence zones (including Zones 2, 4 and 6) and said the compatibility rubric flags detached dwellings as incompatible in Zones 2 and 4 but is less restrictive in Zone 6. She said the proposal will use finer-grained industrial zone categories (for example, airport industrial 1 and 2 and other subcategories) and can tailor allowed uses and development standards by subarea so that smaller, neighborhood-serving employment uses are distinguishable from higher-intensity industrial operations.

Commissioners pressed on implementation details. Commissioner Jimmy Motta Jr. asked about the possibility of phasing out certain residential allowances rather than an immediate ban; Skatson and staff discussed transitional approaches used in other cities, such as staged limits (for example, multi-year allowances to expand existing units by set percentages) and nonconforming-use protections under BMC 19.55 that preserve existing homes until redevelopment. Commissioners also discussed whether accessory dwelling units (ADUs) should be time-limited in the rezoned area, and how to tie any future residential allowances to an employment component in mixed-use areas near the park and Des Moines Memorial Drive.

Infrastructure and services: staff said the area is relatively well-served by sewer (Valley View and Southwest Suburban sewer districts) but that some public-drainage questions remain and will be coordinated with Public Works. Skatson pointed to transportation improvement projects that either abut or cross the project area, including multimodal improvements along South 128th Street and a multiuse bike path on an unopened right of way.

Next steps and schedule: Skatson asked the commission for policy direction to shape a draft proposal, saying staff intends to return with a draft in June, hold a public hearing on July 8, brief the City Council and begin the adoption process with an adoption target of October 12 (ordinance effect likely in November, staff said).

What wasn't decided: commissioners made no formal motions or votes and did not adopt binding policy at the session. Many policy details (exact allowed uses, size limits, ADU rules, and phase-in/ grandfathering provisions) will be addressed in the proposed ordinance and subsequent hearings.

Commissioners and staff said they will continue outreach and fact-checking as they refine the proposal and assess whether the projected job figures are achievable given likely types of permitted uses.