HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/03/2024 - Agenda Packet
AGENDA
Planning Commission Meeting
5:00 PM - Wednesday, July 3, 2024
Council Chambers, 7th Floor, City Hall – 1055 S. Grady Way
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED
4. AUDIENCE COMMENT (NON-AGENDA ITEMS) 1. Virtual Attendees
2. In-person Attendees
Those attending virtually (Call 253-215-8782, Zoom meeting ID: 880 3465 9736, password:
Weplan2024 or
https://zoom.us/j/93740434415?pwd=SmVSZmtqSW1uY0tXK3BOOXhxVnhQQT09 will be
offered an opportunity to speak before the in-person (physical meeting at the City Hall, 7F
Council Chambers) comments are completed.
Please use your device to raise your (electronic) hand in order to be recognized by the
Recording Secretary.
Each speaker will be provided three (3) minutes to address an item. Groups or organizations
are encouraged to select a spokesperson to speak on a group’s behalf.
Alternatively, interested parties are encouraged to provide written comments to
planningcommission@rentonwa.gov.
Attendees will be muted and not audible to the Commission except during times they are
designated to speak.
Public can use the “Raise Hand” option if attending through video.
If there are others calling in, you can be called upon by the last 4 digits of your telephone
number. Phone instructions: *6 to mute/unmute, *9 to raise hand.
5. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
6. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
7. BRIEFING AND PUBLIC HEARING-COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DRAFT
ELEMENTS (Transportation Element)
Page 1 of 184
a)
8. PUBLIC HEARING-COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DRAFT ELEMENTS (Parks and
Recreation, Land Use, Housing and Human Services) a)
b)
9. PUBLIC HEARING- ADDENDUMS TO THE HOUSING ACTION PLAN: POLICY
REVIEW AND RACIAL EQUITY ANALYSIS AND SUPPORT FOR ORDINANCE
5983 SALES TAX FUNDING a)
10. BRIEFING- PLANNED ACTION ORDINANCE FOR THE RAINIER/GRADY
JUNCTION TOD SUBAREA
11. ADJOURNMENT
Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request.
For more information please visit rentonwa.gov/planningcommission
12. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Page 2 of 184
Page 1 of 2
CITY OF RENTON
Community and Economic Development Department
2024 Comprehensive Plan Update: Review of Draft Transportation Element
Staff: Angelea Weihs, Associate Planner
Date: July 2, 2024
Applicant or Requestor: Staff
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The city is in the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan, which is a long-term plan that establishes
goals and policies for growth and development in Renton. The Plan guides decision making on a variety
of important topics – including housing and land use, parks, economic development, and transportation.
In order to keep Renton a great place to live, work, and visit, the Comprehensive Plan will include policy
direction to:
• Plan for and accommodate housing for residents and households with all income levels
• Encourage a variety of housing options, such as ADUs and middle housing to increase housing
availability and affordability.
• Identify strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase resiliency to impacts
related to climate change.
• Meet Renton’s equity objectives and ensure that all residents have equitable access to
opportunity.
• Plan for and develop a connected transportation that provides equitable mobility choices and
access to opportunities, while preventing or mitigating negative impacts to minority
communities, people of low-incomes, and people with special transportation needs.
City staff are seeking feedback on the draft updated Transportation Element (attached to this staff
report) of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update. The Transportation Element is a mandatory element as
required by the Washington State Growth Management Act. The Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan assists Renton in coordinating transportation and land use planning, guides
development of a multimodal system that provides transportation choices for all users, and facilitates
interjurisdictional coordination. Some key issues being addressed as part of the Transportation Element
update include:
• Ensuring consistency with Land Use Element growth assumptions.
• Ensuring consistency with the:
o Department of Commerce checklist,
o Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) VISION 2050 Checklist, and
o King County Countywide Planning Policies.
• Promoting a sustainable, equitable, affordable, safe and efficient multimodal transportation
system.
AGENDA ITEM #7. a)
Page 3 of 184
Page 2 of 2
• Providing level of service standards for bicycles and pedestrian.
• Including general language edits for clarity and consistency.
BACKGROUND
The Growth Management Act was adopted by Washington State in 1990. It has been amended several
times and was amended significantly over the last few years. Renton’s Comprehensive Plan needs to be
amended to ensure compliance with these new requirements. VISION 2050, developed by the Puget
Sound Regional Council (PSRC), provides a regional growth, environmental, economic, and
transportation framework to guide future employment and population growth for the central Puget
Sound region. King County’s Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) ensure consistency for addressing
issues that cross jurisdictional boundaries within the County. These documents inform the update to the
city’s Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Provide feedback to staff on the draft updated Elements (see attachments).
AGENDA ITEM #7. a)
Page 4 of 184
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 1 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: 07/02/2024
Transportation
Renton Comprehensive Plan Update Element Policies Draft
Draft # 1.0: Updated: 07/02/2024
2015 Discussion: General
Ownership, control, development and maintenance of public rights-of-way are primary functions of city government. Transportation investments shape development
patterns that, in turn, influence the economic health, safety, and character of a community. The design, construction, and maintenance of city streets, roads,
sidewalks, trails and other transportation facilities impact all Renton residents, employees, and visitors.
For many decades, transportation problems have been seen primarily as engineering problems with engineering solutions. As a result, transportation planning has
been primarily concerned with the construction of new facilities – mostly roads but also transit, airport, and rail facilities – and has relied on gas taxes to fund the
construction. However, our current transportation challenges are different.
The facilities built in preceding decades are reaching the end of their design life and require maintenance, rehabilitation, or retrofitting. Securing revenue for
transportation investments is increasingly difficult as the purchasing power of gas tax revenue has eroded steadily over time along with the increasing difficulty of
generating greater revenue through taxes. The public’s concerns about transportation issues have also expanded beyond cost and mobility to include neighborhood
impacts, sustainability, and accommodations for all types of users. There is growing demand for alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles and reducing the impacts of
transportation on the environment.
While specific responsibility and authority for transportation choices is divided amongst various governments and agencies, users expect local and regional
transportation facilities to function as a unified system. Achieving that requires coordination with federal, state, regional, county, and municipal stakeholders and
decision makers.
Renton has been designated a Core City by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). A Core City contains a regionally designated growth center – Renton’s Urban
Center encompassing Boeing, The Landing, and Downtown Business District – serves as a key hub for the region’s long-range multimodal transportation system, and
also provides major civic, cultural, and employment centers.
This Transportation Element assists the City of Renton in coordinating transportation and land use planning within its municipal boundaries, guides development of a
multimodal system that provides transportation choices for all users, and facilitates interjurisdictional coordination of transportation related projects. This element is
consistent with Puget Sound Regional Council’s VISION 2040 and Transportation 2040.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 2 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
This Transportation Element includes goals and policies addressing the following topics:
Framework and General Goals
Maintenance, Management and Safety
Transportation Demand Management
Street Network
Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation
Transit and High Occupancy Vehicles (HOV)
Transportation Options and Mobility
Growth Strategy, Land Use, and Transportation
Level of Service Standards, Design, and Concurrency
Freight
Airport
Finance, Investment, and Implementation
Intergovernmental Coordination
Framework Goal Statement
Coordinate transportation investments with the pace of growth and land use development patterns to ensure Renton maintains an efficient, balanced, multimodal
transportation system.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
6
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 3 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Revised Discussion: General
Ownership, control, development and maintenance of public rights-of-way are primary functions of city government. Transportation investments shape development
patterns that, in turn, influence the economic health, safety, and character of a community. The design, construction, maintenance, operation, and siting of city
streets, roads, sidewalks, trails and other transportation facilities impact all Renton residents, employees, and visitors.
For many decades, transportation problems have been seen primarily as engineering problems with engineering solutions. As a result, transportation planning has
been primarily concerned with the construction of new facilities – mostly roads but also transit, airport, and rail facilities – and has relied on gas taxes to fund the
construction. However, our current transportation challenges are different.
The facilities built in preceding decades are reaching the end of their design life and require maintenance, rehabilitation, or retrofitting. Securing revenue for
transportation investments is increasingly difficult as the purchasing power of gas tax revenue has eroded steadily over time along with the increasing difficulty of
generating greater revenue through taxes. The public’s concerns about transportation issues have also expanded beyond cost and mobility to include neighborhood
impacts, sustainability, and accommodations for all types of users. There is growing demand for alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles and reducing the impacts of
transportation on the environment.
While specific responsibility and authority for transportation choices is divided amongst various governments and agencies, users expect local and regional
transportation facilities to function as a unified system. Achieving that requires coordination with federal, state, regional, county, and municipal stakeholders and
decision makers.
Renton has been designated a Core City by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). A Core City contains a regionally designated growth center – Renton’s Urban
Center encompassing Boeing, The Landing, and Downtown Business District – serves as a key hub for the region’s long-range multimodal transportation system, and
also provides major civic, cultural, and employment centers.
This Transportation Element assists the City of Renton in coordinating transportation and land use planning within its municipal boundaries, guides development of a
multimodal system that provides transportation choices for all users, and facilitates interjurisdictional coordination of transportation related projects. This element is
consistent with Puget Sound Regional Council’s VISION 2050 and Transportation 2050.
This Transportation Element includes goals and policies addressing the following topics:
Framework and General Goals
Maintenance, Management and Safety
Transportation Demand Management
Street Network
Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation
Transit and High Occupancy Vehicles (HOV)
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
7
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 4 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Transportation Options and Mobility
Growth Strategy, Land Use, and Transportation
Level of Service Standards, Design, and Concurrency
Freight
Airport
Finance, Investment, and Implementation
Intergovernmental Coordination
Framework Goal Statement
Coordinate transportation investments with the pace of growth and land use development patterns to ensure Renton maintains an efficient, balanced, multimodal
transportation system.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
8
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 5 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Goals: General
Table 1. General Goals
Ro
w # 2015 Goal Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Goal T-A: Continue to develop a transportation
system that stimulates, supports, and enhances
the safe, efficient and reliable movement of
people, vehicles, and goods.
Goal T-A: Continue to develop and operate a
transportation system that stimulates, supports, and
enhances the safe, efficient and reliable movement
of people, vehicles, goods, and services, using best
practices and context sensitive design strategies.
Vision 2050 consistency (MPP-T-1 and 11)
2 Goal T-B: Balance transportation needs with
other community values and needs by providing
facilities that promote vibrant commerce, clean
air and water, and health and recreation.
Goal T-B: Balance transportation needs with other
community values and needs by providing
transportation facilities that promote vibrant
commerce, environmental sustainability, clean air
and water, and human health, safety, and
recreation.
Consistency with Vision 2050 checklist.
3 Goal T-C: Maintain, preserve, and extend the life
and utility of transportation investments.
Goal T-C: Maintain, preserve, and extend the life and
utility of transportation investments.
4 Goal T-D: Reduce the number of trips made via
single occupant vehicle.
Goal T-D: Emphasize investments that provide
alternatives to single occupant vehicle travel.
Vision 2050 consistency
5 Goal T-E: Apply technological solutions to improve
the efficiency of the transportation system.
Goal T-E: Apply technological solutions to improve
the efficiency and safety of the transportation
system.
Added safety
6 Goal T-F: Promote and develop local air
transportation facilities in a responsible and
efficient manner.
Goal T-F: Promote and develop local air
transportation facilities in a responsible and efficient
manner.
7 Goal T-G: Establish a stable, long-term financial
foundation for continuously improving the quality,
effectiveness and efficiency of the transportation
system.
Goal T-G: Establish a stable, long-term financial
foundation for continuously improving the quality,
effectiveness, safety and efficiency of the
transportation system.
Added safety
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
9
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 6 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: General
Table 2. General Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-1: Develop a connected network of
transportation facilities where public streets are
planned, designed, constructed, and maintained
for safe convenient travel of all users – motor
vehicle drivers as well as, pedestrians, bicyclists,
and transit riders of all ages and abilities.
Policy T-1: Develop a connected network of
transportation facilities that foster a sense of place
in the public realm with attractive design amenities,
where public streets are planned, designed,
constructed, and maintained for the safe,
convenient travel of all users, including pedestrians,
bicyclists, transit riders of all ages and abilities, and
freight and motor vehicle drivers.
2 Policy T-2: Implement a multimodal level of
service that maximizes mobility, is coordinated
with level of service standards of adjacent
jurisdictions, and meets concurrency
requirements.
Policy T-2: Implement a multimodal level of service
that maximizes access to available alternative
transportation modes such as walking, biking,
carpooling, and transit.
3 Policy T-3: Develop a transportation system that
preserves and protects natural resources and
complies with regional, state, and federal air and
water quality standards.
Policy T-3: Develop a transportation system that
preserves and protects natural resources and
complies with regional, state, and federal air and
water quality standards.
4 Policy T-4: Support electric vehicle infrastructure
in all areas except those zoned for resource use
or those areas designated as critical areas.
Policy T-4: Promote clean energy transportation
programs and facilities. Also, identify actions to
reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions
from transportation.
Consistency with Vision 2050
5 Policy T-5: Support transportation modes and
technologies that are energy-efficient and
improve system performance.
Policy T-5: Prepare for and support changes in
transportation modes and technologies that are
energy-efficient and improve system performance, to
support communities with a sustainable and
efficient transportation system.
Consistency with Vision 2050 (MPP-T-33)
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
0
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 7 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
Policy T-X: Reduce stormwater pollution from
transportation facilities to improve fish passage,
through retrofits and updated design standards.
Where feasible, integrate with other improvements
to achieve multiple benefits and cost efficiencies.
Consistency with Vision 2050 (MPP-T32)
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
1
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 8 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Maintenance, Management, and Safety
The design, construction, operation and maintenance of the transportation system impacts long-term use and safety for all users. Safety planning and mitigation,
including strategies for protecting the transportation system from disasters, includes multidisciplinary efforts that can significantly improve the livability of our
community.
Revised Discussion: Maintenance, Management, and Safety
The design, construction, operation and maintenance of the transportation system impacts long-term use and safety for all users. Safety planning and mitigation,
including strategies for protecting the transportation system from disasters, includes multidisciplinary efforts that can significantly improve the livability of our
community.
Policies: Maintenance, Management, and Safety
Table 3. Maintenance, Management, and Safety Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-6: Establish essential maintenance,
preservation and safety improvements of the
transportation systems as a high priority.
Policy T-6: Coordinate road right-of-way preservation
and maintenance activities to minimize expected
life-cycle costs and maximize asset management.
Edited for clarity
Combined with T-7
2 Policy T-7: Ensure maintenance and preservation
of the transportation systems are high priorities
in resource allocations. Maintain and preserve
the transportation system mindful of life-cycle
costs associated with delayed maintenance.
Policy T-7: Ensure maintenance and preservation of
the transportation systems are high priorities in
resource allocations. Maintain and preserve the
transportation system mindful of life-cycle costs
associated with delayed maintenance.
3 Policy T-8: Develop and coordinate prevention
and recovery strategies and disaster response
plans with regional and local agencies to protect
the transportation system against major
disruptions.
Policy T-8: Develop and coordinate prevention and
recovery strategies and disaster response plans with
regional and local agencies to protect the
transportation system against major disruptions.
Consistency with Vision 2050 (MPP-T-31)
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
2
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 9 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
4 Policy T-9: Optimize the performance of the
transportation network and improve efficiency
and safety for various travel modes through
signal timing coordination, signal retiming on a
regular basis, maintenance and capital
replacement programs, and other operational
improvements of existing and planned
transportation facilities.
Policy T-9: Optimize the performance of the
transportation network and improve efficiency and
safety for various travel modes through signal timing
coordination, signal retiming on a regular basis,
maintenance and capital replacement programs,
and other operational improvements of existing and
planned transportation facilities.
5 Policy T-10: Limit direct access onto arterials when
access opportunities via another route exist.
Added new policy to limit additional driveway
access on major thoroughfares to control safe
traffic flow
Consistent with Vision 2050
6 Policy T-11: Invest in and maintain Renton’s
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Program
coordinated with other agencies
Policy T-11: Invest in and maintain Renton’s
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Program to
optimize emergency response and communications,
optimize trips and traffic flow through traffic center
management, reduce vehicle miles travelled,
encourage use of other modes, and reduce
greenhouse gas emission idling.
Edited for clarity and specificity to emergency and
traffic center management
Consistent with Vision 2050
Policy T-X: Invest in and maintain Renton’s
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Program
coordinated with other agencies.
Relocated from Transportation Demand
Management section.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
3
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 10 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Transportation Demand Management
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) focuses on more effectively using existing and planned transportation capacity, ensures compatibility with planned uses,
helps accommodate growth consistent with community character and land use objectives, offers alternatives to Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) travel, and serves to
mitigate impacts and better meet mobility needs.
Reducing trip-making, dispersing peak period travel demand throughout the day, and increasing transit usage and ride sharing are significantly less costly means of
accommodating increased travel demands than constructing new or widening existing transportation facilities. Reducing the number of trips made via single occupant
vehicles is also an effective way of reducing automobile-related air pollution, traffic congestion and energy use.
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) can be used to apply technological solutions to problems such as congestion, safety, and mobility. Substantial investment in
ITS – such as signs and internet sites providing real time feedback on travel times and alternatives – continues in the Puget Sound Region. The City is currently
developing plans to implement an Adaptive Signal Control System (ASCS) along the SW 43rd Street/Carr Road/Petrovitsky Road corridor as was installed on Rainier
Avenue S. Adaptive signal control systems adjust the timing of intersection stop lights (green, yellow, red lights) to accommodate changing traffic patterns and ease
traffic congestion (FHWA 2015).
The location and supply of parking is an integral part of the local transportation system and TDM strategies are important to commerce and private enterprise.
Inadequate parking can increase congestion on streets as people circle and look for available spaces. Too much parking can deter use of alternative travel modes,
including transit. A proper balance needs to be achieved between parking supply and demand. Providing for “right size” parking ratios based on a district’s land use
intensity and access to transit is important to community character and mobility, and can help reduce total costs of development. Satellite parking with shuttle
services and collective structured parking are potential physical methods for managing and increasing the parking supply. For example, Boeing currently utilizes
shuttle service to the plant from off-site parking areas.
Opportunities to reduce SOV travel are particularly found in Renton’s mixed use centers. Regional plans call for Regional Growth Centers such as Renton’s to work
towards reducing SOV shares. In 2014, PSRC estimated the following work trip mode shares in Renton’s Regional Growth Center as of a 2010 base year (percentages
are rounded):
SOV: 82%
HOV: 9%
Walk and Bike: 3%
Transit: 7%
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
4
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 11 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Revised Discussion: Transportation Demand Management
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) focuses on more effectively using existing and planned transportation capacity, ensures compatibility with planned uses,
helps accommodate growth consistent with community character and land use objectives, offers alternatives to Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) travel, and serves to
mitigate impacts and better meet mobility needs.
Reducing trip-making, dispersing peak period travel demand throughout the day, increasing transit usage, and ride sharing are significantly less costly means of
accommodating increased travel demands than constructing new or widening existing transportation facilities. Reducing the number of trips made via single occupant
vehicles is also an effective way of reducing automobile-related air pollution, traffic congestion and energy use.
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) can be used to apply technological solutions to problems such as congestion, safety, and mobility. Substantial investment in
ITS, such as signs and internet sites providing real time feedback on travel times and alternatives, continues in the Puget Sound Region. The City is currently
developing plans to implement an Adaptive Signal Control System (ASCS) along Rainier Avenue South, SR 169 (Maple Valley Highway), and SR 900 Sunset Boulevard
corridors as was installed on the SW 43rd Street/Carr Road/Petrovitsky Road corridor. Adaptive signal control systems adjust the timing of intersection stop lights
(green, yellow, red lights) to accommodate changing traffic patterns and ease traffic congestion (FHWA 2015).
The location and supply of parking is an integral part of the local transportation system and TDM strategies are important to commerce and private enterprise.
Inadequate parking can increase congestion on streets as people circle and look for available spaces. Too much parking can deter use of alternative travel modes,
including transit. A proper balance needs to be achieved between parking supply and demand. Providing for “right size” parking ratios based on a district’s land use
intensity and access to transit is important to community character and mobility and can help reduce total costs of development. Satellite parking with shuttle
services and collective structured parking are potential physical methods for managing and increasing the parking supply.
Opportunities to reduce SOV travel are particularly found in Renton’s mixed use centers. Regional plans call for Regional Growth Centers such as Renton’s to work
towards reducing SOV shares. In 2014, PSRC estimated the following work trip mode shares in Renton’s Regional Growth Center as of a 2010 base year (percentages
are rounded):
SOV: 82%
HOV: 9%
Walk and Bike: 3%
Transit: 7%
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
5
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 12 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: Transportation Demand Management
Table 4. Transportation Demand Management Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
Policy T-10: Implement transportation demand
management (TDM) programs to reduce
disruptive traffic impacts and to support mixed-
use development, commercial centers, and
employment areas.
Policy T-10: Implement transportation demand
management (TDM) programs to reduce disruptive
traffic impacts and to support mixed-use
development, commercial centers, and employment
areas.
Policy T-11: Through investments in non-
motorized facility connections, collaboration with
transit providers, and commute trip reduction
programs with employers, encourage a reduction
in drive alone work trip shares to below 75% by
2035 within the Regional Growth Center.
Policy T-11: Through investments in non-motorized
facility connections, collaboration with transit
providers, and commute trip reduction programs
with employers, encourage a reduction in drive
alone work trip shares to below 75% by 2035 within
the Regional Growth Center.
Policy T-13: Incorporate TDM measures such as
priority parking places for HOVs and convenient,
direct pedestrian access from transit
stops/stations in site design and layout for all
types of development.
Policy T-13: Encourage ridesharing through
requirements for parking reserved for carpool and
vanpool vehicles in the zoning code or as allowed
under state law.
Revised for brevity.
Policy T-14: Educate employers about their
commute trip reduction obligations under the City
of Renton’s Commute Trip Reduction (CTR)
Ordinance and CTR Plan.
Policy T-14: Provide education and awareness to
employers about their commute trip reduction
obligations under the City of Renton’s Commute Trip
Reduction (CTR) Ordinance and CTR Plan.
Policy T-15: Regularly review and refine parking
ratios to account for existing parking supply, land
use intensity, and access to transit.
Policy T-15: Regularly review and refine parking
ratios to account for existing parking supply, land
use intensity, and access to transit, as allowed
under state law.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
6
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 13 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
Policy T-16: Encourage shared and structured
parking in downtown Renton to achieve land use
and economic development goals as expressed
in the City Center Community Plan and to
coordinate parking for the benefit of the district
businesses and residents.
Policy T-16: Encourage shared and structured
parking in downtown Renton to achieve land use
and economic development goals as expressed in
the City Center Community Plan and to coordinate
parking for the benefit of the district businesses and
residents.
2015 Discussion: Street Network
Federal and State highways such as I-405, SR-900 (Sunset Boulevard), SR-169 (Maple Valley Highway), SR-515 (Benson Highway), and SR-167 (Rainier Avenue) are
integral elements of Renton's arterial system, as well as, routes for regional commuters. These five interstate, freeway, and state highways converge in central Renton
within a half mile radius of each other. This results in a complex traffic flow as regional and local trips interact within a relatively short distance. Local arterial streets
link commercial, industrial, and residential neighborhoods to the freeways and state highways. Within neighborhoods, local access streets provide internal circulation
and connections to the arterials. Local access streets primarily provide direct access to abutting land uses and are designed to discourage through traffic.
Arterials in the City of Renton are divided into three classifications that are used to identify appropriate uses, establish eligibility for road improvement funding, and
define appropriate street design standards:
Principal Arterials – streets and highways that connect major intra-city activity centers and have high traffic volumes and relatively fast vehicle speeds. The
focus is on through travel instead of property access.
Minor Arterials – streets that provide links between intra-city activity centers or between principal and collector arterials. Minor arterials carry moderately high
traffic volumes and vehicle speeds are typically lower than principal arterials.
Collector Arterials – streets that distribute traffic between local streets and principal or minor arterials and provide circulation within commercial, industrial,
or residential areas. The collector system distributes traffic to local streets to support property access.
Generally, local access streets include all public streets not classified as principal, minor, or collector arterials. A conceptual arterial map is shown in Figure T-1.
Annually, the City adopts an Arterial Streets map displaying the three arterial categories above. The City hereby incorporates by reference its Arterial Streets Map
dated August 4, 2014, Resolution 4222, or as thereafter amended, into this Transportation Element. The City has adopted more specific street classifications in the
Renton Sunset area.
The transportation element seeks to balance local and regional mobility needs. The following policies and priorities address issues related to the street network as a
system, the physical design of individual roadways, traffic flow, and traffic operations control. The intent is to reduce the amount of traffic on City streets that has
neither an origin nor destination in the City of Renton while providing reasonable levels of traffic flow and mobility for users of the local street system.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
7
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 14 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Figure T-1: Arterial Streets Map
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
8
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 15 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Revised Discussion: Street Network
Federal and State highways such as I-405, SR-900 (Sunset Boulevard), SR-169 (Maple Valley Highway), SR-515 (Benson Highway), and SR-167 (Rainier Avenue) are
integral elements of Renton's arterial system, as well as routes for regional commuters. These five interstate, freeway, and state highways converge in central Renton
within a half mile radius of each other. This results in a complex traffic flow as regional and local trips interact within a relatively short distance. Local arterial streets
link commercial, industrial, and residential neighborhoods to the freeways and state highways. Within neighborhoods, local access streets provide internal circulation
and connections to the arterials. Local access streets primarily provide direct access to abutting land uses and are designed to discourage through traffic.
Arterials in the City of Renton are divided into three classifications that are used to identify appropriate uses, establish eligibility for road improvement funding, and
define appropriate street design standards:
Principal Arterials – streets and highways that connect major intra-city activity centers and have high traffic volumes and relatively fast vehicle speeds. The
focus is on through travel instead of property access.
Minor Arterials – streets that provide links between intra-city activity centers or between principal and collector arterials. Minor arterials carry moderately high
traffic volumes and vehicle speeds are typically lower than principal arterials.
Collector Arterials – streets that distribute traffic between local streets and principal or minor arterials and provide circulation within commercial, industrial,
or residential areas. The collector system distributes traffic to local streets to support property access.
Generally, local access streets include all public streets not classified as principal, minor, or collector arterials. A conceptual arterial map is shown in Figure T-1.The
City adopted in 2014 an Arterial Streets map displaying the three arterial categories above. The City hereby incorporates by reference its Arterial Streets Map dated
August 4, 2014, Resolution 4222, or as thereafter amended, into this Transportation Element. The City has adopted more specific street classifications in the Renton
Sunset area.
The transportation element seeks to balance local and regional mobility needs. The following policies and priorities address issues related to the street network as a
system, the physical design of individual roadways, traffic flow, and traffic operations control. The intent is to reduce the amount of traffic on City streets that has
neither an origin nor destination in the City of Renton, while providing reasonable levels of traffic flow and mobility for users of the local street system.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
9
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 16 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: Street Network
Table 5. Street Network Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-17: Work with the State and neighboring
jurisdictions to provide capacity on regional
transportation systems and to reduce regional
traffic on local streets.
Policy T-17: Work with the state and neighboring
jurisdictions to provide capacity on regional
transportation systems and to reduce regional traffic
on local streets.
2 Policy T-18: Increase the person-carrying capacity
of the Renton arterial system by encouraging
modes that allow more people per vehicle and by
discouraging single occupancy vehicle usage.
Policy T-18: Increase the person-carrying capacity of
the Renton arterial system by encouraging transit
and other modes.
Changed for clarification
3 Policy T-19: Adopt and implement street
standards based on assigned street
classification, land use objectives, and user
needs.
Policy T-19: Adopt and implement street standards
based on assigned street classification, land use
objectives, and user needs.
4 Policy T-20: Arrange the street network in a grid
pattern to the extent possible. Connect internal
development networks to existing streets and
avoid cul-de-sacs and dead end streets.
Policy T-20: Design for and maintain connectivity
throughout and within the street network by avoiding
cul-de-sacs and dead end streets.
Revised for clarification.
5 Policy T-21: Support vacating streets when they
meet the criteria in Renton Municipal Code,
Chapter 14, Vacations.
Policy T-21: Support vacating streets when they
meet the criteria in Renton Municipal Code, Chapter
14, Vacations.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
2
0
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 17 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure
Investments in the non-motorized components of the City’s transportation system enhance the quality of life in Renton, improve walking and bicycling safety, support
healthy lifestyles, and support pedestrian and bicycle transportation modes as alternatives to the use of automobiles. Non-motorized facilities serve commuters and
recreational users.
INVENTORY
The City's existing non-motorized transportation system is comprised primarily of roadside sidewalks. These facilities provide safe non-motorized mobility for
pedestrians and cyclists outside of business districts. Within business districts, sidewalks are restricted to pedestrians. Many streets were constructed before the
existing code requiring sidewalks was enacted; as a result, numerous local and arterial roadways are currently without sidewalks. Some notable walkway deficiencies
exist along sections of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169), Puget Drive, and Talbot Road South. The City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study (March 2008)
addresses the sidewalks and walkways within the City and identifies a priority roster to construct "missing" sidewalk/walkway sections throughout the City.
In addition to sidewalks, Renton has combined bicycle/pedestrian facilities along Logan Avenue and portions of Garden Avenue North and North 8th Street, and
striped bicycle lanes on portions of SW 16th Street, Oakesdale Avenue SW, Duvall Avenue NE, and NE 4th Street. The Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan (2009)
lists routes that have been identified as important bicycle transportation elements.
The City of Renton Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan (November 2011) provides an in-depth description of proposed walking, bicycle, and mixed-use trails.
By nature, these types of trails are primarily used for recreational purposes and supplement the City's non-motorized transportation system; their development should
be encouraged.
FUTURE PLANS
Renton's existing transportation system is oriented towards accommodating cars, trucks, and buses rather than pedestrians or bicycles. The policies and priorities of
this section provide guidelines for reevaluating the existing system and making incremental improvements in the City’s walking and biking environment. More
facilities are also needed for bicycle storage and parking in shopping areas, employment centers and in public places. Specific recommendations on improvement
projects are included in the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan (May 2009) and hereby incorporated by reference into this Transportation Element.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
2
1
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 18 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Revised Discussion: Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure
Investments in the non-motorized components of the City’s transportation system enhance the quality of life in Renton, improve walking and bicycling safety, support
healthy lifestyles, and support pedestrian and bicycle transportation modes as alternatives to the use of automobiles. Non-motorized facilities serve commuters and
recreational users.
INVENTORY
The City's existing non-motorized transportation system is comprised primarily of on street sidewalks, multiuse paths, on-street bicycle facilities, and recreational off-
street trails or paths. These facilities provide safe non-motorized mobility for pedestrians and cyclists outside of business districts. Within business districts, sidewalks
are restricted to pedestrians. Many streets were constructed before the existing code requiring sidewalks was enacted. As a result, numerous local and arterial
roadways are currently without sidewalks. The City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study (March 2008 and 2024 update) addresses the sidewalks and
walkways within the City and identifies a priority roster to construct "missing" sidewalk/walkway sections throughout the City.
In addition to sidewalks, Renton has combined bicycle/pedestrian facilities along Logan Avenue and portions of Garden Avenue North and North 8th Street, and
striped bicycle lanes on portions of SW 16th Street, Oakesdale Avenue SW, Duvall Avenue NE, and NE 4th Street. The Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan (2019)
lists routes that have been identified as important bicycle transportation elements.
The City of Renton Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan (January 2020) provides an in-depth description of proposed walking, bicycle, and mixed-use trails. By
nature, these types of trails are primarily used for recreational purposes and supplement the City's non-motorized transportation system; their development should be
encouraged.
FUTURE PLANS
Historically, Renton's transportation system has been oriented towards accommodating cars, trucks, and buses rather than pedestrians or bicycles. The policies and
priorities of this section provide guidelines for reevaluating the existing system and making incremental improvements in the City’s walking and biking environment.
More facilities are also needed for bicycle storage and parking in shopping areas, employment centers and in public places. Specific recommendations on
improvement projects are included in the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan and subsequent amendment (January 2019 and amended January 2024) and
hereby incorporated by reference into this Transportation Element.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
2
2
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 19 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure
Table 6. Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-23: Coordinate transportation planning
activities with the Renton Trails and Bicycle
Master Plan and the Parks, Recreation, and
Natural Areas Plan.
Policy T-23: Coordinate transportation planning
activities with the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master
Plan and the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas
Plan.
2 Policy T-24: Enhance pedestrian and bicycle
movement and safety by:
1) Providing adequate separation between non-
motorized and motorized traffic;
2) Separating foot and bicycle traffic when
possible, but giving preference to foot traffic
when necessary;
3) Improving arterial intersection crossings for
non-motorized users;
4) Minimizing obstructions and conflicts that
restrict the movement of non-motorized users;
and
5) Providing convenient access to all transit stops
and transit centers.
Policy T-24: Enhance pedestrian and bicycle
movement and safety by:
1) Providing adequate separation between non-
motorized and motorized traffic;
2) Separating foot and bicycle traffic when possible,
but giving preference to foot traffic when necessary;
3) Improving arterial intersection crossings for non-
motorized users;
4) Minimizing obstructions and conflicts that restrict
the movement of non-motorized users; and
5) Providing convenient access to all transit stops
and transit centers.
3 Policy T-25: Develop and designate appropriate
pedestrian and bicycle commuter routes along
minor arterial and collector arterial corridors.
Policy T-25: Develop and designate appropriate
pedestrian and bicycle commuter routes along minor
arterial and collector arterial corridors.
4 Policy T-26: Ensure provision of safe and
convenient storage and parking facilities for
bicyclists.
Policy T-26: Ensure provision of safe and convenient
storage and parking facilities for bicyclists.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
2
3
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 20 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
5 Policy T-27: Promote non-motorized travel not
only as a viable means of transportation but as
an important method for maintaining overall
health and fitness.
Policy T-27: Promote safe and convenient access for
healthy communities and livability through active,
non-motorized transportation infrastructure
Edited for clarity and specify to public health
Consistent with Vision 2050.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
2
4
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 21 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Transit and HOV
As Renton’s population continues to grow, there is a greater need to move people efficiently on the local roadway network. A well-managed, attractive, and convenient
transit system reduces traffic demand by encouraging the use of alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles, for trips within the city limits and for trips to regional
destinations. The following policies and priorities seek to maximize the use of transit and other alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles in Renton.
INVENTORY
The Downtown Renton Transit Center is the hub of transit service in Renton. The Transit Center acts as both a destination and a major transfer center. Bus service in
Renton is currently provided by King County Metro and Sound Transit.
Metro provides internal city routes and regional service. Local transit service includes RapidRide, buses, shuttles, and Dial-a-Ride (DART). The RapidRide F-line
connects The Landing and Boeing plant with Downton Renton, Tukwila, SeaTac, and Burien. It connects with the regional Sounder (commuter rail) and Link Light Rail
systems. As of 2014, Renton has over 1,100 park and ride spaces located throughout the community to serve local commuters.
High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, available to buses and vehicles with two or more occupants, currently exist north and southbound on Interstate 405 and SR-
167. HOV queue jump lanes are provided at some interchange ramps in Renton. Rainier Avenue has business access and transit only (BAT) lanes.
FUTURE PLANS
VISION 2040 and Transportation 2040 call for channeling future growth into regional growth centers such as Renton and providing transit links between centers.
Transit investments are critical to providing local and regional trip alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles.
Transit service and facility improvements are needed to support and encourage increased transit use in the City of Renton. Renton has been and will continue to work
with King County Metro and Sound Transit to develop transit system service improvements (e.g., new routes, increased frequency) and capital investments (e.g.,
signal queues, park and ride facilities) to adequately serve Renton’s developing residential and employment areas.
Specific transit service improvements and facilities are needed to support Renton’s role as a regional center. The City hereby incorporates by reference:
1. King County Metro’s Strategic Plan for Public Transportation 2011-2021, or as thereafter amended, and
2. Sound Transit’s Sound Transit 3 (ST3) Plan as adopted by the agency in 2016, or as thereafter amended.
The City is very supportive of Sound Transit’s proposal to add Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) to the I-405 corridor, including direct HOV ramps at a new interchange at NE 8th
Street.
Planned HOV facility investments, such as HOV lanes or intersection queue jumps, are planned in several Renton corridors and direct access HOV interchange ramps
are planned at the following locations between 2015 and 2020:
SW 43rd Street/Carr Road/Petrovitsky Road Ccorridor Improvements: Implement Adaptive Signal Control System (ASCS) along corridor which also will
support transit operations. The system may be expanded to include transit signal priority if King County Metro would provide a BRT route to the corridor.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
2
5
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 22 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor Improvements: Implement projects at locations along this arterial corridor to improve traffic operations including revising/adding turn
lanes, access management, and traffic signal modifications. Projects will upgrade pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Project to consider transit signal priority
enhancements and queue jump lanes to improve transit reliability.
NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor Improvements from I-405 on the west to the east City limits: Reconstruct arterial to enhance pedestrian and bicycle
facilities and transit facilities/develop street to latest adopted Principal Arterial street standards. The City is also discussing extension of BRT to this corridor,
which would connect the Sunset Area with The Landing, Boeing, and other employment centers.
Grady Way Corridor Improvements from Lind Avenue to Main Avenue: Reconfigure traffic lanes and add turn lanes and other traffic signal improvements to
enhance traffic operations and transit reliability.
These HOV investments will improve transit travel time, accessibility, and reliability and contribute to a reduction in congestion and pollution by providing an attractive
alternative to the single occupant vehicle.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
2
6
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 23 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Revised Discussion: Transit and HOV
As Renton’s population continues to grow, there is a greater need to move people efficiently on the local roadway network. A well-managed, attractive, and convenient
transit system reduces traffic demand by encouraging the use of alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles, for trips within the city limits and for trips to regional
destinations. The following policies and priorities seek to maximize the use of transit and other alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles in Renton.
INVENTORY
The Downtown Renton Transit Center is the current hub of transit service in Renton. The Transit Center acts as both a destination and a major transfer center. Bus
service in Renton is currently provided by King County Metro and Sound Transit.
Metro provides internal city routes and regional service. Local transit service includes RapidRide, buses, shuttles, and Dial-a-Ride (DART). The RapidRide F-line
connects The Landing and Boeing plant with Downton Renton, Tukwila, SeaTac, and Burien. It connects with the regional Sounder (commuter rail) and Link Light Rail
systems. As of 2022, Renton has over 1,100 park and ride spaces located throughout the community to serve local commuters.
High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, available to buses and vehicles with two or more occupants, currently exist north and southbound on Interstate 405 and SR-
167. HOV queue jump lanes are provided at some interchange ramps in Renton. Rainier Avenue has business access and transit only (BAT) lanes.
FUTURE PLANS
VISION 20450 and Transportation 20540 call for channeling future growth into regional growth centers such as Renton and providing transit links between centers.
Transit investments are critical to providing local and regional trip alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles.
Transit service and facility improvements are needed to support and encourage increased transit use in the City of Renton. Renton has been and will continue to work
with King County Metro and Sound Transit to develop transit system service improvements (e.g., new routes, increased frequency) and capital investments (e.g.,
signal queues, park and ride facilities) to adequately serve Renton’s developing residential and employment areas.
Specific transit service improvements and facilities are needed to support Renton’s role as a regional center. The City hereby incorporates by reference:
1. King County Metro’s Strategic Plan for Public Transportation 2021-2031 (Metro Connects), or as thereafter amended, and
2. Sound Transit’s Sound Transit 3 (ST3) Plan as adopted by the agency in 2016, or as thereafter amended.
The City is very supportive of Sound Transit’s project to add Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) to the I-405 corridor, including direct HOV ramps at a new WSDOT interchange at
NE 8th Street. The project also includes a new Transit Center in South Renton and inline Station at I-405 and NE 44th Street, with the addition of 700 parking stalls at
the Transit Center and 200 parking stalls at the interchange.
Planned HOV facility investments, such as HOV lanes or intersection queue jumps, are planned in several Renton corridors and direct access HOV interchange ramps
are planned at the following locations between 2023 and 2030:
Rainier Avenue Corridor Improvements: Implement Adaptive Signal Control System (ASCS) along corridor which also will support transit operations.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
2
7
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 24 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
The Safe Routes to Transit Program provides non-motorized improvements along major transit corridors such as the future Rapid Ride I line between the
Regional Growth Centers of Auburn, Kent, and Renton.
NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor Improvements from I-405 on the west to the east City limits: Reconstruct arterial to enhance pedestrian and bicycle
facilities and transit facilities/develop street to latest adopted Principal Arterial street standards. The City is also discussing extension of BRT to this corridor,
which would connect the Sunset Area with The Landing, Boeing, and other employment centers.
Grady Way Corridor Improvements from Lind Avenue to Main Avenue: Reconfigure traffic lanes and add turn lanes and other traffic signal improvements to
enhance traffic operations and transit reliability.
These HOV investments will improve transit travel time, accessibility, and reliability and contribute to a reduction in congestion and pollution by providing an attractive
alternative to the single occupant vehicle.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
2
8
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 25 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: Transit and HOV
Table 7. Transit and HOV Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-28: Work with other jurisdictions and
transit authorities to plan and provide frequent,
coordinated and comprehensive transit service
and facilities in residential and employment
areas.
Policy T-28: Work with other jurisdictions and transit
authorities to plan and provide frequent,
coordinated and comprehensive transit service and
facilities in residential and employment areas.
2 Policy T-29: Support direct HOV ramps to/from I-
405 in the vicinity of The Landing (NE 8th) per
the City Center Community Plan.
Policy T-29: Support direct HOV ramps to/from I-405
in the vicinity of The Landing (NE 8th) per the City
Center Community Plan.
3 Policy T-30: Work to improve the frequency and
reliability of transit serving Renton’s Downtown
and promote the Downtown Transit Center as
part of a regional high capacity transit system.
Policy T-30: Work to improve the frequency and
reliability of transit serving the Regional Growth
Center and promote the new South Renton Transit
Center as part of a regional high capacity transit
system.
In alignment with ST-3, acknowledging the
relocation of the Downtown Transit Station to a
new Sound Renton Transit Center site located
within the Rainier/Grady Transit Oriented
Development Subarea.
4 Policy T-31: Increase transit service and access
in commercial and mixed use corridors and
nodes.
Policy T-31: Increase transit service and access in
commercial and mixed use corridors and nodes.
5 Policy T-32: Coordinate transit, bike, and
pedestrian planning efforts and evaluate
opportunities to leverage investments for the
benefit of more users.
Policy T-32: Coordinate transit, bike, and pedestrian
planning efforts and evaluate opportunities to
leverage investments for the benefit of more users.
6 Policy T-33: Construct improvements and
implement actions to facilitate the flow of HOV’s
into, out of, and through Renton.
Policy T-33: Construct improvements and implement
actions to facilitate the flow of HOV’s into, out of,
and through Renton.
7 Policy T-34: Support exclusive freeway/arterial
HOV facilities that improve transit travel times by
enabling buses to bypass congestion.
Policy T-34: Support exclusive freeway/arterial HOV
facilities that improve transit travel times by
enabling buses to bypass congestion.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
2
9
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 26 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
8 Policy T-35: Allow park-and-ride facilities in
appropriate locations subject to design
considerations.
Policy T-35: Allow park-and-ride facilities in
appropriate locations subject to design
considerations.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
3
0
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 27 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Transportation Options and Mobility
As described in Renton’s Housing Action Plan (2021) and Housing Element, lack of mobility creates obstacles for individuals and families to access the services they
need. Lack of mobility and transportation services can limit a household’s ability to obtain basic goods and services, receive medical or dental care, commute to a job,
and maintain employment. Current barriers to mobility in Renton include:
Uneven access to public transit, with limited options for those who do not live Downtown, do not commute during peak travel times, or who need to travel
within Renton (instead of between Renton and other destinations in the region). The most vulnerable groups include low-income households that are unable
to afford vehicle ownership, as well as, residents who are unable to drive.
Elderly residents and others with personal physical mobility issues also face the challenge of not being able to walk longer distances to and from a bus stop,
further limiting their opportunities to use public transit.
Many of the pedestrian and bike routes connecting Renton’s residential areas with basic services are unsafe, which further limits transportation alternatives
for households without an automobile.
Revised Discussion: Transportation Options and Mobility
As described in Renton’s Housing Action Plan (2021) and Housing and Human Services Element, lack of mobility creates obstacles for individuals and families to
access the services they need. Lack of mobility and transportation services can limit a household’s ability to obtain basic goods and services, receive medical or
dental care, commute to a job, and maintain employment. Current barriers to mobility in Renton include:
Uneven access to public transit, with limited options for those who do not live Downtown, do not commute during peak travel times, or who need to travel
within Renton (instead of between Renton and other destinations in the region). The most vulnerable groups include low-income households that are unable
to afford vehicle ownership, as well as, residents who are unable to drive.
Elderly residents and others with personal physical mobility issues also face the challenge of not being able to walk longer distances to and from a bus stop,
further limiting their opportunities to use public transit.
Many of the pedestrian and bike routes connecting Renton’s residential areas with basic services are unsafe, which further limits transportation alternatives
for households without an automobile.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
3
1
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 28 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: Transportation Options and Mobility
Table 8. Transportation Options and Mobility Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-36: Invest in connection of non-
motorized facilities across Renton. Provide
improvements at intersections to improve safety
and comfort of pedestrians and bicyclists.
Policy T-36: Invest in connection of non-motorized
facilities across Renton. Provide improvements at
intersections to improve safety and comfort of
pedestrians and bicyclists.
2 Policy T-37: Support transit agencies’ investment
in transit service to Renton neighborhoods within
and beyond Downtown.
Policy T-37: Support transit agencies’ investment in
transit service to Renton neighborhoods within and
beyond the Transit Center.
Reflects future relocation
3 Policy T-38: Develop a connected transportation
system that provides opportunities for mobility of
people with special needs.
Policy T-38: Develop a connected transportation
system, through implementation of transportation
programs and improvements, that provides
equitable mobility choices and access to
opportunities, while preventing or mitigating
negative impacts to minority communities, people of
low-incomes, and people with special transportation
needs.
Consistency with Vision 2050 (MPP-T-9 and 10)
4 -- Policy T-39: Implement the Barrier Free Mobility Plan
adopted by the City Council in December of 2021.
Includes new adopted plan.
Policy T-X: Respond to changes in mobility patterns
and needs for both people and goods, and
encourage partnerships with the private sector,
where applicable.
Consistency with Vision 2050 (MPP-T-34)
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
3
2
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 29 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Growth Strategy, Land Use, and Transportation
Renton has been designated a Core City and has a Regional Growth Center called the Renton Urban Center. Renton’s adopted Urban Center boundary includes two
primary sections: the northern portion borders Lake Washington and emphasizes mixed use and regional employment, including Boeing’s Renton Plant and The
Landing, a retail and residential development; the southern portion of the center includes the downtown core and adjacent residential area.
The City is obligated to meet the 2031 Growth Targets contained in the King County Countywide Planning Policies, and much of its growth capacity is in mixed use
zones such as the Central Business District (CBD). The City must also estimate its growth to the year 2035 to provide the required 20-year planning period under
GMA. Table T-1 shows the City’s growth targets, capacity, and transportation model assumptions.
Table T-1: Growth Targets
Housing
Target
Employment
Target
2012-2035
Growth Target
per 2014
Buildable Lands
Report
14,050 28,755
Growth Capacity
Estimated 2012
BLR and Land
Use Element
Update
15,351-16,741 26,090-31,076
Transportation
Model
Assumptions
16,741 31,076
Sources: King County, Puget Sound Regional Council, BERK Consulting 2014
The City has tested the future land use, desired mode split, and planned transportation improvements in the City’s transportation model. The model results show that
the projected growth can be supported by the City’s planned improvements, and the City’s level of service policies (see Policy T-48) can be met. The model tested
Renton’s planned growth and improvements in the context of regional growth and networks consistent with Puget Sound Regional Council’s VISION 2040 and
Transportation 2040 plans.
Testing Renton’s planned growth and improvements shows the following summary model results in selected corridors:
SW 43/Carr/Petrovitsky Corridor: Planned physical improvements to intersections and lanes together ASCS, and the LOS E Mitigated designation per policies,
are appropriate.
Grady Way: Planned improvements would improve operations even in areas of projected continued congestion.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
3
3
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 30 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
156th Avenue NE Corridor: Three lanes should suffice through 2035 modeled conditions. The 142nd/156th intersection with a signal and turn lanes are
projected to work well.
SR 169: Interim improvements are possible and desirable at SE 5th at SR 169, such as striping/signing/operations changes. The State’s Route Development
Plan improvements, included in the Renton Transportation Element list of projects (Appendix A), are needed.
Houser Way at Lake Washington Boulevard: Projects 3 and 5 (Appendix A) would address projected traffic.
192nd Extension over SR 167: This new road would likely pull traffic off of the SW 43rd overcrossing of SR 167, but would not eliminate the need for
widening the overcrossing.
More detailed transportation analysis of planned improvements would occur through the design process.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
3
4
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 31 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Revised Discussion: Growth Strategy, Land Use, and Transportation
Renton has been designated a Core City and has a Regional Growth Center called the Renton Urban Center. Renton’s adopted Urban Center boundary includes two
primary sections: the northern portion borders Lake Washington and emphasizes mixed use and regional employment, including Boeing’s Renton Plant and The
Landing, a retail and residential development; the southern portion of the center includes the downtown core and adjacent residential area.
The City is obligated to meet the 2044 Growth Targets contained in the King County Countywide Planning Policies, and much of its growth capacity is in mixed use
zones such as the Central Business District (CBD). The City must also estimate its growth to the year 2045 to provide the required 20-year planning period under
GMA. Table T-1 shows the City’s growth targets, capacity, and transportation model assumptions.
Table T-1: Growth Targets
Housing Employment
2019-2044 Growth Target per Urban Land Capacity Analysis 17,000 31,780
2019 Growth Capacity Estimated 16,503 26,210
2020 - 2024 Pipeline and Units Built 9,457
Transportation Model Assumptions 16,741 31,076
Sources: King County, Puget Sound Regional Council, BERK Consulting 2014
The City has tested the future land use, desired mode split, and planned transportation improvements in the City’s transportation model. The model results show that
the projected growth can be supported by the City’s planned improvements, and the City’s level of service policies (see Policy T-49) can be met. The model tested
Renton’s planned growth and improvements in the context of regional growth and networks consistent with Puget Sound Regional Council’s VISION 2050 and
Transportation 2050 plans.
Testing Renton’s planned growth and improvements shows the following summary model results in selected corridors:
SW 43/Carr/Petrovitsky Corridor: Planned physical improvements to intersections and lanes together ASCS, and the LOS E Mitigated designation per policies,
are appropriate.
Grady Way: Planned improvements would improve operations even in areas of projected continued congestion.
156th Avenue NE Corridor: Three lanes should suffice through 2045 modeled conditions. The 142nd/156th intersection with a signal and turn lanes are
projected to work well.
SR 169: Interim improvements are possible and desirable at SE 5th at SR 169, such as striping/signing/operations changes. The State’s Route Development
Plan improvements, included in the Renton Transportation Element list of projects (Appendix A), are needed.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
3
5
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 32 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Houser Way at Lake Washington Boulevard: Projects 3 and 5 (Appendix A) would address projected traffic.
192nd Extension over SR 167: This new road would likely pull traffic off of the SW 43rd overcrossing of SR 167, but would not eliminate the need for
widening the overcrossing.
More detailed transportation analysis of planned improvements would occur through the design process.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
3
6
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 33 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: Growth Strategy, Land Use, and Transportation
Table 9. Growth Strategy, Land Use, and Transportation Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-39: Provide multimodal transportation
improvements that support land use plans and
are compatible with surrounding land uses.
Policy T-39: Provide multimodal transportation
improvements that support land use plans and are
compatible with surrounding land uses.
2 Policy T-40: Plan, design, and operate streets to
enable safe and convenient access and travel for
all users including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit
riders, and people of all ages and abilities, as
well as, freight and motor vehicle drivers, and to
foster a sense of place in the public realm with
attractive design amenities.
Combined with T-1.
3 Policy T-41: Plan for land use densities and
mixed-use development patterns that encourage
walking, biking, and transit use in designated
areas.
Policy T-41: Plan for land use densities and mixed-
use development patterns that encourage walking,
biking, and transit use in designated areas.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
3
7
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 34 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
4 Policy T-42: Continue to implement the following
design guidelines in Renton’s Regional Growth
Center:
• Encourage a mix of complementary land uses.
• Encourage compact growth by addressing
density.
• Link neighborhoods and connect streets,
sidewalks, and trails.
• Complete missing links and connections in the
pedestrian and bicycle systems.
• Integrate activity areas with surrounding
neighborhoods.
• Locate public and semipublic uses near
Renton’s transit center(s).
• Design for pedestrians and bicyclists.
• Provide usable open spaces such as the
Renton Piazza, Burnett Linear Park, Cedar River
Trail, and others.
• Manage the supply of parking.
• Promote the benefits of on-street parking.
• Reduce and mitigate the effects of parking.
Policy T-42: Continue to implement the following
design guidelines in Renton’s Regional Growth
Center:
• Encourage a mix of complementary land uses.
• Encourage compact growth by addressing density.
• Link neighborhoods and connect streets,
sidewalks, and trails.
• Complete missing links and connections in the
pedestrian and bicycle systems.
• Integrate activity areas with surrounding
neighborhoods.
• Locate public and semipublic uses near Renton’s
transit center(s).
• Design for pedestrians and bicyclists.
• Provide usable open spaces such as the Renton
Piazza, Burnett Linear Park, Cedar River Trail, and
others.
• Manage the supply of parking.
• Promote the benefits of on-street parking.
• Reduce and mitigate the effects of parking.
5 Policy T-43: Prioritize multimodal transportation
investments in Renton’s Growth Urban Center.
Policy T-43: Promote the development of an
efficient, multimodal transportation system, in
collaboration with other jurisdictions and agencies,
while prioritizing investments in Renton’s Growth
Urban Center.
Consistency with Vision 2050
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
3
8
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 35 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Level of Service Standards, Design, and Concurrency
Transportation concurrency – ensuring the programs, projects, and services needed to serve growth are in place when or soon after growth occurs – is a key
requirement of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). The City established the following objectives for its multimodal concurrency system:
Meet requirements of GMA and be defensible
Be meaningful to measure transportation system versus development
Be simple to explain
Be simple and cost efficient to implement and monitor
Incorporate other travel modes
Be receptive to various TDM and parking strategies
Consider the potential for different standards for different parts of the City
Help fund/implement multimodal transportation improvements
Provide a basis for interjurisdictional coordination on transportation
Following a review of different systems and methods, the City developed a multimodal LOS and concurrency system for the following modes of travel meeting the
objectives:
Motor vehicles (single and multi occupancy)
Transit
Non-motorized (bicycle and pedestrian)
The multimodal LOS system addresses the following scales: 1) citywide, 2) community planning area, and 3) development level.
The primary component of the system is a plan-level estimate of person trips by mode based on the land use forecasts. Person trips are the number of persons
making trips by various modes of travel. Bicycle and pedestrian trips typically involve one person, thus one person trip. But motor vehicles often have more than one
occupant. For example, if the average vehicle occupancy was 1.3, and a concurrency service area (like a community planning area) had 1,000 p.m. peak vehicle trips,
the person trips would be 1,300. Similarly, if a transit vehicle carries 65 passengers, there would be 65 person trips. Using person trips provides a common metric for
use in concurrency and also assessment of transportation impacts or mitigation fees.
To ensure that growth is occurring in a pattern and intensity proposed by the Land Use Element, the person trips could be tracked by consolidated Community
Planning Areas that share a common circulation system and that do not place undue administrative burden.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
3
9
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 36 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
The last component of the LOS program is at a development scale. Applicants for development would need to provide an analysis of the effect of their proposed
development on safety, operations and local access considering a measurement of delay per vehicle of LOS D or LOS E mitigated using Highway Capacity Manual
definitions. See Table T-2 for a description of the key steps in the LOS/Concurrency system.
LOS standards guide the types of street, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit improvements needed to meet planned levels of growth. The list and map of planned
transportation system improvements are presented in Appendix A.
The transportation system’s quality of design, sensitivity to human needs, and integration with the surroundings impact the City’s urban character and quality of life.
Transportation improvements should be designed accordingly.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
4
0
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 37 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Table T-2: LOS/Concurrency Program
Program Component
or Characteristic Attributes
Person Trips
Person trips are the number of persons making the same trip in the same mode of travel. Using
person trips provides a common metric for use in concurrency and also impact or mitigation
fees.
Multimodal Levels
of Service
Person trips will be calculated for the following modes of travel:
• Motor vehicles (single and multi-occupancy)
• Transit
• Non-motorized (bicycle and pedestrian)
Multiple Service
Areas
The City will monitor trip banks to specific service areas, such as consolidated Community
Planning Areas, that reflect differences in transportation opportunities, needs and capacities,
as well as, differences in existing and future land uses.
However, the City will determine system needs and collect fees at a citywide scale in order to
preserve the City’s flexibility to prioritize projects, and to avoid creating smaller accounts that do not collect enough to fund any projects before the legal deadlines to spend the money or
refund it.
Trip Calculator,
Fee Calculator,
Trip Bank
Applicants will provide the type(s) of land uses they will develop, and the number of units they propose for each type (i.e., # of apartments, or # of square feet of retail, office, etc.). The Trip
Calculator will convert the applicant’s data to the number of person trips in their service area
using trip generation rates. The trip calculator results will be used for concurrency by comparing the applicant’s person trips to the balance available in the trip bank for each mode.
The trip calculator results will be used for fee calculations by multiplying the applicant’s person
trips for each mode times the fee per trip for each mode.
Multimodal
Mitigation Fees
A separate SEPA-based mitigation fee schedule will collect each applicant’s proportionate
share of their direct impact on the other modes of travel.
Strategies such as TDM and parking can earn credits that reduce the mitigation fees.
Safety,
Operations, and
Local Access Analysis
Applicants for development will be required to submit an analysis of the effect of their proposed development on safety, operations and local access using guidelines outlined in the
City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
4
1
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 38 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Revised Discussion: Level of Service Standards, Design, and Concurrency
Transportation concurrency – ensuring the programs, projects, and services needed to serve growth are in place when or soon after growth occurs – is a key
requirement of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). The City established the following objectives for its multimodal concurrency system:
Meet requirements of GMA and be defensible
Be meaningful to measure transportation system versus development
Be simple to explain
Be simple and cost efficient to implement and monitor
Incorporate other travel modes
Be receptive to various TDM and parking strategies
Consider the potential for different standards for different parts of the City
Help fund/implement multimodal transportation improvements
Provide a basis for interjurisdictional coordination on transportation
Following a review of different systems and methods, the City developed a multimodal LOS and concurrency system for the following modes of travel meeting the
objectives:
Motor vehicles (single and multi occupancy)
Transit
Non-motorized (bicycle and pedestrian)
The multimodal LOS system addresses the following scales: 1) citywide, 2) community planning area, and 3) development level.
The primary component of the system is a plan-level estimate of person trips by mode based on the land use forecasts. Person trips are the number of persons
making trips by various modes of travel. Bicycle and pedestrian trips typically involve one person, thus one person trip. But motor vehicles often have more than one
occupant. For example, if the average vehicle occupancy was 1.3, and a concurrency service area (like a community planning area) had 1,000 p.m. peak vehicle trips,
the person trips would be 1,300. Similarly, if a transit vehicle carries 65 passengers, there would be 65 person trips. Using person trips provides a common metric for
use in concurrency and assessment of transportation impacts or mitigation fees.
To ensure that growth is occurring in a pattern and intensity proposed by the Land Use Element, the person trips could be tracked by consolidated Community
Planning Areas that share a common circulation system and that do not place undue administrative burden.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
4
2
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 39 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
The last component of the LOS program is at a development scale. Applicants for development would need to provide an analysis of the effect of their proposed
development on safety, operations and local access considering a measurement of delay per vehicle of LOS D or LOS E mitigated using Highway Capacity Manual
definitions. See Table T-2 for a description of the key steps in the LOS/Concurrency system.
LOS standards guide the types of street, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit improvements needed to meet planned levels of growth. The list and map of planned
transportation system improvements are presented in Appendix A.
The transportation system’s quality of design, sensitivity to human needs, and integration with the surroundings impact the City’s urban character and quality of life.
Transportation improvements should be designed accordingly.
Table T-2: LOS/Concurrency Program
Program Component
or Characteristic Attributes
Person Trips Person trips are the number of persons making the same trip in the same mode of travel. Using
person trips provides a common metric for use in concurrency and impact or mitigation fees.
Multimodal Levels
of Service
Person trips will be calculated for the following modes of travel:
• Motor vehicles (single and multi-occupancy)
• Transit
• Non-motorized (bicycle and pedestrian)
Multiple Service
Areas
The City will monitor the trip bank, determine system needs, and collect fees at a citywide
scale.
Trip Calculator,
Fee Calculator,
Trip Bank
Applicants will provide the type(s) of land uses they will develop, and the number of units they propose for each type (i.e., # of apartments, or # of square feet of retail, office, etc.). The Trip
Calculator will convert the applicant’s data to the number of person trips in their service area
using trip generation rates. The trip calculator results will be used for concurrency by comparing the applicant’s person trips to the balance available in the trip bank. The trip
calculator results will be used for fee calculations by multiplying the applicant’s person trips
times the fee per trip. The city will be evaluating the fee per trip expanding it to include non-motorized modes of travel as recently allowed in 2023 by Washington State Law.
Multimodal
Mitigation Fees
A separate SEPA-based mitigation fee schedule will collect each applicant’s proportionate
share of their direct impact on the other modes of travel.
Strategies such as TDM and parking can earn credits that reduce the mitigation fees.
Safety,
Operations, and Local Access
Analysis
Applicants for development will be required to submit an analysis of the effect of their
proposed development on safety, operations and local access using guidelines outlined in the
City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
4
3
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 40 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: Level of Service Standards, Design, and Concurrency
Table 10. Level of Service Standards, Design, and Concurrency Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-44: Ensure adequate transportation
facilities are in place at the time of development
approval or that an adopted strategy is in place
to provide adequate facilities within six years.
Policy T-44: Ensure adequate transportation
facilities are in place at the time of development
approval or that an adopted strategy is in place to
provide adequate facilities within six years.
2 Policy T-45: Ensure that new development
contributes its fair share of the cost of
transportation facilities, programs and services
needed to mitigate growth related transportation
impacts.
Policy T-45: Ensure that new development
contributes its fair share of the cost of multimodal
transportation facilities, programs and services
needed to mitigate growth related transportation
impacts.
Highlight the need for development to contribute to
all transportation facilities including those related
to non-motorized modes of travel.
3 Policy T-46: Maintain a multimodal level of
service that maximizes mobility, is coordinated
with level of service standards of adjacent
jurisdictions, and meets concurrency
requirements.
Policy T-46: Maintain a multimodal level of service
that maximizes mobility, is coordinated with level of
service standards of adjacent jurisdictions, and
meets concurrency requirements.
4 Policy T-47: Incorporate multiple transportation
modes in concurrency determinations.
Policy T-47: Incorporate multiple transportation
modes in concurrency determinations.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
4
4
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 41 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policy T-48: Apply the following multimodal LOS
standards at a citywide level, community
planning area level, and development level:
A. Citywide Person Trips: Based on the City’s land
use and growth strategy, establish a citywide
level of person trips by mode, and support each
mode with capital improvements and programs.
The general mode categories include: motor
vehicle trips, transit trips, and non-motorized
trips.
B. Community Planning Area Trips: Through the
concurrency review process, track person trips by
the following areas to monitor if growth is
occurring in relation to the Land Use Element and
planned Transportation and Capital Facility Plan
investments. If growth is occurring in a different
pattern than planned, consider the effect on
operational LOS and determine if the
Comprehensive Plan land use, LOS or capital
investments should be amended.
1. West Hill/City Center/Cedar River Community
Planning Areas
2. Valley Community Planning Area
3. Talbot/Benson/Fairwood Community Planning
Areas
4. Kennydale/Highlands/East Plateau
Community Planning Areas
5. Adopted planned action areas: Track vehicular
trips per City-adopted Planned Action ordinances
C. Operational LOS: Through the SEPA review
process, apply the following operational LOS
Policy T-48: Apply the following multimodal LOS
standards at a citywide level and development level:
A. Citywide Person Trips: Based on the City’s land
use and growth strategy, establish a citywide level of
person trips by mode, and support each mode with
capital improvements and programs. The general
mode categories include: motor vehicle trips,
transit/carpool trips, and non-motorized trips.
B. Operational LOS: Through the SEPA review
process, apply the following operational LOS
standard at intersections that could be impacted by
a proposed development:
1. Arterials and Collectors: Except as listed in C.2,
apply a standard of LOS D.
2. Alternative Arterial and State Route LOS: Apply a
standard of Level of Service E Mitigated for the
following:
• Specific Corridors: Carr Road, Logan Avenue,
Rainier Avenue, Grady Way, SR 900, SR 169 and SR
515.
• Centers: Renton Urban Center and Center Village
• For the above Corridors and Centers, congestion
should be mitigated (such as increasing transit or
other modes) when p.m. peak hour LOS falls below
LOS E.
Updated to be consistent with Concurrency
Program.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
4
5
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 42 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
standard at intersections that could be impacted
by a proposed development:
1. Arterials and Collectors: Except as listed in C.2,
apply a standard of LOS D.
2. Alternative Arterial and State Route LOS: Apply
a standard of Level of Service E Mitigated for the
following:
• Specific Corridors: Carr Road, Logan Avenue,
Rainier Avenue, Grady Way, SR 900 and SR 515.
• Centers: Renton Urban Center and Center
Village
• For the above Corridors and Centers,
congestion should be mitigated (such as
increasing transit or other modes) when p.m.
peak hour LOS falls below LOS E.
5 Policy T-49: Encourage development that can be
supported by transit and other non-single
occupant vehicle modes.
Policy T-49: Encourage development that can be
supported by transit and other non-single occupant
vehicle modes.
6 Policy T-50: Design transportation facilities to fit
the neighborhood context. Apply urban design
principles.
Policy T-50: Design transportation facilities to fit the
neighborhood context. Apply urban design
principles.
7 Policy T-51: Support continued development of
the 27th/Strander Corridor into Tukwila.
Policy T-51: Support continued development of the
27th/Strander Corridor into Tukwila.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
4
6
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 43 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
Policy T-53: Take one or more of the following
actions if the City is unable to fund the programs,
projects and services identified (not in priority
order):
• Delay development until the needed programs,
facilities or services can be funded;
• Amend the Land Use Plan to reduce the demand
placed on the transportation system; or
• Obtain needed revenue or revise the
Transportation Improvement Plan to reflect known
financial resources.
As a last choice, change the transportation level of
service standard.
New Commerce requirement
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
4
7
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 44 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Freight
Safe and efficient movement and distribution of goods is important for attracting and retaining businesses in the City of Renton.
INVENTORY
Truck and rail freight are important to the regional and local economy. The Washington State Freight Mobility Plan, hereby incorporated by reference, identifies T1
freight corridors (those carrying more than 10 million tons per year), T2 freight corridors (carrying 4 to 10 million tons per year), and other freight routes within the City
that are important to the state economy. Figure T-2 identifies the state designated freight routes.
The City has a system of truck routes for trucks weighing over 26,000 pounds gross vehicle weight. In accordance with the City’s truck route ordinance, trucks
needing to make deliveries off of the designated truck routes are required to take the most direct arterial route to/from one of the designated truck routes and to
combine multiple trips off designated truck routes when feasible. The truck route ordinance does not apply to the operation of school buses or public transit on
designated routes, garbage trucks, city maintenance vehicles, or emergency vehicles.
Freight rail service is currently available to several industrial and commercial areas of the City. Existing rail lines bordering the City of Renton include the Union Pacific
(UPRR) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) main line tracks between Seattle and Tacoma.
The BNSF main line runs in a north-south direction and is located along the City of Renton's western city limits, separating Renton from the City of Tukwila. The BNSF
main line carries a considerable volume of freight service, as well as passenger service. Two spur lines provide intermittent, as-needed freight service from the main
line to the Renton Valley industrial area (southwest Renton) and the Container Corporation of America plant in the Earlington industrial area. The BNSF 18th
Subdivision Branch Line splits from the BNSF main line at the Black River Junction, and continues through Downtown Renton and the North Renton industrial area
before continuing along the east side of Lake Washington and terminating in south Bellevue. Spur tracks off of the branch line provide freight service to the Earlington
industrial area in west central Renton. Two spur tracks serve the North Renton industrial area north of Downtown Renton.
The UPRR mainline track, located 200 to 300 feet west of the BNSF mainline and Renton's City limits, also runs in a north-south direction. The UPRR mainline is a
single track, carrying a somewhat lower level of freight-only service.
The infrequent use of the spur tracks and branch lines within city limits results in minimal disruption to vehicular traffic movement in Renton. Future land use
development is not anticipated to result in a significant increase in rail freight service in Renton.
The following policies and priorities seek to balance the needs of freight (trucks and trains) with the needs of other users of the local street network.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
4
8
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 45 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Revised Discussion: Freight
Safe and efficient movement and distribution of goods is important for attracting and retaining businesses in the City of Renton.
INVENTORY
Truck and rail freight are important to the regional and local economy. The Washington State Freight Mobility Plan, hereby incorporated by reference, identifies T1
freight corridors (those carrying more than 10 million tons per year), T2 freight corridors (carrying 4 to 10 million tons per year), and other freight routes within the City
that are important to the state economy. Figure T-2 identifies the state designated freight routes.
The City has a system of truck routes for trucks weighing over 26,000 pounds gross vehicle weight. In accordance with the City’s truck route ordinance, trucks
needing to make deliveries off of the designated truck routes are required to take the most direct arterial route to/from one of the designated truck routes and to
combine multiple trips off designated truck routes when feasible. The truck route ordinance does not apply to the operation of school buses or public transit on
designated routes, garbage trucks, city maintenance vehicles, or emergency vehicles.
Freight rail service is currently available to several industrial and commercial areas of the City. Existing rail lines bordering the City of Renton include the Union Pacific
(UPRR) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) main line tracks between Seattle and Tacoma.
The BNSF main line runs in a north-south direction and is located along the City of Renton's western city limits, separating Renton from the City of Tukwila. The BNSF
main line carries a considerable volume of freight service, as well as passenger service. Two spur lines provide intermittent, as-needed freight service from the main
line to the Renton Valley industrial area (southwest Renton) and the Container Corporation of America plant in the Earlington industrial area. The BNSF 18th
Subdivision Branch Line splits from the BNSF main line at the Black River Junction, and continues through Downtown Renton and the North Renton industrial area
before continuing along the east side of Lake Washington and terminating in south Bellevue. Spur tracks off of the branch line provide freight service to the Earlington
industrial area in west central Renton. Two spur tracks serve the North Renton industrial area north of Downtown Renton.
The UPRR mainline track, located 200 to 300 feet west of the BNSF mainline and Renton's City limits, also runs in a north-south direction. The UPRR mainline is a
single track, carrying a somewhat lower level of freight-only service.
The infrequent use of the spur tracks and branch lines within city limits results in minimal disruption to vehicular traffic movement in Renton. Future land use
development is not anticipated to result in a significant increase in rail freight service in Renton.
The following policies and priorities seek to balance the needs of freight (trucks and trains) with the needs of other users of the local street network.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
4
9
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 46 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: Freight
Table 11. Freight Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-52: Work with local, regional, state, and
federal agencies to address regional freight
needs and mitigate local impacts.
Policy T-52: Work with local, regional, state, and
federal agencies to address regional freight needs
and mitigate local impacts.
2 Policy T-53: Maintain and improve freight access
to and from Renton industrial areas.
Policy T-53: Maintain and improve freight access to
and from Renton industrial areas.
3 Policy T-54: Minimize the impact of freight traffic
on transportation facilities and general traffic
circulation.
Policy T-54: Minimize the impact of freight traffic on
transportation facilities and general traffic
circulation.
4 Policy T-55: Limit heavy through truck traffic to
designated truck routes.
Policy T-55: Limit heavy through truck traffic to
designated truck routes.
5 Policy T-56: Support railroad crossing
improvements that minimize maintenance and
protect the street surface. Where warranted,
provide protective devices, such as barriers and
warning signals, on at-grade crossings.
Policy T-56: Support railroad crossing improvements
that minimize maintenance and protect the street
surface. Where warranted, provide protective
devices, such as barriers and warning signals, on at-
grade crossings.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
0
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 47 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Airport
The Renton Municipal Airport is a major general aviation airport and a designated Reliever Airport for SeaTac International Airport in the Federal Aviation
Administration’s National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems.
Both federal and state governments recognize its importance as part of the transportation system and require the City to protect and maintain it so that it can be used
safely. Renton's Airport is more than a transportation facility. It is a vital element to Renton's commercial and industrial economy, providing aircraft services,
manufacturing support, flight training, and other airport activities. The airport is a self-sufficient enterprise fund within the City’s operations.
According to the 2012 WSDOT Aviation Economic Impact Study, four airports in Washington State account for the greatest economic impact:
The most significant overall finding is that the statewide economic impacts attributable to airports are substantial, but heavily concentrated in just four facilities -
the three major Boeing activity centers (Paine Field, Boeing Field, and Renton Municipal) and Sea-Tac, which is the principal commercial airline hub in the state and
ranked 17th nationally in terms of annual enplanements.
Combined, they account for 91% of total jobs and 95% of total statewide output attributable to individual airport activity. Each of these facilities is estimated to
support at least 10,000 jobs and more than $5 billion of economic activity.
INVENTORY
The Renton Municipal Airport is owned by the City of Renton. The Airport consists of approximately 165.5 acres; it has one runway with two parallel taxiways.
The runway, running southeast to northwest, is 5,379 feet long and 200 feet wide. It is equipped with medium intensity runway lighting, Runway End Identification
Lighting (REIL), and Precision Approach Path Indicators (PAPI). Taxiways are lighted, there is a rotating beacon, a windsock, and a non-directional radio beacon. The
Federal Aviation Administration operates a contracted Air Traffic Control Tower year round during established hours (generally 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.).
The Renton Airport serves general aviation demand (aviation uses except scheduled commercial passenger airlines) generated by Renton, Boeing, and other
communities generally within a 30-minute drive. Aircraft services available at the Airport include aircraft maintenance and service, fuel, flight instruction, aircraft
charter and rental, and aircraft storage. Fixed Base Operators (FBO's), which are aviation-oriented businesses offering a variety of services and products to aircraft
owners and operators, provide these services to the aviation public.
Contiguous to the Renton Airport is the Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base which, during the summer months, is one of the busiest seaplane bases in the
Northwest.
The Renton Municipal Airport is a Landing Rights Airport, with US Customs services available for both floatplane and wheeled aircraft arriving by water or by land.
FUTURE PLANS
The Airport Layout Plan establishes future development and improvement priorities and timelines that will yield a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally
acceptable public facility with capacity for the future air transport needs of the City of Renton and the Puget Sound region.
The number of aircraft and the number of operations are projected to grow only modestly in the coming decades; however, the region has a large unmet need for
hangars for aircraft storage.
The airport has begun an update to the Airport Layout Plan scheduled to be completed in the spring of 2016.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
1
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 48 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Revised Discussion: Airport
The Renton Municipal Airport is a major general aviation airport and a designated Reliever Airport for SeaTac International Airport in the Federal Aviation
Administration’s National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems.
Both federal and state governments recognize its importance as part of the transportation system and require the City to protect and maintain it so that it can be used
safely. Renton's airport is more than a transportation facility. It is a vital element to Renton's commercial and industrial economy, providing aircraft services,
manufacturing support, flight training, and other airport activities. The airport is a self-sufficient enterprise fund within the City’s operations.
According to the 2020 WSDOT Aviation Economic Impact Study, Renton Municipal Airport accounts for the third largest economic impact in Washington State at over
16 percent of the business revenues into the state.
INVENTORY
The Renton Municipal Airport is owned by the City of Renton. The airport consists of approximately 165.5 acres. It has one runway with two parallel taxiways.
The runway, running southeast to northwest, is 5,379 feet long and 200 feet wide. It is equipped with medium intensity runway lighting, Runway End Identification
Lighting (REIL), and Precision Approach Path Indicators (PAPI). Taxiways are also equipped with lighting, a rotating beacon, a windsock, and a non-directional radio
beacon. The Federal Aviation Administration operates a contracted Air Traffic Control Tower year round during established hours (generally 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.).
The Renton airport serves general aviation demand (aviation uses except scheduled commercial passenger airlines) generated by Renton, Boeing, and other
communities generally within a 30-minute drive. Aircraft services available at the airport include aircraft maintenance and service, fuel, flight instruction, aircraft
charter and rental, and aircraft storage. Fixed Base Operators (FBO's), which are aviation-oriented businesses offering a variety of services and products to aircraft
owners and operators, provide these services to the aviation public.
Contiguous to the Renton airport is the Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base which, during the summer months, is one of the busiest seaplane bases in the
Northwest.
The Renton Municipal Airport is a Landing Rights Airport, with US Customs services available for both floatplane and wheeled aircraft arriving by water or by land.
FUTURE PLANS
The Airport Layout Plan establishes future development and improvement priorities and timelines that will yield a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally
acceptable public facility with capacity for the future air transport needs of the City of Renton and the Puget Sound region.
The number of aircraft and the number of operations are projected to grow only modestly in the coming decades; however, the region has a large unmet need for
hangars for aircraft storage.
The airport has begun an update to the Airport Layout Plan scheduled to be completed in the spring of 2023.
Policies: Airport
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
2
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 49 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Table 12. Airport Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-57: Acknowledge that there are certain
impacts to the community associated with the
existence of the Renton Municipal Airport, such
as noise generation, but that these impacts have
historically been accepted by the community in
exchange for the economic and transportation-
related benefits and the civic prestige that are
also associated with the Airport.
Policy T-57: Recognize the regional significance of
the Renton Municipal Airport for economic
development. Also, acknowledge that there are
certain impacts to the community with the existence
of the airport, such as noise generation, but that
these impacts have historically been accepted by
the community in exchange for the economic and
transportation-related benefits that are also
associated with the airport.
Clean up
2 Policy T-58: Recognize the regional significance
of the Airport for economic development.
Policy T-58: Promote coordinated planning and
effective management to optimize the region’s
aviation system in a manner that minimizes health,
air quality, and noise impacts to communities,
including historically marginalized communities.
Consolidate the previous policy with policy above.
Provide new policy for consistency with Vision
2050
3 Policy T-59: Maximize available space on the
Airport site for uses that require direct access to
taxiways and runways.
Policy T-59: Maximize available space on the airport
site for uses that require direct access to taxiways
and runways.
Grammar edits
4 Policy T-60: Continue operation of the Airport as a
Landing Rights Airport.
Policy T-60: Continue operation of the airport as a
Landing Rights Airport.
Grammar edits
5 Policy T-61: Recognize the benefit of Airport
access for emergency medical and disaster
response in the community.
Policy T-61: Recognize the benefit of airport access
for emergency medical and disaster response in the
community.
Grammar edits
6 Policy T-62: Promote and develop Airport facilities
and services for all wheeled and float-equipped
aircraft, owners, pilots, and passengers in a
manner that maximizes safety, efficiency, and
opportunity for use.
Policy T-62: Promote and develop airport facilities
and services for all wheeled and float-equipped
aircraft, owners, pilots, and passengers in a manner
that maximizes safety, efficiency, and opportunity for
use.
Grammar edits
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
3
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 50 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
7 Policy T-63: Lease Airport property for aviation-
related uses that create jobs and expand the
City’s tax base.
Policy T-63: Lease airport property for aviation-
related uses that create jobs and expand the City’s
tax base.
Grammar edits
8 Policy T-64: Maintain the northern shoreline of
the Airport as the only major publicly-owned
seaplane access and protect its use for that
purpose.
Policy T-64: Maintain the northern shoreline of the
airport as the only major publicly-owned seaplane
access and protect its use for that purpose.
Grammar edits
9 Policy T-65: Develop appropriate land use plans
and regulations for structures and vegetation
within the Airport’s runway approach zone.
Policy T-65: Develop appropriate land use plans and
regulations for structures and vegetation within the
airport’s runway approach zone and discourage the
siting of incompatible uses adjacent to the airport.
Consistency with Commerce
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
4
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 51 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Finance, Investment, and Implementation
This section contains details of transportation revenue sources that the City can reasonably expect to receive during the life of the transportation plan. Revenue
sources contained in the Financial Program vary widely in terms of the amounts available and the types of projects for which they may be used. In most cases,
individual transportation projects are funded by a combination of funding sources, reflecting the fact that transportation projects have multiple purposes and serve
multiple beneficiaries.
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
Appendix A: Transportation Improvement Projects and Programs, summarizes the City of Renton’s identified multimodal roadway system improvements needed to
address capacity and operational issues based on the forecast travel demands. The project table and map, which constitute Appendix A, include a project number for
reference. The table is generally organized by Community Plan Area, starting with the Kennydale Planning Area in the north part of the City.
In addition, the table includes programs covering pedestrian and bicycle travel consistent with the City’s other adopted plans, such as the Renton Trails and Bicycle
Master Plan. Programs covering preservation, traffic operations and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), safety, and transportation project development are also
included. Without programs addressing these items, the City’s existing infrastructure will be less efficient and ultimately will cost more to reconstruct transportation
facilities.
Key improvements from other agencies including Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Sound Transit, King County, and adjacent cities are also
included in the list to illustrate the interdependence of Renton’s transportation element within the regional and sub-regional framework.
To better support use of alternative travel modes, most of the identified roadway improvements include facilities for pedestrians, and others also include
improvements for bicycle travel and improving transit service reliability. The roadway projects focus on improving traffic safety and operations along major corridors.
These include adding turn lanes (including center, two-way left-turn lanes) and upgrading traffic signals at major intersections. These include projects along Lake
Washington Boulevard, Sunset Boulevard, Grady Way, Carr Road/Petrovitsky Road, and 116th Avenue SE. In addition to the listed corridor projects, the traffic
operations and ITS program provide for adjusting the traffic signal phasing and operations at signals throughout the city.
The only project that adds additional travel lanes for a significant distance is the widening of Monster Road between Oakesdale Avenue and Martin Luther King Jr Way
(SR 900). This project completes the 4/5 lane arterial corridor and would be constructed in partnership with King County.
The Transportation Element also incorporates improvement projects from Community Plans and other planning studies. These include the plan to convert the one-way
roadways in downtown Renton to two-way operations to support the vision identified in the City Center Community Plan. In addition, the Transportation Element
includes the key transportation improvements identified in the Sunset Area Community Planned Action Study, and the Benson Hill Community Plan.
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM COSTS
In emphasizing multiple travel modes, this plan requires resources to be spread and balanced among all modes. Many of the identified improvement projects
address multiple travel modes in an integrated manner. The City of Renton cost of funding the transportation improvement projects and programs described in
previous sections for the next 21 years (2015-2035) is estimated at approximately $617 million (2015 dollars). In addition, the City’s Transportation Element relies
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
5
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 52 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
on WSDOT, Sound Transit, King County Metro and other agencies to fund and implement regional and sub-regional transportation improvement projects, as identified
in Appendix A. Ongoing transportation planning work will include continued refinement of the 20-year transportation plan and costs.
As shown in Table T-3, $422 million (68%) of the City’s transportation costs are for multimodal transportation improvement projects in key corridors throughout the
City. Pedestrian, bicycle, and trail projects are estimated to cost $102 million based on the current plans. The remaining $93 million is needed to fund ongoing
operations, including street overlays, system preservation, traffic signal, signs, implementation of ITS, and overall administration and development of projects.
Table T-3: Summary of 2015-2035 Transportation Costs
Type of Project Costs
(1,000s)
Roadway Projects $ 422,000
Non-Motorized Projects and
Programs $102,000
Preservation, Safety, ITS, and
Project Development Programs $93,000
TOTAL Costs $ 617,000
INVENTORY OF FUNDING SOURCES
Having established a 20-year transportation funding level of $617 million, an annual average funding level of approximately $30 million would be needed to fully
implement the Transportation Element by 2035. Sources of revenue to provide this annual funding need are identified on TableT-5. The forecast revenues are based
on historical data extrapolated out to 2035. From existing transportation revenue sources, the City would be expected to generate $240 million from 2015-2035. This
is approximately 40% of the total estimated costs of the 21 year list of transportation projects and programs.
Table T-4: Summary of 2015-2035 Transportation Revenues
Existing Revenue Sources Costs (1,000s)
Grants $119,000
Business License Fees $52,000
Fuel Taxes $51,000
Transportation Impact
Fees and Sidewalk Mitigation Payments $18,000
TOTAL Revenues $240,000
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
6
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 53 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Existing revenues are not able to keep pace with transportation costs for several reasons. They include:
Declining revenue available from several existing sources, such as the half-cent gas tax and grants;
Transportation needs and costs growing faster than available revenues;
Local, state, and federal requirements on transportation improvements lengthening the design process and increasing cost;
Increased needs for preservation of the existing infrastructure;
Additional focus on incorporating complete streets concepts into transportation projects which adds costs due to right-of way and street standards;
The undetermined potential for new funding sources; and
The continued inability of regional agencies to address regional transportation needs.
Ongoing transportation planning work will include a review and update of current revenue sources to reflect federal, state, and regional decisions regarding these
revenue sources. Should the City’s transportation funding approach result in shortfalls, the City will reassess its land use plan, level of service standards, and funding
strategies, accordingly.
To help address this shortfall in funding, the City is considering two new funding sources and potential future modifications to the existing Transportation Impact Fee
(TIF) program rates.
Transportation Benefit District (TBD) – The City is evaluating the potential for establishing a TBD, as allowed under State law. Without a vote of the City
residents, a TBD could be based on a $20 assessment on the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET). This could generate over $30 million over the life of the plan
if implemented starting in 2016. State law allows the City to enact up to a $100 MVET through a vote of residents. A $100 MVET could raise $8 million a year
if approved. The City would likely target the TBD to help provide more consistent funding for preservation of the transportation system and possibly some key
non-motorized projects.
Non-motorized concurrency Impact Fee – The City’s current TIF program is focused on improvements that add capacity to roadways and streets that serve
growth, consistent with State law. With the increased focus on completing key segments of the sidewalk, bicycle, and trails system, the City is considering a
supplemental mitigation fee that would cover those modes. This mitigation payment would be integral to the multi-modal concurrency program. Specific rates
and projects/costs are yet to be fully defined and would be adopted as part of a subsequent change to the City’s existing concurrency requirements (RMC 4-
6-070). Preliminary estimates suggest such a program could generate approximately $8 million for separate pedestrian, bicycle, and multi-use trail projects.
The costs of the non-motorized projects would not overlap with costs included in the impact fee program.
Transportation Impact Fee – The City revised its TIF in 2011. As part of that update, the City set the TIF rate per new PM peak hour trip well below the
maximum rate developed in the Rate Study (Rate Study for Impact Fees, City of Renton). With adoption of the 2015 Transportation Element and project list,
the City will need to review and update the TIF program and ordinance to be internally consistent. At that time, the City could choose to set the TIF rates at a
higher (or lower) level, which could affect the ability to complete the growth-related street and roadway projects.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
7
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 54 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
This Element provides a summary of six and 20-year transportation system proposals (see Level of Service Standards, Design, and Concurrency) needed to support
the land use plan. The City has developed a six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that details projects and funding by year for 2015-2020, and is hereby
incorporated by reference. The full 20-year multimodal project list, summarized in Appendix A, is also incorporated by reference.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
8
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 55 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Revised Discussion: Finance, Investment, and Implementation
This section contains details of transportation revenue sources that the City can reasonably expect to receive during the life of the transportation plan. Revenue
sources contained in the Financial Program vary widely in terms of the amounts available and the types of projects for which they may be used. In most cases,
individual transportation projects are funded by a combination of funding sources, reflecting the fact that transportation projects have multiple purposes and serve
multiple beneficiaries.
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
Appendix A: Transportation Improvement Projects and Programs, summarizes the City of Renton’s identified multimodal roadway system improvements needed to
address capacity and operational issues based on the forecast travel demands. The project table and map, which constitute Appendix A, include a project number for
reference. The table is generally organized by Community Plan Area, starting with the Kennydale Planning Area in the north part of the City.
In addition, the table includes programs covering pedestrian and bicycle travel consistent with the City’s other adopted plans, such as the Renton Trails and Bicycle
Master Plan. Programs covering preservation, traffic operations and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), safety, and transportation project development are also
included. Without programs addressing these items, the City’s existing infrastructure will be less efficient and ultimately will cost more to reconstruct transportation
facilities.
Key improvements from other agencies including Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Sound Transit, King County, and adjacent cities are also
included in the list to illustrate the interdependence of Renton’s transportation element within the regional and sub-regional framework.
To better support use of alternative travel modes, most of the identified roadway improvements include facilities for pedestrians, and others also include
improvements for bicycle travel and improving transit service reliability. The roadway projects focus on improving traffic safety and operations along major corridors.
These include adding turn lanes (including center, two-way left-turn lanes) and upgrading traffic signals at major intersections. These include projects along Lake
Washington Boulevard, Sunset Boulevard, Grady Way, Carr Road/Petrovitsky Road, and 116th Avenue SE. In addition to the listed corridor projects, the traffic
operations and ITS program provide for adjusting the traffic signal phasing and operations at signals throughout the city.
The only project that adds additional travel lanes for a significant distance is the widening of Monster Road between Oakesdale Avenue and Martin Luther King Jr Way
(SR 900). This project completes the 4/5 lane arterial corridor and would be constructed in partnership with King County.
The Transportation Element also incorporates improvement projects from Community Plans and other planning studies. These include the plan to convert the one-way
roadways in downtown Renton to two-way operations to support the vision identified in the City Center Community Plan. In addition, the Transportation Element
includes the key transportation improvements identified in the Sunset Area Community Planned Action Study, and the Benson Hill Community Plan.
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM COSTS
In emphasizing multiple travel modes, this plan requires resources to be spread and balanced among all modes. Many of the identified improvement projects
address multiple travel modes in an integrated manner. The City of Renton cost of funding the transportation improvement projects and programs described in
previous sections for the next 21 years (2025-2045) is estimated at approximately $617 million (2025 dollars). In addition, the City’s Transportation Element relies
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
5
9
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 56 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
on WSDOT, Sound Transit, King County Metro and other agencies to fund and implement regional and sub-regional transportation improvement projects, as identified
in Appendix A. Ongoing transportation planning work will include continued refinement of the 20-year transportation plan and costs.
As shown in Table T-3, $422 million (68%) of the City’s transportation costs are for multimodal transportation improvement projects in key corridors throughout the
City. Pedestrian, bicycle, and trail projects are estimated to cost $102 million based on the current plans. The remaining $93 million is needed to fund ongoing
operations, including street overlays, system preservation, traffic signal, signs, implementation of ITS, and overall administration and development of projects.
Table T-3: Summary of 2025-2045 Transportation Costs
Type of Project Costs
(1,000s)
Roadway Projects $ 422,000
Non-Motorized Projects and
Programs $102,000
Preservation, Safety, ITS, and
Project Development Programs $93,000
TOTAL Costs $ 617,000
INVENTORY OF FUNDING SOURCES
Having established a 20-year transportation funding level of $617 million, an annual average funding level of approximately $30 million would be needed to fully
implement the Transportation Element by 2045. Sources of revenue to provide this annual funding need are identified on TableT-5. The forecast revenues are based
on historical data extrapolated out to 2045. From existing transportation revenue sources, the City would be expected to generate $240 million from 2025-2045. This
is approximately 40% of the total estimated costs of the 21 year list of transportation projects and programs.
Table T-4: Summary of 2025-2045 Transportation Revenues
Existing Revenue
Sources
Costs
(1,000s)
Grants $119,000
Business License Fees $52,000
Fuel Taxes $51,000
Transportation Impact
Fees and Sidewalk
Mitigation Payments
$18,000
TOTAL Revenues $240,000
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
6
0
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 57 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Existing revenues are not able to keep pace with transportation costs for several reasons. They include:
Declining revenue available from several existing sources, such as the half-cent gas tax and grants;
Transportation needs and costs growing faster than available revenues;
Local, state, and federal requirements on transportation improvements lengthening the design process and increasing cost;
Increased needs for preservation of the existing infrastructure;
Additional focus on incorporating complete streets concepts into transportation projects which adds costs due to right-of way and street standards;
The undetermined potential for new funding sources; and
The continued inability of regional agencies to address regional transportation needs.
Ongoing transportation planning work will include a review and update of current revenue sources to reflect federal, state, and regional decisions regarding these
revenue sources. Should the City’s transportation funding approach result in shortfalls, the City will reassess its land use plan, level of service standards, and funding
strategies, accordingly.
To help address this shortfall in funding, the City is considering two new funding sources and potential future modifications to the existing Transportation Impact Fee
(TIF) program rates.
Transportation Benefit District (TBD) – The City established a city-wide TBD in August 2023, assumed the responsibilities of the District in October 2023, and
adopted an additional tax of one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of sales/use tax in December 2023 for a period of ten (10) years, as allowed under state law.
This is projected to generate over $3.5 million (2023 dollars) annually over the life of the plan.
Transportation Impact Fee – The City revised its TIF in 2011. As part of that update, the City set the TIF rate per new PM peak hour trip at the maximum rate
developed in the Rate Study (Rate Study for Impact Fees, City of Renton).
The City’s current program is focused on improvements that add capacity to roadways and streets that serve growth. With the recent expansion of the
Washington State Law in 2023 allowing impact fees to be used for non-motorized modes of travel and with the increased focus on completing key segments
of the sidewalk, bicycle, and trails system, the City will be considering integrating other transportation modes into the TIF adapting the fee to a Multimodal
Impact Fee which will be integral to the multimodal concurrency program. Specific rates and projects/costs are yet to be fully defined and would be adopted
as part of a subsequent change to the City’s existing concurrency requirements (RMC 4-6-070). Preliminary estimates suggest such a program could
generate approximately $8 million for separate pedestrian, bicycle, and multi-use trail projects as well as those needed to add capacity to roadways and
streets.
This Element provides a summary of six and 20-year transportation system proposals (see Level of Service Standards, Design, and Concurrency) needed to support
the land use plan. The City has developed a six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that details projects and funding by year for 2025-2030, and is hereby
incorporated by reference. The full 20-year multimodal project list, summarized in Appendix A, is also incorporated by reference.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
6
1
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 58 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: Finance, Investment, and Implementation
Table 13. Finance, Investment, and Implementation Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-66: Ensure the transportation system
funding and implementation program supports
land use policies and distributes transportation
costs equitably.
Policy T-66: Ensure the transportation system
funding and implementation program supports
land use policies, advances equity, inclusion,
sustainability, safety, and distributes
transportation costs equitably.
Vision 2050 consistency
2 Policy T-67: Pursue federal, state and local
sources of funding (e.g. loans, matching funds)
for transportation improvements in an efficient
and equitable manner.
Policy T-67: Pursue federal, state and local sources
of funding (e.g. loans, matching funds) for
transportation improvements in an efficient and
equitable manner.
3 Policy T-68: Use business license fees and
impact fees charged to new development to
fund growth related traffic improvements.
Policy T-68: Use business license fees and impact
fees charged to new development to fund growth
related traffic improvements.
4 Policy T-69: Coordinate equitable public/private
partnerships to help pay for transportation
improvements.
Policy T-69: Coordinate equitable public/private
partnerships to help pay for transportation
improvements.
5 Policy T-70: Seek opportunities for multi-
jurisdictional cooperation to fund transportation
improvements (e.g. joint transportation
mitigation systems or funding mechanism) to
address impact of growth outside municipal
boundaries on the City’s transportation system.
Policy T-70: Seek opportunities for multi-
jurisdictional cooperation to fund transportation
improvements (e.g. joint transportation mitigation
systems or funding mechanism) to address impact
of growth outside municipal boundaries on the
City’s transportation system.
Policy T-X: Pursue alternative transportation
financing methods, such as user fees, tolls, and
other pricing mechanisms to manage and fund the
maintenance, improvement, preservation, and
operation of the transportation system.
Consistency with Vision 2050 (MPP-T-6)
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
6
2
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 59 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
6 Policy T-71: Expedite implementation of
transportation projects that protect
neighborhoods against the impacts of through
traffic, improve HOV flow, increase transit
service, and enhance pedestrian and bicycle
facilities.
Policy T-71: Expedite implementation of
transportation projects that protect neighborhoods
against the impacts of through traffic, improve HOV
flow, increase transit service, and enhance
pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
7 Policy T-72: Reassess the Land Use Element,
Level of Service standard, and funding
strategies if probable funding falls short of
meeting existing needs and to ensure that the
Land Use Element, transportation plans, and
financing plan are coordinated and consistent.
Policy T-72: Reassess the Land Use Element, Level
of Service standard, and funding strategies if
probable funding falls short of meeting existing
needs and to ensure that the Land Use Element,
transportation plans, and financing plan are
coordinated and consistent.
8 Policy T-73: Evaluate establishing a
Transportation Benefit District (TBD) as allowed
under State law.
Policy T-73: Evaluate establishing a Transportation
Benefit District (TBD), as allowed under state law.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
6
3
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 60 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
2015 Discussion: Intergovernmental Coordination
A significant amount of travel that occurs in Renton is regional in nature – with either the origin or destination (sometimes both) outside city limits. Effectively
managing flow within and through the City requires extensive coordination with neighboring jurisdictions, transit service providers, and regional, state, and federal
entities.
Revised Discussion: Intergovernmental Coordination
A significant amount of travel that occurs in Renton is regional in nature – with either the origin or destination (sometimes both) outside city limits. Effectively
managing flow within and through the City requires extensive coordination with neighboring jurisdictions, transit service providers, and regional, state, and federal
entities.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
6
4
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Transportation
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 61 Draft 1.0 Draft Revised: DATE
Policies: Intergovernmental Coordination
Table 14. Intergovernmental Coordination Policies
Ro
w # 2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy T-74: Develop and maintain relationships
between Renton and other agencies and local
jurisdictions for cooperative planning of common
transportation improvements.
Policy T-74: Develop and maintain relationships
between Renton and other agencies and local
jurisdictions for cooperative planning of common
transportation improvements.
2 Policy T-75: Continue to coordinate Renton's
Transportation Element with adjacent
jurisdictions' transportation and land use goals,
countywide policies, regional land use and
transportation plans, and statewide goals
outlined in the GMA.
Policy T-75: Continue to coordinate Renton's
Transportation Element with adjacent jurisdictions'
transportation and land use goals, countywide
policies, regional land use and transportation plans,
and statewide goals outlined in the GMA.
3 Policy T-76: Pursue strategies to address
inconsistencies (i.e. interlocal agreements) and
adjust Renton’s Transportation Element, as
needed.
Policy T-76: Pursue strategies to address
inconsistencies (i.e. interlocal agreements) and
adjust Renton’s Transportation Element, as needed.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
7
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
6
5
o
f
1
8
4
Page 1 of 5
CITY OF RENTON
Community and Economic Development Department
2024 Comprehensive Plan Update: Supplemental Staff Report for Land Use Element
Staff: Angie Mathias, Long Range Planning Manager
Date: July 2, 2024
Applicant or Requestor: Staff
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The city is in the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan, which is a long-term plan that establishes
goals and policies for growth and development in Renton. The Plan guides decision making on a variety
of important topics – including housing and land use, parks, economic development, and transportation.
In order to keep Renton a great place to live, work, and visit, the Comprehensive Plan will include policy
direction to:
• Plan for and accommodate housing for residents and households with all income levels
• Encourage a variety of housing options, such as ADUs and middle housing to increase housing
availability and affordability.
• Identify strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase resiliency to impacts
related to climate change.
• Meet Renton’s equity objectives and ensure that all residents have equitable access to
opportunity.
City staff presented a briefing on the Land Use element, this supplemental staff report addresses a
proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation amendment and rezone of a small area along
Benson Rd. S. and the creation of a new Residential Multi-Family zone that allows 40 dwelling units per
acre. It also addresses the city’s desire to establish two Countywide Centers.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION AMENDMENT AND REZONE
There is an apartment complex located on Benson Road South built in 2014 that developed three of the
ground floor units as live work space in order to satisfy the mixed use requirement of the Commercial
Arterial (CA) zone. The property owner has only been able to secure one tenant over the last ten years
and that single tenant, a barber shop, was not able to remain viable and has closed. The topography of
the area rises sharply making visibility difficult. The property owner would like to bring the site into full
conformance with Code and the most reasonable way to do this is to rezone the property to a zone that
does not require a commercial component to be able to allow residential.
AGENDA ITEM #8. a)
Page 66 of 184
Page 2 of 5 July 2, 2024
The parcel on which this apartment complex
is located is east of Benson Rd. S. It is 2.8
acres in size and there are 119 apartments
units in two buildings. A second parcel
abutting to the west that is .87 acres in size
is where the approximately 7,000 square
foot rental office for the apartments is
located. A third parcel abuts the apartments
to the east. It is a retirement facility that lies
on 4.53 acres and has many buildings. There
are multiple buildings that serve as nursing
home structures for approximately 120
units. There is a 63 unit assisted living
facility, a duplex, and a sixplex that also
provide housing for seniors. This parcel does not have any commercial uses. Both of the residentially
used parcels are built out at approximately 40 dwelling units per acre. All three of these parcels are
currently designated as Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) on the Comprehensive Land Use Map and zoned
CA which is intended to function with commercial uses.
Staff recommends amending the Land Use Designation of these three parcels from Commercial Mixed
Use with Commercial Arterial zoning to Residential High Density (RHD) and rezoned to a new zone called
Residential Multi Family 2 (RMF-2) that is recommended to allow 40 dwelling units per acre.
Across Benson Road South, to the west of
the apartments, there is a single parcel with
the Land Use Designation of CMU and zoned
CA. The current use of the site is an
approximately 35,000 square foot office
building on a 1.3 acre parcel. The area used
for parking for the office building currently is
on three parcels all designated Residential
High Density (RMD) and zoned R-14,
allowing 14 dwelling units per acre. The
parcels in total are approximately 3.5 acres
in size. While the parking is considered an
accessory use to the office building and does
not necessarily need to be identified in the
use table as a permitted use, it would be more consistent to have the parcels associated with parking for
the office and the office itself designated with the same zoning. There is a single parcel to the north of
these parcels that is also designated as RMD and zoned as R-14. The current use is predominately to
serve as an onramp to I-405 from Benson Drive South (SR 515).
AGENDA ITEM #8. a)
Page 67 of 184
Page 3 of 5 July 2, 2024
Staff recommends amending these parcels from Residential High Density to Commercial mixed use and
from R-14 zoning to Commercial Arterial zoning.
Almost all of these parcels are constrained by
steep slopes. In the map shown the yellow
areas have 15-25% slopes, orange areas have
25-40% slopes, red areas have 40-90% slopes,
and purple areas have greater than 90%
slopes.
Slopes greater than 40% are identified as
protected slopes and development is
prohibited on these areas with limited
exceptions such as reasonable use provisions.
Sensitive slopes are those greater than 25%,
but less than 40%. The allowed development
on these areas depends on landslide hazard
which depends on soil type and other factors,
but may only allow limited development. Construction costs also inhibit the redevelopment likelihood of
areas with these types of slopes.
All Comprehensive Plan amendments shall be evaluated on their merits based upon the following (with
staff assessment following in italics):
1. The effect upon the rate of growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the
Comprehensive Plan;
These areas are built out with little capacity to accommodate additional growth over the next 20
years. However, the Land Capacity Analysis done as part of the Comprehensive Plan update
process has identified adequate capacity in other areas of the city. Therefore, an amended
designation and rezone of these parcels does not have an effect of the rate of growth
development, or conversion of land.
2. The effect upon the City’s capacity to provide adequate public facilities;
These two areas are built out with existing uses that are not anticipated to change over the next
20 years. Therefore, there will not be need for the city to provide additional adequate facilities to
these parcels.
3. The effect upon the rate of population and employment growth;
AGENDA ITEM #8. a)
Page 68 of 184
Page 4 of 5 July 2, 2024
It is not anticipated that these Land Use Designation amendments and rezones will have an
effect on the rate of population and/or employment growth.
4. Whether Comprehensive Plan objectives are being met as specified or remain valid and
desirable;
Comprehensive Plan objectives are being met. Although the area is built out, the existing uses
accommodate growth inside the Urban Growth Area.
5. The effect upon general land values and housing costs;
It is not anticipated that these Land Use Designation amendments and rezones will have an
effect on the general land values and/or housing costs.
6. Whether capital improvements or expenditures, including transportation, are being made or
completed as expected;
Metro Rapid Ride I line is anticipated as a transportation improvement that will run along
Benson Drive South (SR 515) has been delayed, it is expected to open in 2026. There are not
other identified capital improvements or expenditures that are not being made or completed as
expected in this vicinity.
7. Whether the initiated amendment conforms to the requirements of the GMA, is internally
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and is consistent with the County-wide Planning
Policies for King County;
The proposed rezones are in conformance with GMA and is consistent with both the Renton
Comprehensive Plan and the Countywide Planning Policies.
8. The effect upon critical areas and natural resource lands;
It is expected that the existing critical areas regulations adequately protect identified areas with
steep slopes.
9. Consistency with locational criteria in the Comprehensive Plan and application requirements
established in this section;
The Comprehensive Plan calls for the RMF zone to be applied to areas greater than one acre in
size where there is existing or vested multifamily housing. Also, when access is from a Principal,
Minor, or Collector arterial road. The proposed rezone to RMF meets these criteria. The CA zone
calls for areas with large surface parking lots and that provide employment opportunities. The
parcels proposed to be rezoned to CA meet this criteria.
10. Consistency with the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan;
The proposed rezones are consistent with the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan.
11. The effect upon other considerations as deemed necessary by the Department. n/a
AGENDA ITEM #8. a)
Page 69 of 184
Page 5 of 5 July 2, 2024
COUNTYWIDE CENTERS DESIGNATION
In the County’s adoption of the Countywide Planning Policies they established for the first time a
Countywide Center designation for urban areas that accommodate concentrations of housing and
employment. They are similar to a Regional Growth Center designation from Puget Sound Regional,
except at a countywide level rather than a four county region. These centers areas within cities that are
expected to accommodate a substantial amount of growth, both housing and employment. Also, by
focusing growth into centers helps achieve goals of a sustainable and equitable community.
Renton submitted two areas for candidates as Countywide Centers, Sunset and the Rainier Grady
Junction TOD area. The County reviewed the areas and recommended some amendments to them. First,
the Sunset area did not have enough Activity Units (# of housing units + #of jobs per acre) in both
existing and planned with only 16 existing and 25 planned. The TOD area also did not have enough
existing or planned Activity Units per acre with 20 existing and 26 planned.
Staff recommends amending the boundaries as shown by the redline on the maps above. The Sunset
area has experienced such significant change in the three years since the Countywide Centers nominations
were made that it currently has 29 activity units per acre. Staff believe that omitting the park located in
the area, which contains no housing units and no jobs the existing and planned activity units will achieve
the minimum 30 activity units. In the TOD area, proposed amendment to the boundary will shift it to 28
Activity Units per acre existing and 38 planned. Additionally, the County indicated in their response to the
city’s nomination that the presence of the interstate as an intervening aspect of the center did not work
to create a “compact, walkable, and transit oriented place”. The proposed amendment to the map would
resolve this concern.
AGENDA ITEM #8. a)
Page 70 of 184
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 1
Draft 3.1 Post PC Draft Revised: June 19, 2024
Housing and
Human
Services
Renton Comprehensive Plan Update Element Policies
Draft
Draft 3.1 Post PC: Updated: June 19, 2024
Summary of Updates
Washington State Law:
▪Include adequate provisions/planning by income band (HB 1220)
▪Include consideration of duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes in urban
growth areas
▪Include identification of capacity of land for housing for government-
assisted housing, housing for moderate, low, very low, and extremely
low-income households, manufactured housing, group homes, foster
care facilities, emergency housing, emergency shelters, permanent
supportive housing
▪Identify local policies and regulations that result in racially disparate
impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing (i.e., zoning that may
have a discriminatory effect, disinvestment, infrastructure availability)
▪Establish policies and regulations to address and begin to undo racially
disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing caused by
local plans and policies
▪Identify areas that may be at a higher risk of displacement and establish
anti-displacement policies
VISION 2050:
▪Increase housing supply and densities to meet the region’s current and
projected needs at all income levels
▪Expand the diversity of housing types for all income levels and
demographic groups
▪Expand capacity for middle housing
▪Promote jobs-housing balance; promote housing choices accessible to
workers
▪Use inclusionary and incentive zoning to provide more affordable
housing when creating additional housing capacity
▪Create and preserve affordable housing near high-capacity transit
▪Develop anti-displacement strategies
▪Promote homeownership opportunities while recognizing historic
inequities in access to homeownership opportunities for communities
of color
▪Identify and begin to undo local policies and regulations that result in
racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing
King County Countywide Planning Policies:
▪Align with existing plans, including VISION 2050 and the Regional
Affordable Housing Task Force Final Report and Recommendations.
▪Redefine Countywide need as the number of homes needed today and
in the future to ensure that no low-income household is cost-burdened.
▪Guide cities and the county through a four-step continuous
improvement process to meet the countywide needs.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
7
1
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 2
▪Establish regular monitoring of regional and jurisdictional progress
through the Affordable Housing Dashboard and leverage new
centralized data infrastructure created by King County staff that
support the AHC.
▪The CPP policy amendments are structured to achieve health and
equity outcomes with five key equity objectives:
▪Equitable processes and outcomes;
▪Increased housing supply, particularly for households with the
greatest needs;
▪Expanded housing options and increased affordability accessible
to transit and employment;
▪Expanded housing and neighborhood choice for all residents; and
▪Housing stability, healthy homes, and health communities.
Plans to be Adopted by Reference:
▪Policy Review and Racial Equity Analysis
▪Support for Ordinance 5983 Sales Tax Funding
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
7
2
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 3
Discussion Revised 2024
All community members need housing and being an inclusive community means having housing available for all. Renton needs quality, fair, and safe housing accessible to
all members of the community. Housing variety, location, and affordability influence a household’s ability to access jobs, schools, and services. Human services can help
support residents to find and maintain stable and healthy dwellings and to meet economic, health, and social needs. Renton’s goals and policies ensure residential
development capacity to accommodate all housing needs and a system of social services and support to prevent hardships associated with housing instability.
The Housing and Human Services Element presents Renton’s goals and policies to meet the Growth Management Act’s (GMA) housing goal to “Plan for and accommodate
housing affordable to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of
existing housing stock.”
The element integrates goals and policies related to human services, because housing and human service needs are often intertwined. Human Services are programs and
strategies that:
▪Support vulnerable or at-risk individuals and families in times of need,
▪Address the social conditions that make people vulnerable or put them at risk, and
▪Foster an effective and efficient system of services.
Human services address needs along a continuum from meeting basic human needs, promoting safe and healthy communities, and assisting people in becoming self-
reliant. While optional under GMA, Renton addresses human services in the Comprehensive Plan to best meet community needs efficiently and effectively.
Sustainable, Inclusive, and Safe Housing
Assessments of Renton’s housing and human service needs were conducted for the Housing Action Plan (2021), Renton Racial Disparate Impacts (2022), and Renton
Community Conditions (2023 update), The assessments find that Renton has the following housing and human service needs.
Renton housing needs include:
▪More affordable housing. Housing prices have increased considerably from the previous recession and the low housing prices experienced in 2012. Housing in
Renton is still generally affordable compared to cities to the North and East, but housing affordability is a widespread challenge, with both renters and
homebuyers challenged to find appropriate housing at affordable price points.
Households spending more than 30% of their income on housing, are considered “cost-burdened.” and households spending more than 50% of their income on
housing are considered “severely cost-burdened.” Due to the high percentage of income spent on housing, these households are at a greater risk of displacement
and likely have difficulties meeting other household necessities, including food, medicine, clothing, and transportation. Approximately one-third (37%) of all
Renton households are either “cost-burdened” or “severely cost-burdened.” Rates of housing cost burden have increased 4 percentage points among renter
households since 2010 (47% in 2010 to 51% in 2021). Rates of renter cost burden are higher for households led by a person of color. About 40% of households of
color reported experiencing housing cost burden compared to 32% of white households.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
7
3
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 4
▪A greater variety of housing sizes and configurations. About half of the housing production in Renton between 2010 and 2020 has been in single-unit, detached
homes, including replacements for depreciated housing stock, infill projects, and new subdivisions on undeveloped land. However, there has also been a notable
increase in the diversity of housing types, with new apartment, multi-plex, and townhome projects. To meet local needs over the coming years, demands for
future growth will require a wide range of housing opportunities for the city. This will include both single-unit and multi-unit development, as well as units sized
for individuals, couples, and families.
▪Housing that is affordable to households with extremely low incomes. There is a gap in rental housing available to households with incomes less than 30% AMI.
There are about 2.5 times the number of households in this income segment than affordable units. As a result, about 84% of extremely low-income households
are facing some level of cost burden, with around 68% paying more than half their income on housing.
Significant support from government agencies and non-profits is required to provide housing for these households. The net revenue received from the residents
of an income-restricted housing development may be considerably lower than market rents. In some cases, this may not even be enough to cover the building's
ongoing expenses. Support is necessary to bridge the gap and ensure that projects remain feasible and sustainable.
▪Opportunities for homeownership. Similar to the Puget Sound Region, Renton has experienced declines in homeownership rates between 2010 and 2020. The
reduction in homeownership is observed across all race and ethnic categories except households headed by a person identifying as American Indian Alaska Native
alone (non-Hispanic) However, the estimate has a significant sampling error due to the small size of the population. While more than two-thirds of Asian
households (69%) live in homes they own, the rate is less than half for Black (29%) and Hispanic or Latino households (27%).
Housing to meet special housing needs. Many special-needs households also require affordable housing choices.
▪People with disabilities. Higher proportions of households with lower incomes have household members with disabilities, with the highest proportions
among households with extremely low-income households. Renton has about 18,000 households that include a member living with a disability. About 18%
of all households have a member with a self-care or individual living limitation and another 30% have another member living with a disability. Persons with
medical or physical disabilities or substance abuse concerns may need support services or a supportive living environment.
▪Veterans: Among the civilian population aged 18 and over in Renton, about 5.9% (4,839 (2021 estimate)) are veterans. In Renton, veterans are more likely
to have risk factors associated with higher levels of housing instability than non-veterans. While these factors would suggest a higher rate of housing
instability, there are avenues of support available to veterans that are not accessible to other households at risk for housing instability. Specifically, access
to federal resources for healthcare and housing through the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), can meet housing and health needs for some, but will
not alleviate all the needs of veterans in the community.
▪Unhoused Populations: The number of people experiencing homelessness in King County grew between 2012 and 2022. Roughly 12,000 people are
experiencing homelessness (2000 point-in-time estimate) in Southeast King County, the area including Renton. For the 2022-2023 school year, Renton had a
larger percentage (3.8%) of unhoused students than Washington state (3.4%). There is an unmet need for flexible, temporary housing assistance to prevent
homelessness.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
7
4
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 5
Encouraging Housing Variety and Opportunity
Renton has a diverse housing stock with a wide range of housing types and prices. This includes new and older detached homes of all sizes, flats, townhouses, low- and mid-
rise apartments and condominiums, and high-density mid-rise apartments.
Renton has a strong sense of place with many established neighborhoods organized around schools, parks, and other institutions. New development in Renton is still
largely infill development. In 2019, 53% of Renton’s housing inventory was detached, single-unit housing. Between 2011 and 2019, production shifted to a greater
percentage of attached housing in buildings greater than 5 units, but detached housing is still a considerable part of housing development. The communities of Benson,
Valley, Talbot, and the City Center have seen greater increases in attached housing units since 2011 due to the availability of infill sites in zones that allow moderate-density
development.
Meeting current and future needs will require a wide range of housing opportunities to provide housing capacity for residents of all income levels. Renton must plan for its
share of total countywide future housing needs for moderate-, low-, very low-, and extremely low-income households, as well as emergency housing, emergency shelters,
and permanent supportive housing specified by King County Countywide Planning Policies,
The King County Countywide Planning Policies require jurisdictions to analyze housing affordability according to income groups benchmarked against King County’s median
income for all households. More specifically, the policies define housing need based on affordability levels equal to 30%, 50%, and 80% of the County’s Area Median Income
(AMI). Figure 1 shows the distribution of Renton’s (2020) 43,362 housing units across affordability levels. Countywide Planning Policies direct Renton, other cities, and King
County to work collectively to meet low- and moderate-income housing needs countywide. Renton’s 2044 housing target is 60,362 housing units, which represents an
increase of 17,000 units above the 2020 housing stock. Notably, about half (46%) of Renton’s net new need between 2020 and 2044 is for units affordable to households
earning 50% of AMI or less, with 37% of the need for households at or below 30% of AMI. In addition, Renton also must plan for capacity to accommodate more than 3,200
emergency housing beds by 2044.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
7
5
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 6
Figure 1. Renton Housing Supply and Future Housing Need 2020 – 2044
Source: King County, 2022; Renton, 2023; BERK 2023
Addressing Racially Disparate Impacts and Displacement
Renton has long been a home to waves of new Americans, and today, it is a diverse community in which no one racial or ethnic group makes up most of the population.
Renton is both proud of its diversity and recognizes the historical injustices endured by people who are Black, Indigenous, or Community of Color (BIPOC). A review of key
factors of access to housing and opportunity demonstrates long-standing racial disparities in Renton. For example, BIPOC households experience:
▪Lower household incomes. Renton’s households led by a person who identifies as BIPOC have lower median incomes than Renton’s households led by someone
who identifies as White and Asian. Also, more than half of households (53%) led by a person who identifies as American Indian or Alaska Native have household
incomes of less than 80% of King County's median income.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
7
6
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 7
▪Higher rates of housing cost burden. Approximately 40% of Renton’s households headed by a person who identifies as BIPOC are experiencing a housing cost
burden, compared to 32% of households headed by a person who identifies as White, not Hispanic. More than half of renter households headed by a person who
identifies as Black or Hispanic are experiencing housing cost-burden (53%) compared to renter households headed by a person who identifies as White (43%).
▪Lower rates of homeownership. Due to historic and current discrimination, BIPOC households have been denied equal access to homeownership, resulting in
persistent disparities in homeownership and exclusion from neighborhoods that have predominantly owner-occupied housing. The University of Washington’s
Seattle Civil Rights & Labor History Project identified 10 areas with racially restrictive covenants within Renton’s current city boundaries. While more than two-
thirds of households headed by a person who identifies as Asian (69%) live in homes they own, the rate is less than half for households headed by a person who
identifies as Black (29%) and Hispanic or Latino households (27%). Like the Puget Sound Region, Renton has experienced declines in homeownership rates
between 2010 and 2020.
▪Potential Displacement Risk. Displacement risk was assessed by census tract based on the social vulnerability of current residents, evidence of demographic
change associated with gentrification, and changes in market prices relative to county-wide patterns. This assessment provides an initial high-level screening of
potential displacement risk. Renton includes many highly diverse census tracts and many with high proportions of renters and low-income households compared
to census tracts across King County, which is associated with higher displacement risk. The county-wide pattern has been increasing proportions of BIPOC
individuals and proportionally more households needing affordable housing (incomes at 60% or 80% of AMI) since 2010. Renton already had higher rates of these
factors in 2010 and, in most cases, has not had the proportional increases seen county-wide. While the proportional decrease has been lower than county-wide
patterns, Renton's increasing numbers of BIPOC people and lower-income households suggests a lack of displacement risk above county-wide trends. However,
there are some neighborhoods that demonstrate potential displacement risk:
The analysis indicated areas of higher displacement risk in the Highlands Planning Area. The Highlands Planning Area has higher rates of social vulnerability
associated with displacement relative to county-wide patterns. It has the highest number of BIPOC-identified people compared to all other planning areas, as
well as high proportions of renters and lower average household incomes compared to county-wide patterns. These combined demographic factors are
associated with higher displacement risk. An examination of demographic change finds that other parts of the county have grown proportionally more diverse
since 2010 than the census tracts within the Highlands Planning Area, but the area was already diverse in 2010 and has grown more diverse over the 10-year
period. The increase in BIPOC population suggests a lack of gentrification. The biggest factor driving the elevated displacement risk appears to be higher rent
increases through 2021 than in other areas parts of the county. More than a third of Highlands Survey Respondents reported concern about gentrification (29%)
and feeling financial pressures related to affordability (37%).
The census tract in the Cedar River Planning Area, adjacent to the Highlands Planning Area, demonstrates a demographic pattern like the Highlands Planning
Area but with higher rental price appreciation between 2010 and 2021. However, almost three-quarters of households in the Cedar River Planning area are
homeowners (73% of households). While increasing costs are more associated with displacement for renters, about two-thirds of Cedar River Survey
Respondents, who were mostly homeowners, listed housing costs as a primary housing challenge facing the community.
The Benson Planning Area includes a larger portion of the census tract associated with the Cedar River Planning Area and areas of south-central Renton. The
areas of the Benson Planning Area associated with higher displacement risk include:
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
7
7
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 8
▪The northern areas east of the SR 167 and Interstate 405 interchange around Nelsen Middle School and the Renton Academy. This area has higher
proportions of renter households and lower median household income compared to county-wide trends, though demographic changes have been following
county-wide patterns. The area was considered an affordable area in 2015 compared to county-wide patterns, but rental costs have accelerated faster than
county-wide patterns since 2010.
▪The eastern areas of the Benson Planning Area, along the city border with Fairwood, including the residential areas around Renton Park Elementary School
and Lindbergh Senior High School, show higher rates of displacement risk. The area is among the most diverse in King County, with a greater representation
among people identifying as Black or Hispanic than in neighboring census tracts. The area has maintained its high proportion of BIPOC households but has
seen a reduction in the number of households with household incomes below 80% and 60% county-wide Area Median Income between 2010 and 2021.
This could be due to an increase in household income or an out-migration of lower-income households and an in-migration of higher-income households.
However, increases in local rents are like county-wide patterns, which is contrary to the evidence of gentrification. Benson Survey Respondents expressed
concerns about housing costs and gentrification, and about a quarter reported that their community is leaving the area (23%).
The Valley Planning Area is largely commercial and industrial land, with some residential population at the northern border in the Earlington Park area. Relative
to county-wide patterns, the residents in the area are predominantly renters and are headed by a BIPOC-identified person, leading to a high displacement risk
based on demographic characteristics alone. The area has increased its number of BIPOC people and low-income households between 2010 and 2021, suggesting
a lack of gentrification. The area has lower rental prices compared to county-wide trends, and market prices have been tracking or growing slower than county-
wide patterns.
Remedies
Renton has a multilevel approach to addressing racial disparities and achieving its vision of an inclusive city that offers opportunity, resilience, and equitable outcomes for
all to ensure social, economic, environmental and racial justice.
1.Increase housing and housing options. BIPOC communities are disproportionately burdened when housing is insufficient to meet the need for housing, resulting in
higher rates of housing cost burden and loss of wealth-building opportunities through homeownership. These disparities persist and accrue over generations. Renton’s
primary strategy for addressing observed racialized housing disparities is to ensure sufficient capacity for housing to meet the needs of all economic segments of the
community.
2.Strengthen and institutionalize low-barrier strategies for community participation. In 2015, Renton established the Mayor's Inclusion Task Force (MITF) to increase
its accessibility to and partnership with the diverse ethnic and cultural communities that comprise Renton. Comprised of representatives of Renton’s ethnic and
cultural communities, the MITF helps to facilitate dialogue and enhance understanding, trust, respect, and representation to create a culture of inclusion in the
community. The MITF members identify barriers to inclusion, advise on strategies to promote inclusion, and facilitate communication and understanding about city
endeavors within their respective communities.
3.Equity review of potential policy and regulatory decisions. In 2021, Renton established the Equity Commission to advise the city council on equity issues and to
review city policies, programs, and practices to identify and remove barriers to equitable outcomes.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
7
8
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 9
4.Identify and track outcomes. The Human Services Strategic Plan & Funding Strategy (2024 – 2026) includes a commitment to tracking key community conditions to
improve the understanding of community needs, strengthen the response to those needs, and align grant funding to identified community needs. Housing specific
conditions include:
a.Change in housing costs compared to reference jurisdictions (sales and rental prices).
b.The percentage of Renton households that can affordably purchase a home
c.Housing cost burden (by tenure)
d.Number of subsidized rental units
5.Community planning. Renton uses a Community Planning approach to give the community a greater voice in planning and decision-making processes. Through the
community planning process, communities set the vision and goals for their respective areas and participate in identifying challenges and opportunities. The city can
identify community preferences, needed protective measures, and community-driven anti-displacement strategies through community planning. Because community
planning focuses on a defined area it enables Renton to identify and prioritize the involvement of underrepresented and historically marginalized communities.
6.Incentivize for affordable housing. Renton supports the development of affordable housing by using its policy-making authority to reduce costs in exchange for the
community benefit of affordable housing.
a.Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE). Renton offers an 8-year tax exemption for any development in the Sunset and Downtown Areas and a 12-year exemption for
developments in which 20% of the units are affordable.
b.Bonus Densities. In higher-density residential and mixed-use zones, a project may receive bonus density for allocating some of the units to be affordable.
c.Waived Fees. A project may receive waived building permits, plan review, mitigation, or inspection fees in exchange for including affordable units.
d.Reduced Parking. In the Downtown area, buildings with affordable units are required to provide only 1 stall for every 4 affordable units, with a maximum of 1.75
spaces per unit.
7.Protect community members vulnerable to displacement or housing insecurity.
a.Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) Zoning. The RMH zone is intended to protect established manufactured home parks and to expand the variety of
affordable housing types available within the city. The zoning designation restricts the conversion of Manufactured Home Parks to other uses.
b.Rental Registration Program (RRP). Renton implemented the RRP to ensure the maintenance of quality rental housing within the City. The RRP requires landlords
and property managers to register all residential rental properties located in the City annually, complete a compliance checklist, and maintain required licenses.
c.Housing Repair Assistance. Renton provides grants for minor home repairs to eligible Renton residents to improve the environmental health and safety of
citizens' homes.
d.Homeownership information and referral. Renton values homeownership opportunity as an important component of an inclusive community and recognizes
that historic practices and policies have led to lasting inequities in homeownership, particularly for communities of color. Renton aims to broaden
homeownership opportunities for all residents by providing information on loan and down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers, veterans, and
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
7
9
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 10
residents with disabilities. Renton is also leveraging funding and surplus public property to create affordable homeownership opportunities for income-qualified
households. Community input favors promoting greater production of new, lower-cost, for-sale housing to provide homeownership opportunities for moderate-
and low-income households, including a greater proportion of Black and Hispanic/Latino households, to access homeownership.
8.Collaborate with regional partners to address county-wide housing need. The City does not develop or manage low-income housing directly but works with
authorities, non-profit organizations, and other partners to provide subsidized housing options. Renton also participates in my regional and local efforts to broaden
access to affordable housing.
▪Renton is a founding member of the South King Housing and Homeless Partners (SKHHP). SKHHP is a joint board formed by an interlocal agreement and
includes Renton, Auburn, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Federal Way, Kent, Normandy Park, Tukwila, and King County. The mission is to work together
and share resources to increase access to affordable housing for South King County residents.
▪Renton has an 80+ year partnership with the Renton Housing Authority (RHA) to provide quality, affordable housing to people in Renton. Renton works
closely with RHA and its resident/tenants to establish the long-term vision and revitalization of Sunset Terrace and other locations in the Sunset Area.
▪Renton staff participate on the Affordable Housing Committee in their effort to implement the Regional Affordable Housing Task Force’s five-year action
plan.
▪The City also participates in the King County Joint Recommendations Committee (JRC) which allocates funding for affordable housing.
9.Fund affordable housing.
a.SHB 1406. Renton exercises its right to receive 0.0073% of King County’s qualified tax revenue, which it pools with other cities through the SKHHP to produce
affordable housing.
b.Sales tax for Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders (HB 1590). Renton implemented this sales tax in January 2021 and the City is currently coordinating how
to leverage this funding effectively to meet local housing and human services goals.
Figure 2. Summary of Housing Strategies and Remedies
Renton’s Plan for Growth
Renton’s land supply of vacant, underutilized, and re-developable land in its neighborhoods and mixed-use centers will accommodate its 2044 growth targets, as shown in
Figure 3.,
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
8
0
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 11
Figure 3. Renton Housing Growth Targets (2020 - 2024) Compared to Housing Pipeline and Capacity (since 2020)
Renton’s plan for growth, detailed in the Land Use Element, allocates land use designations to facilitate a range of housing types across all affordability levels where they
are supported by complete neighborhoods, local amenities, and transit options.
By providing for housing variety, Renton:
▪Accommodates housing at all affordability levels. The cost of housing is driven by many factors, including the cost of land, construction costs, operational
overhead, and the supply of housing relative to the demand. To support housing at all affordability levels, Renton’s plan for growth includes higher density
housing in neighborhoods with transit and services, a greater variety of housing types in established neighborhoods, and partnerships with non-profit housing
providers and regional coalitions to support housing at affordability levels not met by the private market. In addition, promoting more housing stock that supports
upward mobility frees up lower-cost units for households needing greater affordability.
▪Prevents housing instability and economic displacement. Households experience housing instability when their income and resources are insufficient to cover
the cost of housing and other basic needs. Households may “double up” and share housing with another household in crowded conditions. Others may stretch
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
8
1
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 12
their housing budgets too far due to a lack of options. Forms of shared housing and accessory dwelling units, can be a source of affordable housing for some
households and offer housing stability to others by providing income for homeowners to help pay their mortgage or allowing older households to age in place..
▪Meets housing needs over a person’s life cycle. Renton is committed to providing a livable community where all generations have value, thrive, and age with
respect. Renton’s older residents express a strong desire to stay in their current community for as long as possible. As people age housing needs change due to
changing household configurations, changing lifestyle preferences, a desire to reduce the burden of home maintenance, or changing sensory or mobility
conditions. Increasing the diversity of Renton’s housing supply in existing neighborhoods with a greater variety of styles and price ranges will better serve all
resident needs.
▪Improves mobility. Encouraging housing where there is a variety of transportation options or increasing the density in areas served by public transportation can
improve the viability of transit and provide better access to employment, recreation, and other services.
▪Meets special housing needs. A variety of housing choices allows persons and households with special needs, including seniors, people with disabilities, large or
extended families, and unhoused persons to have access to stable and supportive housing choices.
Expands opportunities for homeownership. Many Renton residents express a preference for homeownership, but homeownership rates have fallen with greater
reductions among BIPOC populations. Large, detached houses are expensive to build, to maintain, and often require households to absorb additional
transportation costs. Increasing the variety of housing types broadens who can access homeownership in primarily two ways. First, by broadening the variety of
housing sizes and price points through a greater variety of housing forms. Secondly, the greater variety of housing form and arrangement allows households to
approach homeownership in innovative ways. For example, buying a house that provides income from an backyard cottage or partnering with family members to
purchase a multi-unit home.
Goals
Table 1. Sustainable, Inclusive, and Safe Housing Goals
Row #2015 Goal Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 HHS-A: Adopt best available housing practices and
implement innovative techniques to advance the
provision of affordable, fair, healthy, and safe
housing for renters, homeowners, and the
homeless. By the end of year 2020, adopt a
strategic housing plan tailored to achieve this goal.
HHS-A: Adopt best available housing practices and
implement innovative techniques to advance the
provision of affordable, fair, healthy, and safe housing
for renters, homeowners, and people experiencing
homelessness
▪Revised for inclusive language.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
8
2
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 13
Row
#2015 Goal Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
2 HHS-B: Ensure a variety of housing types are
available within the City that meet the needs of
the present without compromising the needs of
future generations.
HHS-B: Ensure the availability of a variety of housing
types that meet all housing needs equitably and
sustainably
▪Revised for clarity.
3 HHS-H: Actively work to increase the availability of
healthy, equitable, and affordable housing for
people in all demographic groups and at all income
levels and promote a balance of housing and the
amenities needed by residents at a neighborhood
level, such as childcare, availability of fresh food,
recreational opportunities, and medical care.
HHS-H: Increase the availability of safe, equitable, and
affordable housing for people in all demographic
groups and at all income levels and promote a balance
between housing and the amenities needed by
residents at a neighborhood level, such as childcare,
fresh food availability, recreational opportunities, and
medical care.
▪Moved from the previous “mobility” section. Revised
to remove extraneous clauses and to align with
current policy intent.
4 --HHS-X: Provide sufficient capacity to accommodate
the 20-year housing growth targets at all income
bands.
▪Added goal to meet GMA requirements.
5 --HHS-X: Implement policies and practices to address
and undo racial disparities and exclusion in housing
and promote equitable housing ownership and rental
housing opportunities.
▪Added goal to meet GMA requirements.
6 --HHS-X: Track housing outcomes for meeting housing
targets for all economic segments and addressing and
undoing racially disparate impacts, and mitigating
hardships related to displacement. Participate in
regional data tracking and report metrics in periodic
updates for the Comprehensive Plan.
▪Added goal to meet GMA requirements.
7 HHS-C: Increase the stability of neighborhoods by
fostering long-term homeownership, property
maintenance, and investments in existing housing.
HHS-C: Mitigate displacement pressure caused by
market forces by fostering homeownership
opportunity and encouraging investments in existing
housing.
▪Moved from previous section on “Preservation.”
Modified to focus on mitigating displacement to
make the policy intent clear and align with GMA
requirements.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
8
3
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 14
Policies
Table 2. Sustainable, Inclusive, and Safe Housing Policies
Row #2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 Policy HHS-3: Work with other jurisdictions and
organizations, including the Renton Housing
Authority and non-profit housing developers, to
address the need for housing to be affordable to
very low-income households. This housing should
focus on accessibility, mobility, and proximity to
social services.
Policy HHS-3: Work with other jurisdictions and
organizations, including the Renton Housing
Authority, the South King County Housing and
Homelessness Partners, and non-profit housing
developers, to address the need for housing to be
affordable to extremely low, very low, and moderate-
income households. This housing should focus on
accessibility, mobility, and proximity to social services.
▪Updated to include Renton’s participations in the
regional affordable housing partnership and to
match statute language for affordable housing.
2 Policy HHS-5: Work collaboratively with local,
regional, state, and federal public and private
sector entities to enhance resources and secure
financial and other types of support for housing
programs.
Policy HHS-5: Work with local, regional, state, and
federal public and private sector entities to enhance
resources and secure financial and other types of
support for housing programs.
▪Revised to remove extraneous phrase.
3 Policy HHS-2: Collaborate with financial
institutions, organizations, and individuals who
provide affordable housing to acquire and
rehabilitate foreclosed units to be used as long-
term affordable or subsidized housing.
Policy HHS-2: Collaborate with financial institutions,
organizations, and individuals who provide affordable
housing to acquire and rehabilitate foreclosed units to
be used as long-term affordable or subsidized
housing.
▪No change proposed.
4 Policy HHS-6: Implement inclusionary zoning
provisions and other techniques that result in a
range of housing types, at different densities, and
prices in new developments that address the
housing needs of all people at all stages of life,
including vulnerable populations.
Policy HHS-6: Implement zoning provisions and other
techniques that allow for a range of housing types, at
different densities, and prices, that address the
housing needs of all people, at all affordability levels,
at all stages of life, including vulnerable populations.
▪Revised to align with current state law.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
8
4
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 15
Row
#2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
5 Policy HHS-9: Foster and locate new housing in
proximity to Employment Centers and streets that
have public transportation systems in place, and
complements existing housing.
Policy HHS-9: Encourage new housing, including
affordable and special needs housing, in walking
distance to Employment Centers, shopping, and
streets with existing and planned multimodal
transportation facilities.
▪Revised to remove “complements existing housing”
due to potential discriminatory impacts.
▪Revised to broaden public transportation to include
active transportation.
6 Policy HHS-10: In collaboration with the County,
other cities, and community stakeholders, develop
strategies to achieve a diverse housing stock that is
affordable for the following minimum percentages
of the City’s households:
Total Households AMI
12 % Below 30% (very low-income)
12 % 30 to 50% (low-income)
16 % 51 to 80% (moderate-income)
Policy HHS-10: In collaboration with the County, the
South King Housing and Homelessness Partners,
regional housing authorities, other cities, and
community stakeholders, develop strategies to
achieve a diverse housing stock that meets Renton’s
housing targets for each economic segment.
▪Updated to align with current GMA and King County
Countywide Planning Policies.
▪Made specific mention of SKHHP and RHA.
7 Policy HHS-23: Support the link between land
development and physical activity by increasing
options for transit use, walking, and bicycling, such
as providing physical connections between
residential areas and schools and/or commercial
development.
▪Addressed in the transportation and land use
elements.
8 Policy HHS-24: Support the development of
housing and neighborhoods that are sited,
designed, constructed, and maintained to promote
environmentally healthy and safe living.
“Environmental heath,” in this context, includes
factors of the natural and built environment that
affect human health, such as physical, chemical,
and biological factors external to a person.
Policy HHS-24: Support the development of housing
and neighborhoods that are sited, designed,
constructed, and maintained to promote an
environment that supports healthy and safe living.
▪Revised for clarity and to remove “environmental
health” definition due to potential confusion with
the term being applied in other elements of the plan
with different meaning (i.e., climate).
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
8
5
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 16
Row
#2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
9 Policy HHS-25: Plan and construct a transportation
system that links residents to services, such as
childcare, healthcare, and places of work.
Transportation systems should include
opportunities for various modes of transportation,
including automobiles, public transit, walking, and
cycling.
Policy HHS-25: Plan and construct a transportation
system that links residents to services, such as
childcare, healthcare, and places of work.
Transportation systems should include opportunities
for various modes of transportation, including
vehicles, public transit, walking, and cycling.
▪Updated for consistency in word choice.
10 Policy HHS-26: Encourage construction of
universally designed units, supportive housing
arrangements, and transitional housing in close
proximity (within one-quarter mile) to public
transportation.
Policy HHS-26: Encourage construction of universally
designed units, supportive housing arrangements, and
transitional housing in close proximity (within one-
quarter mile) to public transportation.
▪No change proposed.
11 Policy HHS-8: Continue to allow Accessory
Dwelling Units in single family residential areas and
ensure they are compatible with the existing
neighborhood.
Policy HHS-8: Support the development of accessory
dwelling units in residential areas and ensure they are
compatible with neighborhood design standards.
▪Strengthened to align with new requirements and
revised for consistent capitalization and to reduce
subjectivity.
12 Policy HHS-14: Provide technical assistance and
access to resources for housing adaptations and
remodels to allow people to age or remain in place
as their circumstances change.
Policy HHS-14: Provide technical assistance and access
to resources for housing adaptations and remodels to
allow people to age or remain in place as their
circumstances change.
▪Moved from previous section on housing
preservation.
13 --Policy HHS-X: Expand anti-displacement strategies in
collaboration with residents and community
organizations.
▪Added policy to address displacement.
14 Policy HHS-1: Provide resource assistance to
potential new homeowners, homeowners facing
foreclosure, and others in danger of losing their
housing.
Policy HHS-1: Prevent household displacement and
encourage households to enter homeownership by
referring households to resources and supporting
housing assistance providers.
▪Revised policy to more clearly focus on displacement
prevention.
15 Policy HHS-4: Promote homeownership
opportunities for households of all incomes.
Policy HHS-4: Promote homeownership opportunities
for households of all incomes.
▪No change proposed.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
8
6
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Discussion Revised 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 17
Row
#2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
16 Policy HHS-7: Continue to regulate manufactured
housing the same as site built housing. Also,
maintain manufactured housing developments
that meet the following criteria:
1) The development provides market rate housing
alternatives for moderate- and low-income
households.
2) The housing is maintained and certified as built
to the International Building Code and Federal
Department of Housing and Urban Development
standards.
3) Site planning includes pedestrian amenities,
landscaping, and a community facility.
Policy HHS-7: Regulate manufactured housing the
same as site-built housing and apply manufactured
home park zoning to reduce risk of conversion of
Manufactured Home Parks to other uses when
developments meet the following criteria:
1) The development provides market rate housing
alternatives for moderate- low-, and very low-income
households.
2) The housing is maintained and certified as built to
the International Building Code and Federal
Department of Housing and Urban Development
standards.
3) Site planning includes pedestrian amenities,
landscaping, and a community facility.
▪Revised to remove extraneous clauses and
incorporate inclusive language.
17 Policy HHS-11: Utilize the City’s authority to
rehabilitate housing to prevent neighborhood
blight or eliminate unsound structures.
Policy HHS-11: Utilize the City’s authority to
rehabilitate housing to prevent health and safety risks
or eliminate unsound structures.
▪Moved from previous section on housing
preservation.
18 Policy HHS-12: Encourage expansion of programs
that result in home repair, weatherization, and
other energy-efficient improvements to owner-
occupied and rental housing, and promote
additional funding for these programs at the state
and federal level.
Policy HHS-12: Encourage expansion of programs that
result in home repair, weatherization, and other
energy-efficient improvements to owner-occupied
and rental housing, and promote additional funding
for these programs at the state and federal level.
▪Moved from previous section on housing
preservation.
▪
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
8
7
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Effective and Accessible Human Services Discussion 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 18
Effective and Accessible Human Services Discussion 2024
Human Services are those efforts targeted directly to individuals and families to meet basic needs and address a variety of physical, social, and economic needs. The City of
Renton has the following six priority areas that may change or expand as needs change.
▪Basic Needs. Includes food, clothing, housing stability services (such as rent and/or utility assistance), legal services, and meal programs.
▪Connector Services. Includes information and referral, transportation, advocacy, case management, cultural navigators, and other services that connect residents
to services.
▪Domestic Violence/Sexual Assault Services. All services related to sexual assault and domestic violence, including legal assistance and shelter.
▪Economic Opportunity/Self Sufficiency. Includes job training; programs that help those with barriers to employment or other forms of economic opportunity that
can improve, prevent, or reduce needs for social service and housing supports; youth programs; mentoring; and after school programs.
▪Health and Wellness. Includes physical, mental, and dental health services, counseling, therapy, day health programs, and chore services.
▪Homeless Services/Housing. Includes shelters, homeless outreach, transitional housing, and emergency housing.
Human services must address the diverse and emerging needs of the community through a complete system of services. The City continuously engages service providers
and community organizations in dialogue regarding the functioning of the present service systems. The City’s plays five primary roles in community partnerships that
promote safety, health, and security and are inclusive, integrated, respectful of cultural and linguistic differences, foster equity and dignity, and provide emotional support
for vulnerable and marginalized residents.
▪Inspire: Highlight programs and providers that are making a difference and advocate for increased funding and attention to the issues.
▪Understand and Evaluate: Assess community needs on an ongoing basis, including through broad stakeholder engagement and tracking reported outcomes from
agencies that receive funding.
▪Educate: Communicate an understanding of community needs to stakeholders and promote available resources and solutions.
▪Connect: Build a network of internal and external stakeholders through convening and referrals, and advocate for and support a systems approach to meeting
community needs.
▪Invest: Prioritize the allocation of public funds to responsively address community needs, with a focus on prevention and stabilization for residents in crisis.
The Human Services Division distributes general funds to local non-profit organizations to serve the needs of Renton residents. The City partners with schools, businesses,
libraries, service providers, local faith-based entities, and others to address the human service needs of Renton residents. The City participates in local and regional human
service efforts to address needs in the community.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
8
8
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Effective and Accessible Human Services Discussion 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 19
Goals
Table 3. Effective and Accessible Human Services Goals
Row #2015 Goal Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 HHS-F: Enable individuals to meet their basic
physical, economic, and social needs by promoting
an effective and equitable human services delivery
system that enhances their quality of life.
HHS-F: Promote an effective and equitable human
services delivery system that assists all community
members in meeting their basic physical, economic,
and social needs and enhances their quality of life.
▪Revised for clarity.
2 HHS-E: Actively participate in local, regional, state,
and federal programs to address human services
needs in the region and in Renton.
▪Moved to policies.
3 HHS-D: Partner with the community to help
provide services and resources so that all residents
have food, clothing, and shelter, and have the
opportunity to live a healthy, active, safe, and
sustainable lifestyle. To achieve this goal, adopt a
strategic human services plan that furthers the
ability of residents to develop to their fullest
potential.
.▪Moved to policies.
Policies
Table 4. Effective and Accessible Human Services Policies
Row
#
2015 Policy Proposed Language ▪Change Purpose or Rationale
1 --Policy HHS-XX: Participate in local, regional, state, and
federal programs to address human services needs in
the region and in Renton.
▪Revised to remove extraneous clause.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
8
9
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Effective and Accessible Human Services Discussion 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 20
Row
#
2015 Policy Proposed Language ▪Change Purpose or Rationale
2 --Policy HHS-XX: Partner with the community to help
provide services and resources so that all residents
have access to food, clothing, and shelter, and an
opportunity to live a healthy, active, safe, and
sustainable lifestyle.
▪Revised to remove extraneous clause.
3 --Policy HHS-XX: Encourage a network of human
services for the diverse needs of Renton’s residents
that are easily accessible and in proximity to public
transportation options.
▪Revised to emphasize human services that respond
to Renton’s diverse needs.
▪Kept reference to transit to keep policy aligned to
Land Use Element and PSRC Vision 2050
Policy HHS-XX. Raise awareness of community housing
and human services needs through conducting timely
Community Conditions assessments, disseminating
community data to partners and stakeholders, and
collaborating with partners to identify and respond to
changing needs and demographics in Renton.
▪Reflects Human Services Strategic Plan Initiative #1
(bullets 1 & 2), Initiative #2 (bullets 4), Initiative #3
(bullets 3 and 4)
Policy HHS-XX. Participate in the Human Services
Funding Collaborative (HSFC) to support regional
coordination for addressing human service needs and
increase accessibility of human service funding for
services providers.
▪Reflects Human Services Strategic Plan prescribed
funding process.
▪Addresses KC CPP PF-18
Policy HHS-XX. Foster a culture of inclusivity and
address barriers to service access through
scholarships and reduced fees for city programs,
translation and interpretation services, improved
referral processes, and maintain updated community
resource lists.
▪Reflects Human Services Strategic Plan Initiative #2
and the current Renton Business Plan
▪Addresses C CPP FW-6: Enable culturally and
linguistically appropriate equitable access to
programs and services and help connect residents to
service options, particularly for those most
disproportionately cost-burdened or historically
excluded.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
9
0
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Effective and Accessible Human Services Discussion 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 21
Row
#
2015 Policy Proposed Language ▪Change Purpose or Rationale
Policy HHS-XX. Convene the Human Services Advisory
Committee, comprised of diverse representatives
from Renton, to advise on human services funding
priorities.
▪Reflects Human Services Strategic Plan prescribed
funding process.
Table 5. Housing Preservation Policies
Row
#2015 Policy Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
3 Policy HHS-13: Promote housing development in
proximity to the City’s Employment Centers and
other areas of the City that have jobs and work
opportunities, or the potential for future job
growth.
▪Covered by goals listed under Sustainable, Inclusive,
and Safe Housing
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
9
1
o
f
1
8
4
Element Review ▪ Housing and Human Services ▪ Effective and Accessible Human Services Discussion 2024
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2024 22
Table 6. Mobility Goals
Row #2015 Goal Proposed Language Change Purpose or Rationale
1 HHS-G: Make land use decisions that provide
increased options for healthy living in Renton.
▪Removed due to redundancy with other Housing
Element and Land Use Element goals.
3 HHS-I: Improve mobility and transportation
options for Renton residents to increase access to
jobs and services, reduce household costs, and
maintain a sustainable lifestyle.
▪Removed due to redundancy with Land Use and
Climate Element goals.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
Pa
g
e
9
2
o
f
1
8
4
City of Renton
SUPPORT FOR ORDINANCE 5983 SALES TAX FUNDING
AN ADENDUM TO THE HOUSING ACTION PLAN
August 2021 Drafted xx 2024 Adopted
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 93 of 184
2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1000
Seattle, Washington 98121
P (206) 324-8760
www.berkconsulting.com
“Helping Communities and Organizations Create Their Best Futures”
Founded in 1988, we are an interdisciplinary strategy and analysis firm providing integrated, creative and
analytically rigorous approaches to complex policy and planning decisions. Our team of strategic planners,
policy and financial analysts, economists, cartographers, information designers and facilitators work together to
bring new ideas, clarity, and robust frameworks to the development of analytically-based and action-oriented
plans.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 94 of 184
i
Summary of Recommendations
On October 5, 2020, Renton City Council adopted Ordinance 5983 to authorize an additional sales and
use tax for affordable housing, behavioral health, and housing-related services under RCW
82.14.530, which was passed with House Bill 1590. The research in this report informs a series of
recommendations to the City to guide the use of this 0.1% sales tax funding, as well as longer-term
questions in program monitoring and evaluation.
The research in this report includes a review of available statistics on overall needs for affordable
housing, emergency and transitional housing needs for people experiencing homelessness, and behavioral
health services. Additionally, major providers related to these areas were interviewed to compile
information on current trends and needs in the community.
Based on the research findings, the following recommendations are provided for allocations of funding
over time.
The focus should be on acquiring strategic resources, including housing units and properties for new
development, in conjunction with available partners (e.g., Renton Housing Authority, local non-profits,
private equity). Additionally, pilot programs are also proposed to test other support programs. Major
allocations include:
Overall management, including engagement and consultation with local stakeholders, and regular
reporting.
Strategic leveraging of City resources to acquire housing units or land for future development, to be
coordinated with available partners.
Development of a permanent emergency shelter, potentially with supportive services such as a
meal program, laundry and hygiene facilities, and navigation services.
Capital and maintenance funding to develop affordable housing with local partners, including the
Renton Housing Authority (RHA) and local nonprofits (potentially through a competitive application
process). This would also include joint regional facilities with neighboring jurisdictions, potentially
through South King Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP) or individual agreements.
Maintenance of behavioral health field response as a pilot program, with a review of the
associated outcomes.
A pilot program for additional behavioral health services for Renton residents, granted through a
contract with a local provider.
A pilot program for rental assistance, coordinated with an external partner to provide supporting
funds to recipients in the community at risk of housing instability.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 95 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment ii
Development of affordable housing on banked land with available housing partners.
Additional funding support for affordable housing development by the Renton Housing Authority,
and other partners. Funding should also be allocated to address longer-term maintenance and
operations of the facilities acquired under this program.
The development of an additional emergency shelter, potentially as a regional response to meet
more specialized needs, coordinated with neighboring communities.
A review and adjustment of pilot programs, including the behavioral health services (including field
response) and rental assistance programs.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 96 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment iii
Table of Contents
Summary of Recommendations ....................................................................................................... i
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................ iii
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1
Context Overview ........................................................................................................................ 2
Legislation ............................................................................................................................... 2
Current Support ........................................................................................................................ 3
Data Review .............................................................................................................................. 10
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 10
Housing Needs ........................................................................................................................ 10
Specific Housing Needs by Category ........................................................................................... 19
Homelessness ....................................................................................................................... 24
Behavioral Health Needs ........................................................................................................... 28
Interviews ................................................................................................................................ 29
Approach ............................................................................................................................... 29
Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................ 30
Funding Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 33
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 33
Proposed Investment .............................................................................................................. 35
Implementation ...................................................................................................................... 38
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 97 of 184
1
Introduction
On October 5, 2020, the Renton City Council adopted Ordinance 5983 to authorize an additional sales
and use tax for affordable housing, behavioral health, and housing-related services under RCW
82.14.530, which implemented House Bill 1590. This was made possible by changes by the
Washington State Legislature to the statute in March 2020 that allowed the City Council to impose the
tax through councilmanic action.
To help guide the use of this revenue to address issues of housing affordability, homelessness, and
behavioral health in the community, this report outlines high-level needs and recommended actions by the
City to address existing and future gaps. To help understand these gaps and the importance of action, it
includes assessments of:
Overall housing and behavioral health issues in the community.
Available resources for housing-related and behavioral services that serve the specified low-income
groups.
Existing gaps in available affordable housing, housing-related services, and behavioral health
services.
The contributions of different organizations to meeting low-income housing needs and behavioral
health needs in Renton.
This report presents two main sources of information related to this work:
Existing sources of data are compiled and reviewed to quantify the supply, demand, and gaps with
existing services in housing and behavioral health available in Renton.
Interviews were conducted and are summarized in this document to provide a qualitative perspective
on needs, resources, and gaps with respect to housing and behavioral health providers in the city.
These data sources inform a series of recommendations to the City to guide the use of Ordinance 5983
sales tax funding, as well as longer-term questions of program monitoring and evaluation.
The remainder of the report is structured into the following sections:
An overview of the legislation and City of Renton context, including a discussion of current services
and expenditures and funding.
A data review to highlight information about major themes in housing, homelessness, and behavioral
health in the community.
A summary of interviews discusses the outcomes from the conversations, and how these results align
with the overall discussion of needs for these services.
Finally, a description of funding support recommendations incorporates the information collected
as part of this review and presents actionable advice to guide the use of Ordinance 5983 funding
over the long-term.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 98 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 2
Context Overview
Legislation
In 2015, the Washington State Legislature passed ESHB 2263, which in part provided a new local option
for cities to create a retail sales and use tax that could support affordable housing, behavioral health
facilities, and operations and maintenance costs related to these types of programs and facilities.
However, while this program had the potential to provide a new source of revenue, only two cities were
able to get approval for the sales tax increase from voters.1
Recognizing the growing need to address local resource needs to address these issues, the Legislature
updated the provision of this sales and use tax option implemented under RCW 82.14.530. The most
important adjustment was through HB 1590 in 2020, which allowed the tax to be passed with
councilmanic authority instead of requiring voter approval at an election, making it more flexible for
cities to use. Additional changes were made under ESHB 1070 in April 2021, which provided revisions to
the allowed uses for the funding and other smaller amendments.
Currently, the provisions of RCW 82.14.530 state that a 0.1% sales tax can be imposed after
September 30, 2020, if counties did not decide to impose this tax first. Under the statute, at least 60%
of the revenue received must be used on the following activities:
Constructing or acquiring affordable housing, which may include emergency, transitional, and
supportive housing and new units of affordable housing within an existing structure, and facilities
providing housing-related services, or acquiring land for these purposes.
Constructing or acquiring behavioral health-related facilities or acquiring land for these purposes.
Funding the operations and maintenance costs of new units of affordable housing and facilities
where housing-related programs are provided, or newly constructed evaluation and treatment
centers.
The remaining funding (40% or less) can be used for the operation, delivery, or evaluation of behavioral
health treatment programs and services or housing-related services.
The housing and housing-related programs are restricted to only include specific populations:
Persons with behavioral health disabilities
Veterans
Senior citizens
Persons who are homeless or at-risk of being homeless, including families with children
Unaccompanied homeless youth or young adults
Persons with disabilities
Domestic violence survivors
1 The cities of Ellensburg and Olympia passed theses sales tax with voters in 2018.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 99 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 3
Current Support
Funding
Data from the Washington State Auditor’s Office Local Government Financial Reporting System (LGFRS) can be used to track social services funding. For Renton, this data shows regular funding of social services, including funding related to general welfare, seniors, domestic violence, and homelessness over multiple departments, is increasing over time.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 100 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 4
Exhibit 1 presents the amount of funding provided for social services in city expenditures from 2013 to
2020. This indicates that funding for these items has increased both on an absolute and per capita basis,
rising from $1.8 million in 2013 to about $3 million in 2020, or about 7% per year on average.
The majority of Renton’s financial support highlighted in this data is indicated as being directed towards
the following:
Welfare, amounting to about $11.1 million in expenses since 2013, largely associated with activities
under “Serving vulnerable/low income” and “Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)” line
items for the current Community Services budget.
Aging and disability services, amounting to $4.7 million in expenses since 2013, largely related to
the operation of the senior center.
Domestic violence prevention, totaling $1.2 million between 2013 and 2020 to support a DV
advocate and related expenses.
Mental health services ($372K) and chemical dependency services ($197K)
Exhibit 2 provides amounts in total and per capita social services expenditures for Federal Way, Auburn,
Redmond, and Kent. While the LGFRS data may be categorized differently and not match completely, it
provides a landscape view of social services spending and suggests that Renton’s expenditures are
generally midrange.
City-level reporting can provide a more detailed view of expenditures. Listed in Exhibit 3 is City of
Renton Human Services Agency funding provided to individual organizations, many that support housing
and services related to housing, homelessness, and behavioral health.
Aside from this funding, other recent major contributions provided by the City for these purposes include
the following:
Housing projects
Sunset Oaks: $700,000 grant, assistance in securing other funding, waived fees.
Sunset Court: Assistance in property acquisition, assistance in securing a 9% Low-Income Housing Tax
Credit (LIHTC) allocation and other funding, waived fees.
Sunset Gardens: $1.5 million in Ordinance 5983 funding, assistance in securing other funding.
Willowcrest Townhomes: $357,000 in grants, assistance in securing other funding, waived fees
Shelters
REACH Center of Hope: City Hall space, direct financial contribution ($120,000 in 2021)
Emergency Assistance & Mental/Behavioral Health Services
Emergency rental and food assistance: $650,000 in CARES Act funding for food assistance and
emergency rental assistance
Community Court: Expected to support diversion to prescribed treatment and services as an
alternative to incarceration.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 101 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 5
Community Centers
Renovation/development of the Sunset Neighborhood Center: $400,000 grant
Family First Community Center: $4,000,000 in support
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 102 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 6
Exhibit 1. City of Renton Social Services Spending, 2013–2020.
Source: SAO Local Government Financial Reporting System, 2021.
Exhibit 2. Social Services Spending, Amount and Per Capita by City, 2020.
Source: SAO Local Government Financial Reporting System, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 103 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 7
Exhibit 3. City of Renton Human Services Agency Funding, 2019-2020.
ORGANIZATION AMOUNT
Catholic Community Services $62,747
Communities in Schools of Renton $51,315
St. Vincent de Paul/St. Anthony Conference $35,780
King County Sexual Assault Resource Center $32,000
YWCA Seattle King Snohomish $29,000
Domestic Abuse Women's Network $26,500
Renton Area Youth and Family Services $24,880
Sound Generations $20,500
Crisis Clinic $20,000
Ukrainian Community Center of WA $17,500
HealthPoint $17,000
Multi-Service Center $17,000
St. Vincent de Paul Seattle King County $16,000
Friends of Youth $15,000
Lifewire $10,515
King County Bar Foundation $10,500
Seattle-King County Dept. of Public Health $10,000
Valley Cities Counseling and Consultation $10,000
Washington Poison Center $9,000
Renton Kiwanis Clothes Bank $8,500
Way Back Inn $8,000
Refugee Women's Alliance $7,800
Aerospace Joint Apprenticeship Comm. $7,500
Bridge Disability Ministries $7,500
Children's Therapy Center $7,500
Feminist Women's Healthcare Center $7,500
Institute for Family Development $7,500
Issaquah School Foundation $7,500
Mother Africa $7,500
Nexus Youth & Family $7,500
Orion Industries $7,500
Partners In Employment $7,500
Puget Sound Training Ctr $7,500
The Salvation Army $7,500
West African Community Council $7,500
Margie Williams Helping Hands $5,000
TOTAL $562,037
Source: City of Renton, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 104 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 8
Available Income-Restricted Housing
Income-restricted affordable housing units are provided by different organizations in Renton. Locations of
these housing units are displayed on a map of Renton in Exhibit 5. In this map, the Renton Housing
Authority properties are highlighted to demonstrate the distribution of these units.
According to information provided from the National Housing Preservation Database (NHPD) and other
sources, there is a supply of almost 2,000 income-restricted low-income housing units in the city, with a
development pipeline of almost 600 affordable units at different stages.2 Additionally, many existing
income-restricted units were updated as part of the Renton Housing Authority’s recently completed
rehabilitation and modernization work, which invested about $57 million into their existing projects.
Different sources highlight how these income-restricted housing units fit local needs:
From the projects identified in the NHPD dataset, available subsidized units cater mainly to elderly
and/or disabled households (58% of units), and families (18% of units).
A 2019 analysis of South King County communities highlighted that from 1,580 units identified, 75%
were accessible to households at 60% AMI or below, while only about 133 units, or 8% of this total,
were accessible at 30% AMI or below.3
Available Emergency Shelter Space
Emergency space in Renton is limited, but two programs have historically offered shelter services. The
ARISE program, coordinated by Catholic Community Services NW, provides overnight shelter for men in
temporary space within churches in the community. The REACH Center of Hope is a permanent shelter for
10–12 families and is being relocated to the Lakeridge Lutheran Church as part of the “Hope on the Hill”
partnership.
Future additional emergency shelter space is anticipated through King County’s purchase of the Extended
Stay America Hotel in Renton as part of the Health Through Housing program.
2 National Housing Preservation Database, 2021.
3 “South King County Subregional Housing Action Framework – Task 2 Housing Context Assessment Methods Memo”, ECONorthwest, 2020.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 105 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 9
Exhibit 4. Available Income-Restricted Housing, City of Renton.
NAME OWNER UNITS
Housing Authorities
Cedar Park Apartments Renton Housing Authority 244
Houser Terrace Renton Housing Authority 104
Vantage Point Apartments King County Housing Authority 77
Cedar River Terrace Renton Housing Authority 72
Sunset Oaks Renton Housing Authority 62
Hillcrest Terrace Renton Housing Authority 60
Golden Pines Renton Housing Authority 53
Evergreen Terrace Renton Housing Authority 50
Sunset Court Renton Housing Authority 50
Cole Manor Renton Housing Authority 28
Kirkland Avenue Townhomes Renton Housing Authority 18
Chantelle Renton Housing Authority 17
Highland House Renton Housing Authority 15
Glennwood Townhomes Renton Housing Authority 8
Non-Profits
Liberty Square Apartments DASH 92
Compass Veterans Center Renton Lutheran Regional Veterans Program / Compass Housing Alliance 58
June Leonard Place Low-Income Housing Institute (LIHI) 48
Renton Family Housing Catholic Housing Services of Western Washington 42
Good Shepherd I Good Shepherd Lutheran Home 12
Good Shepherd II Good Shepherd Lutheran Home 12
For-Profit
Royal Hills Apartments PPMG, Inc. 284
The Reserve at Renton Affordable Housing CDC Inc. 217
Stonebrook Apartments HNN Associates, LLC 193
Spencer Court Apartments MS Real Estate Co. 74
Heritage Grove Apartments Pacific Living Properties 51
Peak 88 Apartments Pacific Living Properties 33
Merrill Gardens Merrill Gardens 31
Sources: Renton Housing Authority, 2021; National Housing Preservation Database (NHPD), 2021; BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 106 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 10
Exhibit 5. Location of Available Income-Restricted Housing, City of Renton.
Sources: City of Renton, 2020; BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 107 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 11
Data Review
Introduction
To provide a high-level understanding of the potential needs for low-income housing and behavioral
health, this report compiles available information from multiple sources to characterize the supply of
available housing and services, as well as the demand from the Renton community. This includes the
following information:
A high-level review of the overall housing needs in the community, including current and projected
needs and estimated costs for addressing housing insecurity in the community.
Specific housing needs by category, as specified in the legislation.
An understanding of the behavioral health needs in the community, with quantitative measures
where possible.
A review of the capacity and gaps to meet these needs, including areas where additional support
will be essential.
Although available data can provide some guidance as to the needs and gaps for different groups in the
city, this information was supplemented with qualitative interviews summarized in the following section.
Housing Needs
Comparisons of Income and Housing
It is important to understand how the distribution of incomes within a community compares to the housing
that is affordable to them. Exhibit 6 provides a distribution of the income levels of households in Renton.
This is categorized according to tenure (renters versus owners) and income bracket based on Area
Median Income (AMI). Exhibit 7 provides the distribution of renting households in King County and Renton
by income categories, as well as the proportions of rental housing affordable at each income category.
This information highlights the following:
Overall, about 47% of renters in Renton are considered low-income, with household incomes of
80% AMI or lower. This is generally comparable to King County as a whole.
For renting households, affordable units do not line up with the needs by income level. Most notably,
there is a significant lack of affordable housing affordable to extremely low-income households, with
only 9% of housing affordable to those making 30% AMI or below. This suggests that there are
significant gaps at the lower end of the market, where subsidies are usually required for households
to afford housing.
There are also concerns with the availability of units at the upper end of the market (affordable at
80% AMI or above). While market-rate housing is outside of the scope of this analysis, downrenting
by higher-income households of housing affordable to lower-income households contributes to
affordability challenges for low-income households.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 108 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 12
Exhibit 6. Households by Tenure and Income Level, City of Renton.
Sources: HUD CHAS (based on ACS 2017 5-year estimates); BERK, 2021.
Exhibit 7. Renter Households and Affordable Housing Supply, City of Renton.
Sources: HUD CHAS (based on ACS 2017 5-year estimates); BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 109 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 13
Housing Cost Burdens
Exhibits 8 and 9 describe cost burdens experienced by households renting in Renton by income category,
by percent, and number respectively. This information includes the most recent data available from the
2017 CHAS dataset provided by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, and highlights
households that are cost burdened (paying more than 30% of their income on rent) and severely cost
burdened (paying more than half their income on rent).
To understand how this relates to the availability of affordable housing, Exhibit 10 shows the differences
between renting households at or below a given AMI, compared to the total supply of housing
affordable at that income level or lower. This represents all households and housing in the current market,
to generally show what affordable housing certain households have access to in the local area right now,
and how many units short Renton is with respect to meeting needs at different income levels.
This indicates the following:
About 46% of renters in the city are experiencing some level of housing cost burden, and 21% of
renters are paying over half their income on rent.
These burdens are related strongly to income: about 30% of households with incomes at 30–50%
AMI are paying over half their income on rent, and 69% of households at 0–30% AMI are
severely cost burdened.
At incomes of 50% AMI or below, over 6,000 households in Renton are facing some level of
housing burden, with over 3,800 households experiencing severe cost burdens.
For extremely low-income households earning 30% AMI or below, there is a significant gap in
available affordable housing, with an estimated shortfall of about 2,415 units today. This gap is
reduced when considering households at 50% AMI or below, suggesting that the most significant
needs are with extremely low-income households and many of these households may have to access
housing that is less affordable to them.
Overall, these distributions across income categories highlight evidence of both uprenting, with low-
income households taking on increased housing burdens, and downrenting, with higher-income
households paying less than 30% of their incomes on rent, potentially for units that would be more
affordable to lower-income households.
To better understand the likely cost burdens faced by residents of the city, it is possible to generate the
cost of the total housing cost burden faced by all low-income households in Renton. While these burdens
cannot be fully addressed with this funding, especially given its constraints, this can provide a sense of the
scale of the problem as compared to these available resources.
Data from the Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) from the American Community Survey for 2019 was
used to calculate the total housing subsidies necessary to address housing burdens for Renton households
at 60% AMI or below. This is divided by:
Tenure: Renters versus owners.
Housing costs burdens: severe housing cost burdens (all housing costs above 50% of income), or all
housing cost burdens (above 30% of income).
Income level: Extremely low-income households (<30% AMI) versus households at 30–60% AMI.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 110 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 14
From this assessment, total cost burdens for households at 60% AMI or below amount to $94 million per
year, with about $64 million for all renting households, and around $30 million for cost burdens for low-
income households renting in the city. While not all these burdens can be addressed with this sales tax
funding, this highlights that the housing cost burden in the community will exceed available revenue
sources, requiring prioritization in housing support.
Exhibit 8. Housing Cost Burden of Renters by Income Category, Percent, City of Renton.
Sources: HUD CHAS (based on ACS 2017 5-year estimates); BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 111 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 15
Exhibit 9. Housing Cost Burden of Renters by Income Category, Number of Households, City of Renton.
Sources: HUD CHAS (based on ACS 2017 5-year estimates); BERK, 2021.
Exhibit 10. Gaps in Affordable Housing by Income Threshold, City of Renton.
Sources: HUD CHAS (based on ACS 2017 5-year estimates); BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 112 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 16
Exhibit 11. Aggregate Annual Housing Cost Burdens, City of Renton.
Sources: ACS PUMS, 2019; BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 113 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 17
Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing
In understanding how the current housing market can manage current housing needs, examining naturally
occurring affordable housing can also be important. In the open market, there are cases where units may
be affordable but not maintained through subsidies. These housing units are often older and more
obsolete than the rest of the housing stock, but because of their condition, the rents charged for these
spaces are lower. As they present a source of unsubsidized affordable housing in the local market,
understanding the populations they serve and how they can be maintained with lower rents can be an
important part of affordable housing policy.
Estimates of the availability of naturally occurring affordable housing in Renton are provided in Exhibit
12, based on the analysis of CoStar data from the South King Housing (SoKiHo) sub-regional housing
assessment framework.4 This provides a count of the available market-rate units by the number of
bedrooms, according to the affordability for two different income categories: 50–80% AMI (low-income),
and less than 50% AMI (very low- and extremely low-income).
This indicates that about 62% of units that are market-rate and affordable at 50% AMI or below consist
of either studio or 1-bedroom apartments. This highlights that larger low-income households (such as
those with children) may have greater challenges finding affordable units on the market. This is
especially true for larger family sizes, where availability may be very limited, and overcrowding would
be likely.
Exhibit 12. Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing Units by Size, City of Renton.
Source: EcoNorthwest, 2020; CoStar, 2020.
4 For more information, see visit econw.shinyapps.io/south-kc-policy-analysis-tool.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 114 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 18
Future Housing Needs
Beyond the discussions of current housing needs above, there are also considerations that more
affordable housing will be needed in the future. Exhibit 13 highlights the overall expected housing needs
in Renton estimated over the next 20 years, considering both short-term housing underproduction and
expected needs into the future. This figure is based on estimates from the 2017 Land Use Vision modeling
coordinated by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and is presented as part of the South King
Housing (SoKiHo) framework.
This projection indicates the following:
Overall, about 2,590 housing units, or about 28% of the total housing demand, will need to be
built in the future to address the needs of households with incomes of 60% AMI or lower.
For extremely low-income households making 30% AMI or below, about 894 units in this assessment
will be required to meet demand. These units will require significant subsidy, either through the City
or partners.
This assessment is based on earlier measures with previous growth targets for the city. Under new
Countywide Planning Policies approved in July 2021, Renton has set a new target of 17,000 new housing
units between 2019 and 2044.
Based on these proportions, this would require around 4,750 new units at 60% AMI or below,
including around 1,650 new units at 30% AMI or below over the next 20 years.
Meeting the needs of affordable housing for extremely low-income households alone would require
building $500–660 million in new housing, or about $25–33 million per year in today’s dollars
over a 20-year period.5 This would require the most significant subsidies, and other support (e.g.,
grants, surplus land for development, etc.) would still be necessary to address other needs for the
4,750 units needed at 60% AMI and below.
Note that these assessments are over and above the needs that are identified in the current market, such
as the need for an additional 2,415 units to meet the needs of households at 30% AMI or below.
Additionally, many of the other gaps in the affordable housing stock today, such as with family-sized
housing, will likely widen as growth continues unless addressed.
5 This assumes a cost of $300,000 to $400,000 per unit for construction in current dollars, and only includes costs of development and not ongoing costs with maintenance and operations.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 115 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 19
Exhibit 13. Projected Housing Needs for the City of Renton, 2019–2040.
Source: EcoNorthwest, 2020.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 116 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 20
Specific Housing Needs by Category
People with Disabilities
Exhibit 14 provides a distribution of renter households in the city, divided between:
Households with at least one member with a disability providing limitations on self-care or
independent living.
Households with at least one member with another disability.
All other households.
This data highlights that higher proportions of households with lower incomes have household members
with disabilities, with the highest proportions among extremely low-income households. This highlights that
challenges with housing affordability will increase with household members with disabilities, especially
considering the need for appropriate housing that meets their needs. This challenge with affordability
should be recognized in funding support, especially for funding that can be used to address deficiencies
in available housing.
Exhibit 14. Renter Households With At Least One Member with Disability, City of Renton.
Sources: HUD CHAS (based on ACS 2017 5-year estimates); BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 117 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 21
Seniors
The following exhibits highlight housing income distributions for seniors:
Exhibit 15 provides a distribution of cost-burdened renter households by income and household type
(including seniors living alone and senior couples).
Exhibit 16 highlights a distribution of severely cost-burdened renter households by income and
household type.
Exhibit 17 describes the distribution of owner households by income and household type.
These figures indicate the following:
For cost-burdened and severely cost-burdened households, a greater proportion of extremely low-
income households consist of seniors, especially seniors living alone. Twenty percent of cost-
burdened renters at 30% AMI or below are seniors living alone, and 16% of severely cost burdened
households are seniors living alone.
Cost burdens for seniors that own their homes are not as significantly related to income. While a
greater proportion of cost-burdened owners are seniors, about 29% of cost-burdened households
making AMI or above are considered “cost burdened”.
Altogether, this suggests that while a greater proportion of low-income cost-burdened households that
are renting are seniors, this relationship is not as clear when it comes to housing burdens for owner-
occupied housing.
Exhibit 15. Renter Cost-Burdened Households by Household Type (Elderly/Other), City of Renton.
Sources: HUD CHAS (based on ACS 2017 5-year estimates); BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 118 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 22
Exhibit 16. Renter Severely Cost-Burdened Households by Household Type (Elderly/Other), City of Renton.
Sources: HUD CHAS (based on ACS 2017 5-year estimates); BERK, 2021.
Exhibit 17. Owner Cost-Burdened Households, by Household Type (Elderly/Other), City of Renton.
Sources: HUD CHAS (based on ACS 2017 5-year estimates); BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 119 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 23
Domestic Violence
Housing needs for survivors of domestic violence are often more challenging than other types of housing
needs. Temporary shelters, transitional housing, and permanent housing options typically require
anonymity, and affected individuals and families can often experience severe disruptions in housing
stability and security.
To understand general trends in domestic violence in Renton, Exhibit 18 highlights the volume of monthly
calls from the Renton Police Department coded as domestic disputes related to domestic violence. As
noted in this figure, the number of calls varies between about 175 to 250 per month, or 5.7 to 8 per day
on average, with the highest volume recorded in July 2019. No significant change is noticeable from this
data, however.
Anecdotal evidence does suggest that the social isolation and stress related to the COVID-19 pandemic
may be related to an increase in domestic violence that may not be reported.6 Similarly, many cases of
domestic violence typically go unreported. Coupled with income and housing instability, there may be
future needs that will only be possible to identify well after the impacts of the pandemic have receded.
Exhibit 18. Domestic Violence Calls by Month, City of Renton.
Source: Renton Police Department, 2021.
6 See Seattle and King County Public Health, Domestic Violence Patterns in King County, WA: March-September 2020.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 120 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 24
Veterans
Among the civilian population aged 18 and over in Renton, about 6.5% (5,104) are veterans, versus
5.8% in King County overall, according to 2019 5-year ACS data. In Renton, veterans are more likely to
have risk factors associated with higher levels of housing instability than non-veterans:
11.9% are in poverty (versus 8.6% of non-veterans).
4.9% are unemployed (versus 3.5% of non-veterans).
28.8% have at least one disability (versus 11.7% of non-veterans).
While these factors would suggest a higher rate of housing instability, there are avenues of support
available to veterans that are not accessible to other households at risk for housing instability.
Specifically, access to additional federal resources for healthcare and housing through the US
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), can also help with unmet housing and health needs, but will not
alleviate all the needs of veterans in the community.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 121 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 25
Homelessness
The major source of data in the region on homelessness is the annual Seattle/King County Point-in-Time
count of people experiencing homelessness. The 2020 Report7 highlights major trends in homelessness
across the region, including demographics, health conditions, reasons for homelessness, and types of
shelter.
This count does not provide specific counts for Renton. However, aggregated counts are provided for
different subareas in the county, as shown in Exhibit 19. Renton is in the “Southwest County” area, with
Algona, Auburn, Burien, Des Moines, Federal Way, Kent, Milton, Normandy Park, Pacific, Renton, SeaTac,
Tukwila, Vashon Island, and other unincorporated parts of King County.
This information indicates the following:
Overall counts of people experiencing homelessness. Overall estimates of annual point-in-time
counts from 2017 to 2020 are provided in Exhibit 20, with the proportion of the total found in the
Southwest Area indicated in the graph. Over time, the count of people experiencing homelessness is
relatively stable at around 12,000 individuals, with the Southwest Area accounting for about 15–
18% of this total or around 1,900–2,000 people.
General demographics. From the recent 2020 Point-in-Time Count, general statistics for individuals
experiencing homelessness in the county include the following:
About 19% are under 18 years old.
Around 35% are experiencing homelessness for the first time.
About 64% have been experiencing homelessness for a year or more.
The most common reasons for homelessness include job loss, alcohol/drug use, and eviction.
In 2020, over half of respondents had a psychiatric or emotional condition, with two-thirds
indicating that this kept them from maintaining stable housing. Other common health conditions
included post-traumatic stress disorder (47%) and substance use (44%)
Families with children account for 32% of the total population of people experiencing
homelessness.
People fleeing domestic violence or abuse account for about 10% of the homeless population,
with 69% unsheltered.
Unaccompanied youth comprise about 8% of the total homeless population of the county, with
27% representing different gender identities (e.g., gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, etc.).
Veterans account for about 7% of the total number of people in the county experiencing
homelessness, with a downward trend since 2017.
7 See All Home, Count Us In: Seattle/King County Point-in-Time Count of Individuals Experiencing Homelessness, 2020.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 122 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 26
Exhibit 19. Point-In-Time Count Reporting Areas.
Source: All Home, 2020.
Exhibit 20. Point-In-Time Counts of People Experiencing Homelessness, King County.
Source: All Home, 2020.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 123 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 27
Shelter status. For the population of people experiencing homelessness in the Southwest Area
overall, Exhibit 21 highlights the breakdown of people with shelter (including transitional housing and
emergency shelter space) versus those without adequate shelter. This highlights that from the total,
only about 42–47% of the people experiencing homelessness in the count are able to find some
type of space for shelter, with this proportion slightly decreasing over time.
Overall regional proportion. With respect to shelter space, it can be difficult to determine the city
of residence for people experiencing homelessness, especially those experiencing chronic
homelessness. However, 6% of countywide respondents reported that their last permanent address
was Renton in the 2019 Count, which was the second most frequent response after Seattle.
Youth homelessness. More detailed information on the characteristics of students experiencing
homelessness is available from the Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
through the Comprehensive Education Data and Research System (CEDARS). In addition to providing
information about students that are sheltered or unsheltered, this information highlights other housing
situations, such as doubling-up in housing or temporary shelter at a hotel/motel. What should be
highlighted here is that doubling-up is the most common expression of homelessness, with about 74%
of students experiencing homelessness finding temporary shelter in this way. This points to a much
more extensive issue with access to affordable housing that also needs to be addressed.
For emergency shelter space targets, it is a complex task to set fair targets between communities to meet
these needs. The annual Point-in-Time reports provide physical counts, but they involve self-reported data
and may not identify people that do not want to participate or are finding temporary shelter in other
ways (e.g., doubling up, hotel rooms, etc.). People experiencing homelessness may need to relocate to
more urban locations where they can receive services, including both moving from Renton to Seattle, as
well as moving to Renton from surrounding suburban communities. It can also be challenging to determine
someone’s city of residence for the purpose of allocating responsibilities without a stable address.
A service target for Renton can be informed in two ways:
Allocations at the county level. Based on the finding from the 2019 report that 6% of people
experiencing homelessness reported their original place of residence as Renton. As a proportion, this
suggests that Renton would need to provide emergency shelter and supportive housing for a total of
around 700 people currently experiencing homelessness. At a minimum, accommodating a 6% share
of currently unsheltered people would require facilities to meet the needs of 335 residents.
Allocations at the subregional level. From point-in-time count tallies at the sub-regional level, about
1,937 people were experiencing homelessness in the Southwest Area, 42% of which had access to
shelter. Based on a proportion of the total city population, Renton should accommodate about 365
residents. If calculated on unsheltered residents, about 210 spaces would be required.
From these calculations, the minimum target for additional emergency shelter and permanent supportive
housing in Renton should be around 200 spaces, which would account for an even share of the
subregional count of unsheltered people in the last point-in-time count. However, the City should look to
set higher targets for these services to be hosted in the community and work with partners to
accommodate at least 350–400 spaces for people experiencing housing instability and homelessness.
Note that this target will likely increase over time as population and housing costs increase.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 124 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 28
Exhibit 21. Sheltered versus Unsheltered Individuals, Southwest Area.
Source: All Home, 2020.
Exhibit 22. Students Experiencing Homelessness, by Primary Nighttime Residence, 2019.
Source: WA OSPI, Comprehensive Education Data and Research System (CEDARS), 2020.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 125 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 29
Behavioral Health Needs
Providing enhanced behavioral health treatment options is also an important component of an integrated
approach under this sales tax funding option. In addition to providing for better overall quality of life
through access to treatment, addressing these health needs can be an important part of the supportive
services that can keep people housed. Over half of respondents in the Point-in-Time Count noted that
they had a psychiatric or emotional condition, with a significant portion of respondents noting that PTSD
and substance use were also health conditions of concern that keep many from maintaining stable
housing.
To understand general trends in the demand for behavioral health services, Exhibit 23 shows data from
the Washington State Department of Health Comprehensive Hospital Abstract Reporting System (CHARS).
This database system provides aggregated data on inpatient and observation intakes at area hospitals
by three-digit zip code aggregations, with information on intakes related to behavioral health issues,
divided according to distinct types of issues.
This graph shows that while intakes due to behavioral health conditions dropped significantly in 2020 due
to the pandemic, there was a 39% growth in intakes from 2017 to 2019. The most significant increases
were with “Schizophrenia and other non-mood psychotic”, which increased 49% in this time, and other
substance use aside from alcohol, which amounted to 46% in that same period. This rapid increase may
suggest that there has been a distinct rise recently in the need for behavioral health services, especially in
more severe cases that may challenge someone’s housing stability.
Exhibit 23. Inpatient/Observation Patient Stays, Mental/Behavioral Disorders, 980 Zip Codes.
Source: WA DOH, Comprehensive Hospital Abstract Reporting System, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 126 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 30
Interviews
Approach
The interviews conducted as part of this research were coordinated with organizations that currently
provide services in Renton or the region in areas of housing, homelessness, and behavioral health. The
participating organizations are included in Exhibit 24:
Exhibit 24. Project Interviews Conducted.
Organization Type Representative
Renton Housing Authority Affordable Housing Jill Richardson
City of Renton Domestic Violence Advocate Domestic Violence Tina Harris
Domestic Abuse Women’s Network (DAWN) Domestic Violence Angela Dannenbring
King County Library Services Homelessness Services Melissa Glen
Multi-Service Center Homelessness Services Maje Qureshi
Refugee Women’s Alliance Homelessness Services Crisaan Brooks
St. Vincent de Paul/St. Stephen the Martyr Homelessness Services Darlene Simpson
REACH Center of Hope Homelessness Services / Emergency Shelter Maggie Breen
Catholic Community Services (ARISE) Homelessness Services / Emergency Shelter Whonakee King
Asian Counseling and Referral Services Behavioral Health Yoon Joo Han
Renton Area Youth and Family Services (RAYS) / Childhaven Behavioral Health Angela West
Ukrainian Community Center Behavioral Health Oleg Pynda
Valley Cities Counseling and Consultation Behavioral Health Amber Rhodes
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 127 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 31
These interviews were intended as an “environmental scan” to determine major trends. The general focus
of these interviews was on the following questions:
Current Services and Programs
What housing-related needs are currently underserved in Renton (either due to a lack of service
options or lack of capacity to meet the need)?
What are the current barriers to meeting those needs?
Which housing-related services are constrained due to a lack of facilities (either housing or facilities
to provide services)?
What are the risks to your programs related to facilities?
Future Services
What are promising models to address the unmet/undermet needs in Renton?
Are you currently expanding or planning to expand your services?
In what ways?
What needs are you responding to?
What are the barriers to expansion?
Summary of Findings
General
Issues with navigation were highlighted as a major concern. Generally, engaging with multiple
agencies to find services is an issue, and these problems are compounded for people of color,
people with limited English ability, and people with mental/behavioral health issues. Providing more
equitable access may require specially trained navigation staff that can address specific needs of
subpopulations in the community.
Providing services locally was seen as supporting people in retaining their connections to the
community. This can also help in cases where transportation is a barrier to accessing services.
In addition to providing for direct capital needs related to housing and mental and behavioral
health services, there are other facility needs that may be required. Challenges with acquiring and
maintaining office space may provide obstacles to service delivery, especially in cases where office
costs are rising and spaces may be too small for staffing levels.
Housing
Providers report that help finding affordable housing is the most common request, and there are few
options available due to a lack of supply and turnover. More supply of affordable housing is
desperately needed.
Incomes are too low for many to maintain stable housing in Renton. It can be challenging for these
households to maintain housing stability without continuing subsidies or sufficient income.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 128 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 32
The City has ongoing relationships with other agencies, including the Renton Housing Authority, and
ongoing support of capital projects should continue.
There is an important role for flexible temporary housing assistance through grants or loans.
Covering short-term emergency expenses can make the difference between households staying in
permanent housing or requiring more expensive support later.
Homelessness
There are very limited local services for people experiencing homelessness. Emergency shelter beds
are limited throughout the region, and there is far more demand than supply.
While the advantages to approaching homelessness with a “housing first” approach are important,
there is still a perceived need for transitional housing, especially since there has been the
perception that providing wraparound services (including mental and behavioral health services) has
been a challenge.
Local facilities are very limited as well. REACH Center of Hope is the only permanent shelter in
Renton (serving women with children), with temporary shelter space for single adult men provided in
other facilities through ARISE. The Extended Stay Hotel purchase by King County will provide some
permanent supportive housing capacity when the facility opens.
Other facilities may be needed to support people experiencing homelessness, in addition to shelters.
Construction and staffing of hygiene centers and day centers can provide additional support, even
for people who are unable or unwilling to pursue shelter options.
Behavioral Health
The COVID-19 pandemic has provided significant limitations to accessing mental and
behavioral health services. In-person appointments have been limited, and many staff members
have only been able to provide remote services by phone or video chat. This often limits contact with
individuals needing support, and clients that are homeless or experiencing severe behavioral health
issues may be challenged in using technology to access appointments.
As with navigation in general, there are distinct cultural needs for mental and behavioral health
services, and often specialized services (such as bilingual providers) are needed for different
populations. While some providers can give these specific services to clients, more general service
providers may have challenges in meeting a broad set of needs with available staff.
There have been considerable staffing constraints to meet existing needs. During the pandemic,
there have been additional challenges, but burnout and low salaries have been an ongoing
challenge to recruitment and retention of staff to support services. Without additional sources of
funding, these issues cannot be addressed.
Child and elder care can be important support services for people accessing mental and
behavioral health. This is especially true for households managing without typical child or elder care
arrangements, and a lack of care options can be an obstacle in accessing support services. While this
could be a service available to support appointments, it is not always available.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 129 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 33
Specialized Needs
Accommodating accessibility of affordable and emergency housing for people with disabilities
can address a major obstacle to receiving needed services. Providing accessibility for people with
mobility issues and other disabilities is essential in addressing major obstacles to these services.
However, in many cases service providers do not have the resources or infrastructure to meet these
needs themselves, which can limit the options for people with disabilities. Providing support both for
the needs of these clients through supporting programs and referrals and to providers to
accommodate these needs in facilities, can help address these obstacles.
For people experiencing homelessness, there are few local options to address other specialized
needs in Renton. Meeting the specific needs of youth, people with disabilities, domestic violence
survivors, and other populations locally can be limited since even general resources are scarce. This is
often due to the scale of these specialized needs, meaning that regional or metro-wide collaboration
is necessary to ensure that these needs are supported.
There may also be limited options for specialized behavioral health treatment that can be
provided in Renton. Again, this is related to the scale of demand, where psychiatric care or specific
types of behavioral therapy may only be able to be provided at regional facilities. This means that
people may need to access the resources found in other communities (such as in Seattle), and
coordinating access to these types of regional services is important.
More local housing and service options (e.g., coordinated with surrounding communities) can help
to support people at risk by maintaining their local social networks and reducing travel. From the
experiences of providers, the social connections developed by people experiencing homelessness
can be an important source of support. Additionally, traveling to receive services and emergency
housing can be a challenge, especially if people need to access locations that would be difficult to
reach by transit (such as travel to Eastside cities).
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 130 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 34
Funding Recommendations
Introduction
Under City estimates of revenue, the 0.1% sales tax has generated $1.1 million as of June 2021 and is
expected to generate around $2.6 million for the entire year. For future years, receipts of around $2.7
million would be expected per year starting in 2022, changing with inflation and adjustments to local
taxable retail sales.
The following points should be considered when determining courses of action based on the findings from
this report and the Housing Action Plan:
The City should leverage available funding using relationships with local providers. As seen by
the diversity of non-profits and religious organizations operating in Renton, there are several
partners well-positioned to address issues of housing, homelessness, and behavioral health. Funding
to support key investments by these organizations can facilitate planned projects that may not
otherwise move forward, provide support and connections for hired staff, and reduce administrative
costs to the City.
New funding allocations should focus on investments that can leverage external sources. Even
with cooperation from other partners, the funding available from this sales tax will not cover all
identified needs. However, a flexible and reliable source of funding can help to demonstrate the
viability of projects and attract additional financial support from external entities. This could include
county, state, and federal grant programs, as well as the forthcoming SKHHP Capital Fund, private
equity funding, and other sources.
This revenue presents opportunities for reliable long-term support. One challenge that often arises
is the availability and reliability of support over time. For operating expenditures such as salaries,
planning around unreliable or short-term funding sources can be challenging. The City should focus on
providing more reliable and consistent allocations of support that can be flexible when considering
overall needs.
Equity considerations should be a primary concern. Issues related to housing, homelessness, and
behavioral health often have a disproportionate impact on certain populations, including people of
color. Funding allocations need to consider issues with the availability of services and resources to
these groups in the community. Additionally, the City should identify approaches to provide
navigation services and support to address differences in access and outcomes.
Regional needs require a regional response and funding. Some specialized needs, such as
addressing the housing and behavioral health needs of specific populations (e.g., veterans, DV
survivors), may need to be addressed at a regional scale given the proportions of people impacted.
Coordinating with other jurisdictions on both capital and operating support will be important in
providing regional coverage of housing and behavioral health services. This will require a consistent
source of funding that can be allocated to projects over time.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 131 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 35
Funding models should provide focused support. Many smaller awards can limit the ability to
audit and review the effects of these allocations, given the increased costs of oversight. Where
possible, larger and more regular funding allocations should be made with this revenue stream.
Long-term planning must consider ongoing support for maintenance and operations. New
facilities will require additional support for ongoing operations and maintenance costs beyond
existing budgets. While immediate allocations of this funding should look to focus on capital needs,
this revenue stream should provide for fiscal sustainability by giving a greater focus on operations,
maintenance, and preservation/rehabilitation over time.
8 Based on estimated equity costs of about $80,000 to $400,000 per unit, drawn from multiple sources, depending upon the cost and other funding leveraged to acquire the housing units.
9 Based on estimates of “costs per day” identified in the Washington State Department of Commerce Homeless System Performance: King County Report Card for 2018 and 2019.
10 Based on estimates of “costs per successful exit” from the Homeless System Performance: King County Report Card for 2018 and 2019.
11 Developed using the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2020.
Illustrative Examples of Funding Allocations
With respect to the potential investment strategies for this revenue, there are many possible
approaches for allocating this funding within the community. However, this funding will not be sufficient
alone to address all the gaps in the local system. While the results of spending in different areas will
vary based on details, there are several examples of what the funding could provide. For example,
the entire amount could be used to fund any one of the following (or a combination of a portion of
two or more of the following):
Acquire around 10–30 affordable housing units per year, depending on market conditions.8
Support the operating costs for 100–200 person-years in rapid rehousing programs, 150–300
person-years in emergency shelters, 150–550 person-years in transitional housing, or 500–1000
person-years in homelessness prevention programs.9
Provide for the annual operating costs for around 200–400 successful exits from emergency
shelter, rapid rehousing, or transitional housing into permanent housing.10
Directly support about 30–50 case workers/counselors or 20 psychologists (depending on
salaries and benefits).11
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 132 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 36
Proposed Investment
Overview
The statute under RCW 82.14.530 provides requirements for allocations for the funding, with:
From 60% to 100% allocated to constructing or acquiring facilities for housing, housing-related
services, and behavioral health, as well as ongoing operations and maintenance costs.
The remaining funding (up to 40%) can be used for the operation, delivery, or evaluation of
behavioral health treatment programs and services or housing-related services in other locations.
This funding split is flexible and dependent on capital needs for services related to addressing housing,
homelessness, and behavioral health. Given this, recommendations for funding allocations are divided
between facilities support and programmatic support.
Facilities Support
Given the required allocations of funding and expected revenue, facility support could amount to
between $1.6 and $2.7 million per year based on the projections for 2022, depending on the levels of
programmatic support allocated. Based on the research coordinated, recommended options for this
funding include:
Strategic leveraging. As land prices in Renton will continue to increase, providing support for the
strategic acquisition of existing housing and future sites for affordable housing should be a high
priority for the City. This should be done in collaboration with the Renton Housing Authority and
housing non-profit agencies operating in Renton and should consider the surplus lands inventory
anticipated being coordinated by the City. The main focus of this effort should be on acquiring
housing and property in transit-oriented locations in the Rainier/Grady Junction area and in other
locations with high development pressures.
Development of emergency shelter and associated support facilities. At present, there are only
two emergency shelters available in Renton: one men’s shelter (ARISE) with rotating space run by
Catholic Community Services, and the REACH Center of Hope facility for families experiencing
homelessness. Expanding available emergency shelter space with additional permanent beds would
be desirable to address the identified gaps. Additionally, new facilities could provide an ideal
location for the replacement of the services formerly provided in the cold weather shelter near the
Renton Airport, including meals, hygiene facilities, and other support activities.
Ongoing contract support for the operation of emergency housing and supporting services
($200K–$450K). In addition to providing short-term support for the development of new
emergency housing space in the community, the City should work to provide ongoing support through
a contract for personnel and ongoing management of shelter space and other facilities. A staff of 2–
5 employees would be expected for a facility providing emergency housing for 30–60 people, with
additional costs and staffing based on available day services, meal programs, navigation services,
and other functions. Identified costs assume that the City would contract for these services (similar to
REACH) and would assume the costs, benefits, and overhead for part or all of the staff.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 133 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 37
Ongoing development of affordable housing by the Renton Housing Authority. A significant and
consistent portion of the regular revenue should be allocated to the Renton Housing Authority to
support ongoing acquisition and construction of affordable housing. This revenue should be directed
to support new housing at 60% AMI or below for the targeted populations identified in the statute.
The City should coordinate funding support with RHA long-range planning to highlight specific
opportunities for funding support.
Ongoing development of affordable housing by other agencies. Additional funding for
affordable housing can also be directed to support the production of housing by other partners.
Where possible, this should address the identified needs for extremely low-income housing (30%
AMI or below) and low-income families first, targeting support specifically to meet needs that are
not easily addressed by the local market through existing and future incentives.
Future support for operations and maintenance of existing facilities. Adding new affordable
housing and facilities to support people experiencing homelessness and behavioral health challenges
will require ongoing operations and maintenance costs. To ensure that these investments are fiscally
sustainable, the City should direct funding to provide long-term operations and maintenance costs for
facilities constructed or acquired under this program.
Programmatic Support
According to the funding model under statute and estimates of revenue, the City can allocate about $1
million per year based on the projections for 2022 to operating costs for behavioral health and housing-
related services. This would include support for staffing, as well as the provision of other programs that
are not directly related to acquiring and maintaining facilities.
Recommended allocations for this funding include the following:
Ongoing joint funding for behavioral health field response ($100K–$300K). Under Year 1
recommendations for this funding, the City is pursuing an option to fund a behavioral health
professional to provide field response. This funding should be maintained over the long term to
provide dependable support to the community through these positions. Based on a short-term
evaluation of their effectiveness and the availability of other grant funding, the City may seek to
expand funding for Renton-specific needs depending on demand.
Additional wrap-around housing and behavioral health services pilot ($100K–$400K). In
addition to the funding support for a field response team, support for behavioral health
professionals providing wrap-around services is also needed. These professionals would be focused
on the needs of Renton residents in existing emergency shelters and permanent supportive housing
and provide behavioral health support on an ongoing basis. Initial efforts should be focused on a
limited hire (one to two counselors or behavioral health professionals) through a contract with a local
nonprofit provider, with the potential to expand these services over time.
Affordable rental assistance funding pilot ($100K–$200K). Providing emergency funding to very
low- and extremely low-income renters in targeted populations that are experiencing housing
instability can be an effective way to avert homelessness in the community. Maintaining households
that are experiencing unforeseen financial circumstances in permanent housing, can avoid the need
for emergency housing services, which can reduce the costs to the community and keep these
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 134 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 38
households from being displaced. This program should be developed as a pilot to determine the
potential demand for market assistance and could also include other flexible options to allow the use
of this funding for assistance with housing searches, rental deposits, moving expenses, and other
expenses.12
As opposed to the facilities-based expenditures, this programmatic support element should be defined
by initial pilot programs, with efforts scaled up based on initial uptake, outcomes, and expected
additional demand. Additional funding should be allocated based on assessments provided at the end of
Years 3 and 4.
Administration
While certain elements of the proposed investments could be administered by the City departments, the
management of these new resources should be shared with other agencies working with housing,
homelessness, and behavioral health services in the community. Unlike current models of funding support,
these expenditures would far exceed current levels of funding in the community. As a result, this would
require a higher level of review and coordination, requiring investments of City staff time and resources
in specific areas:
Proposals/Applications. Many of the activities listed in this assessment would be coordinated with
existing agencies or through relationships, for example, additional funding to the Renton Housing
Authority or cooperative projects with other communities. Funding support for RHA could be
negotiated separately, with other allocations to affordable housing providers coordinated through a
regular competitive process, either through yearly applications or a formal Request for Proposals.
Additionally, smaller outlays with rental assistance and housing preservation should also be
evaluated on a continuing basis through applications.
Additional engagement. The City should also provide for regular engagement with non-profit
housing and community organizations. Regular communication with these groups can help to
identify what issues should be considered in funding allocations and whether changes to these
programs are necessary.
Monitoring and reporting. To ensure this revenue is deployed openly and transparently, the City
should commit to regular reporting of the use of sales tax funding on key objectives. Because of
this, regular yearly reporting should be coordinated from partners and City departments
receiving or managing these resources. Outcomes should then be reported on a regular basis by
the City to the broader public, through a scorecard report or web-based dashboard. This reporting
should also include reviews of the efficacy of the pilot programs identified and
recommendations for future adjustments to these programs.
12 The City of Ellensburg has developed a comparable funding program using this sales tax revenue source, coordinated through HopeSource Ellensburg. See: “City, HopeSource ready to disperse funds to help residents pay rent.”, The Daily Record, May 4, 2020.
13 The City of Olympias’s Home Fund is managed in this way through a Home Fund Advisory Committee, consisting of representatives from affordable housing finance, community health, homelessness services, behavioral health, law enforcement, and emergency services.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 135 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 39
Implementation
A general schedule for implementation steps would proceed as follows:
The City should focus on setting up the frameworks for long-term management of the program with its
partners and providing for strategic leveraging of resources for affordable housing and the development
of shelter space. Programmatic investments should focus on pilots related to behavioral health response
and support of low-income renters.
Administration
Engagement. Regular and ongoing efforts for outreach with organizations providing affordable
housing and services related to housing, homelessness, and behavioral health should be coordinated
over time.
Reporting. A regular framework should be developed in the short term by the City to provide
transparency about the use of funding and related outcomes. This should be presented as a yearly
report and/or an online dashboard.
Ongoing program administration. The City should continue engagement with local providers,
other jurisdictions, and regular reporting activities.
Facilities Support
Strategic leveraging. Target properties for immediate acquisition of housing units or land banking
for future development should be identified in coordination with the Renton Housing Authority and
nonprofit agencies, with priorities in areas with high transit service.
Emergency shelter development. A process should be developed for receiving applications for
funding support for the acquisition and operation of permanent space for emergency shelter.
Preferably, this would include options for supportive services such as a meal program, laundry and
hygiene facilities, and navigation services. This development may be negotiated directly with
Catholic Community Services to provide a permanent location for the ARISE shelter, although a net
expansion of available beds should be provided from this investment.
Capital and maintenance funding for the Renton Housing Authority. The City should coordinate
with the Renton Housing Authority to determine a schedule or plan for providing funding support for
RHA capital and maintenance expenditures related to new affordable housing acquisition and
development.
Capital and maintenance funding for regional facilities. In coordination with neighboring
communities and SKHHP, the City should identify funding priorities for regional facilities to address
issues of housing, homelessness, and behavioral health, and clearly determine required funding
support. These allocations should focus on specialized populations that would be best served at a
regional scale, such as supportive housing options for survivors of domestic violence.
Capital and maintenance funding to support local partners. In addition to direct funding for RHA
and regional projects, the City should coordinate a competitive application process for local
providers to support efforts by non-profit and private equity partners to create and maintain
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 136 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 40
affordable housing options in the community.
Coordination of development on banked land. The City should work to provide support for funding
affordable housing projects on banked land in key locations. This should be coordinated with RHA
and affordable housing development partners and may include additional capital funding to
promote the development of these projects.
Additional funding support for affordable housing development. Ongoing capital and
maintenance funding should be coordinated with the Renton Housing Authority, as well as with
neighboring jurisdictions and with external affordable housing providers through a competitive
process. At this stage, funding should begin to be allocated to address longer-term maintenance and
operations of the facilities acquired under this program.
Additional emergency shelter development. A second process should be coordinated to provide
for an expansion of emergency shelter space. This may be focused on more of a regional response
to specialized needs, and discussions with neighboring communities should be coordinated to plan out
potential options and locations.
Continuation of capital funding support. The City should look to provide ongoing capital funding
support for targeted affordable housing projects in the community, both with the Renton Housing
Authority and other affordable housing providers. Where possible, this should be focused on
development of banked land. As noted previously, this funding should shift over time to provide
greater support for maintenance and preservation projects to encourage fiscal sustainability.
Additional shelter development. An additional process should be developed to expand emergency
shelter space further. As with previous processes, this may be provided through a regional facility in
cooperation with other neighboring jurisdictions.
Programmatic Support
Maintenance of behavioral health field response. The City should continue to support funding for
behavioral health professionals and navigators for field response and monitor the outcomes from this
work.
Pilot program for additional behavioral health services. The City should coordinate a pilot process
to develop additional behavioral health services for residents. This may be negotiated directly with
a public housing authority or non-profit agencies to support existing facilities related to permanent
supportive housing or could be granted through a contract based on a competitive application
process to a local provider.
Pilot program for rental assistance. A pilot process would be coordinated with an external partner
to provide housing assistance to recipients in the community. This may be negotiated directly or
released through a competitive process to a limited number of social service agencies working in the
Renton area.
Continuation of programmatic support. Efforts to provide other support through the identified
programs with behavioral health services, rental assistance, and affordable housing preservation
should be maintained.
Review and adjustment of pilot programs. After a few years, an initial review of the pilot
programs should be conducted. This would include:
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 137 of 184
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 41
Behavioral health services (including field response)
Rental assistance
For each of these programs, the City should review the performance of each investment and
determine the reach of these programs. This should be used to identify whether funding support
should be expanded or realigned as needed.
Program review. As this funding program continues into the long term, the City should conduct a
broader review of the funding strategies and use of resources to determine if a significant
realignment would be necessary. This should look to identify possible new areas of funding support
based on changing trends (e.g., aging population, changing demographics, etc.).
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 138 of 184
1
Comprehensive Plan and Policy
Review & Racial Equity Analysis
An Addendum to the Housing Action Plan | Drafted March 2023, Adopted xx 2024
Table of Contents
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................. 1
Table of Figures ..................................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4
State Laws and Requirements ............................................................................................................... 4
HB 1220 (link)............................................................................................................................................................. 4
Missing Middle Grant (link) ...................................................................................................................................... 4
Relation to Other Plans ......................................................................................................................... 5
Vision 2050 (link) ....................................................................................................................................................... 5
Countywide Planning Policies .................................................................................................................................. 5
Housing Action Plan (link) .......................................................................................................................................... 5
Renton Comprehensive Plan (link) ........................................................................................................................... 6
Comprehensive Plan Review ................................................................................................................ 6
Land Use Element ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
Housing and Human Services Element .................................................................................................................... 9
Existing Code Review ......................................................................................................................... 10
Title IV Development Regulations ......................................................................................................................... 10
Chapter 2 – Zoning Districts – Uses and Standards ..................................................................................... 10
Chapter 4 – City-Wide Property Development Standards ........................................................................ 16
Chapter 6 – Street and Utility Standards ...................................................................................................... 19
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 139 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 2
Chapter 9 – Permits – Specific ......................................................................................................................... 19
Past Code Amendments ...................................................................................................................... 20
Summary of Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 22
Racial Equity Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 23
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 23
Community Understanding ..................................................................................................................................... 23
Historical Context ................................................................................................................................................ 23
Analysis of Racially Disparate Impacts, Exclusion, and Displacement ........................................................... 27
Measures ............................................................................................................................................................... 27
Racially Disparate Impacts ................................................................................................................................ 28
Housing Tenure ..................................................................................................................................................... 31
Distribution of Environmental Exposure Risk ................................................................................................... 35
Summary of Analysis Findings ............................................................................................................................... 46
Table of Figures
Exhibit 1. 4-2-020 Existing Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts ..................................................................... 11
Exhibit 2. 4-2-020 Recommended Changes to Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts ................................... 11
Exhibit 3. Percentage of Housing Units Density ...................................................................................................... 12
Exhibit 4. 4-2-060 Zoning Use Table ....................................................................................................................... 12
Exhibit 5. 4-2-110A1 Existing Development Standards For Residential Zoning Designations ...................... 13
Exhibit 6. 4-2-110A Recommended Changes To Development Standards For Residential Zoning
Designations................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Exhibit 7. 4-2-115.2 Existing Open Space Standards ......................................................................................... 15
Exhibit 8. 4-2-115.3 Existing Residential Design Standards ............................................................................... 15
Exhibit 9. 4-2-116 Existing Accessory Dwelling Unit Residential Design Standards ....................................... 16
Exhibit 10. 4-4-080 Existing Parking Spaces Required Based on Land Use .................................................... 17
Exhibit 11. 4-4-080 Recommended Changes to Parking Spaces Required Based on Land Use .................. 18
Exhibit 12. Parking Area Versus Floor Space Ratio ............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Exhibit 13. Annexation History Map ......................................................................................................................... 25
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 140 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 3
Exhibit 14. Racially Restrictive Covenants in Renton: Representative Language from a Sample of
Covenants ....................................................................................................................................................................... 26
Exhibit 15. Renton Map of Race-Based Covenants ............................................................................................... 27
Exhibit 16. Measures of Racially Disparate Impacts, Exclusion, and Displacement ......................................... 27
Exhibit 17. Renton Median Household Income ........................................................................................................ 28
Exhibit 18. Median Household Income by Race and Ethnicity ............................................................................. 29
Exhibit 19. Average Rent Comparison ..................................................................................................................... 29
Exhibit 20. Rent Over Time ......................................................................................................................................... 30
Exhibit 21. Average home price over time.............................................................................................................. 31
Exhibit 22. Average home price in Renton at different AMI ................................................................................ 31
Exhibit 23. Housing Tenure Rates, 2010-2021 ...................................................................................................... 32
Exhibit 24. Home Owner Cost Burden by Race and Ethnicity .............................................................................. 33
Exhibit 25. Renter Cost Burden by Race and Ethnicity .......................................................................................... 34
Exhibit 26. Overcrowding in Renton ......................................................................................................................... 34
Exhibit 27. Washington Environmental Health Disparities Definition .................................................................. 35
Exhibit 28. Environmental Exposure Risk Map ........................................................................................................ 36
Exhibit 29. Commute Mode Split ............................................................................................................................... 37
Exhibit 30. Affordable Housing Projects in Renton ................................................................................................ 38
Exhibit 31. Municpality Eviction Study Comparison ............................................................................................... 39
Exhibit 32. Municipality Eviction Rate: by Race and Ethnicity .............................................................................. 40
Exhibit 33. Municipality Relative Risk of Eviction: by Race and Ethnicity .......................................................... 40
Exhibit 34. Evictions Study Map: Eviction Count ...................................................................................................... 41
Exhibit 35. Eviction Study Map: Eviction Rate ......................................................................................................... 41
Exhibit 36. Eviction Study Map: Relative Eviction Risk ........................................................................................... 42
Exhibit 37. Evictions Study Map: Relative Eviction Risk ......................................................................................... 42
Exhibit 38. Displacement Risk Index ......................................................................................................................... 44
Exhibit 39. Displacement Risk Table, Renton ........................................................................................................... 45
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 141 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 4
Introduction
The Comprehensive Plan and Policy review is an analysis of existing Renton Comprehensive Plan policies
and Municipal Code to determine the extent of amendments required to meet the goal of authorizing
middle housing types on at least 30% of lots currently zoned as single family residential. Middle housing
types include duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, courtyard apartments,
cottage housing, and stacked flats. Existing plans such as the Renton Housing Action Plan (HAP) and Vision
2050 have been assessed and provide context and recommendations as to how Middle Housing can
address housing needs in Renton. Housing policy recommendations for middle housing will allow more
diverse and affordable housing options for Renton’s residents and future households. This report is
designed to provide a review of the City’s existing codes and policiesto inform recommendations for next
steps. A racial equity analysis and a public engagement process will also be done in conjunction to
provide additional quantitative and qualitative information.
This report lists relevant comprehensive plan policies and municipal code affecting middle housing, with
notes, rationale, and questions for further discussion. Furthermore, key themes from this report will inform
discussion questions for public engagement and a framework for policy recommendations for middle
housing in Renton.
State Laws and Requirements
HB 1220 (link)
House Bill 1220 amended the Growth Management Act, adding greater specificity to the requirement of
the housing element. The new requirements are effective as of July 25, 2021. The updates strengthen the
GMA housing goal from “encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of
the population” to “plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all economic segments of the
population of this state,” making policy more actionable in planning for and accommodating households
of all incomes, including emergency and permanent supportive housing. The amendment also requires
counties and cities to identify and remove discriminatory barriers and undo racially disparate impacts.
Missing Middle Grant (link)
Section 189 of Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 5693, the 2022 supplemental operating budget, directs
the Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) to develop a grant program to support the
adoption of ordinances authorizing middle housing types, as well support to conduct a racial equity
analysis. The Middle Housing Grant Program is available to cities within King, Kitsap, Pierce, and
Snohomish counties.
Grantee jurisdictions must conduct actions relating to adopting ordinances that authorize middle housing
types on at least 30% of lots currently zoned as single family residential. “Middle housing types” include
duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, courtyard apartments, cottage housing,
and stacked flats.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 142 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 5
Each city must use a racial equity analysis and establish anti-displacement policies as required under
RCW 36.70A.070(2)(e) through (h) to ensure there will be no net displacement of very low, low, or
moderate-income households, as defined in RCW 43.63A.510, or individuals from racial, ethnic, and
religious communities which have been subject to discriminatory housing policies in the past.
Relation to Other Plans
Vision 2050 (link)
The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) develops policies and facilitates decisions about regional
growth, transportation, and economic development planning within King, Pierce, Snohomish, and Kitsap
counties. PSRC is composed of four counties, numerous cities and towns, ports, state and local
transportation agencies, and Tribal governments within the region.
The GMA requires multi-county planning policies (MPPs) that cities’ and counties’ comprehensive plans
must be consistent with. MPPs for King, Pierce, Snohomish, and Kitsap counties are adopted by PSRC in a
long-range plan called VISION 2050. VISION 2050 is the region’s plan to grow to accommodate 5.8
million people by 2050.
PSRC’s Regional Growth Strategy calls for the 16 Core Cities (including the City of Renton) to
accommodate 28% of the region’s population growth and 35% of its employment growth by 2050.
Within the Core Cities, jurisdictions should encourage growth near high-capacity transit stations and within
regional growth centers to achieve regional growth goals.
Countywide Planning Policies
Within the GMA framework, each county collaborates with its cities to adopt Countywide Planning
Policies (CPPs) and develop local growth targets that set expectations for local comprehensive plans.
Manufacturing and industrial centers (MICs) are also designated at this countywide level. In 2021 the
Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) approved new CPPs, and they have been approved by
the King County Council and ratified by the cities. The updated policies are consistent with PSRC’s newly
adopted VISION 2050. The CPPs set forth growth targets for housing and jobs, and identify a hierarchy
of centers reflecting VISION 2050 as well as countywide center. The CPPs also address equity and
environmental justice, environmental protection, and detailed affordable housing requirements, among
other policies.
Housing Action Plan (link)
The City of Renton received a grant from Commerce to create a Housing Action Plan in 2021. The Renton
City Council adopted the Final Housing Action Plan in October of 2021. The Housing Action Plan (HAP) is
the City of Renton’s short-term strategy for increasing housing options and affordability in the community
to achieve its vision of a more vibrant, inclusive, and equitable future. The City’s progress on
implementing the strategies and impacts to housing production and achieving the goals of the Plan will be
assessed as part of the update to the Comprehensive Plan in 2024.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 143 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 6
Renton Comprehensive Plan (link)
Renton’s Comprehensive Plan includes a future land use map and goals and policies that accommodate its
2035 growth targets and govern housing, economic development, transportation, utilities, capital
facilities, and a variety of public and human services. The content, analyses, goals, and policies of
Renton’s Comprehensive Plan were developed in compliance with the GMA, King County’s Countywide
Planning Policies, and PSRC’s Regional Growth Strategy (at the time VISION 2040). The City will prepare
a periodic update of its Comprehensive Plan by 2024 to address more recent updates to GMA and
VISION 2050 as well as its new growth targets to 2044.
Comprehensive Plan Review
The Comprehensive Plan Review identifies relevant policies from Renton’s Land Use and Housing and
Human Services Element. The notes column on the right in the table below identifies changes that could
support middle housing in Renton. Considerations regarding middle housing include: explicit limitations on
middle housing styles or densities in policies or design limitations and open space and parking policies
that would impede middle housing.
This section is designed to inform policy recommendations with additional support from the racial equity
analysis and public engagement.
The policies were reviewed for racially disparate impacts using draft Commerce guidance, and notes are
in the right hand column. The evaluation included the following criteria:
The policy is valid and supports meeting the identified housing needs. The policy is needed and
addresses identified racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing. S Supportive
The policy can support meeting the identified housing needs but may be insufficient or does not
address racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing. A Approaching
The policy may challenge the jurisdictions' ability to meet the identified housing needs. The policy’s
benefits and burdens should be reviewed to optimize the ability to meet the policy’s objectives while
improving the equitable distribution of benefits and burdens imposed by the policy. C Challenging
The policy does not impact the jurisdiction’s ability to meet the identified housing needs and has no
influence or impact on racially disparate impacts, displacement, or exclusion. NA Not Applicable
Land Use Element
POLICY Middle Housing Support RDI Evaluation
RENTON LAND USE PLAN
Policy L-14: Residential-1 Zone – Lands with
significant environmental constraints, which may have the potential for development at a level of intensity that is compatible with that environment, or lands that provide
urban separators should be zoned for
Residential-1 (R-1). R-1 zoning is allowed in
Include a provision that supports the inclusion
of attached and detached accessory dwelling units.
A – The R1 zone can help meet identified
housing needs by accommodating
accessory dwelling units.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 144 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 7
POLICY Middle Housing Support RDI Evaluation
the Residential Low Density land use designation.
Policy L-14: Residential-4 Zone – Zone lands
suitable for large lot housing and suburban, estate-style dwellings compatible with the scale and density of the surrounding area Residential-4 (R-4). R-4 zoning is allowed in
the Residential Low Density land use
designation.
Remove language around specific single
family housing styles and replace with “lands suitable for single family housing typologies”. Include a provision that supports the inclusion of attached and detached
accessory dwelling units. The corresponding
zoning designation allows 0-4 du/ac.
A – Policy could include specific
descriptions of geography and desired
residential typologies.
Policy L-14: Residential Manufactured Home Park Zone – Lands with existing
manufactured home parks as established
uses should be zoned Residential
Manufactured Home Park (RMH). RMH zoning is allowed in the Residential Low Density, Residential Medium Density, and Residential High Density land Use
designations.
No changes are proposed for RMH zoned parcels. S – This policy is supportive of the
achieving the GMA goal for housing.
Policy L-15: Residential Medium-Density - Place areas that can support high-quality, compact, urban development with access to urban services, transit, and infrastructure,
whether through new development or
through infill, within the Residential Medium
Density (RMD) designation. Within the RMD designation, allow a variety of single-family
development, with continuity created
through the application of design guidelines,
the organization of roadways, sidewalks, public spaces, and the placement of community gathering places and civic amenities.
Exclusively single-family development should not be supported outright in the RMD zone, but instead could be included as part of a new development including duplexes,
triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes,
townhouses, courtyard apartments, cottage
housing and stacked flats.
C – Prioritizing single family residential
development in the RMD designation is a
barrier to the implementation additional missing middle typologies. Some middle housing typologies should be allowed in
the code.
Policy L-15: Residential 6 Zone - Zone lands
Residential-6 (R-6) where there is land suitable for larger lot development, an opportunity for infill development, an existing pattern of single-family
development in the range of four to eight
units per net acre, and where critical areas
are limited. R-6 zoning is allowed in the Residential Medium Density land use
designation.
Remove specific density reference (4-8 units
per net acre) to establish a more flexible density range within the municipal code designation. The corresponding zoning designation allows 3-6 du/ac which differs
from the guidance in L-15.
A – This density range could be more
supportive of missing middle housing
typologies to achieve the GMA goal for
housing.
Policy L-15: Residential 8 Zone - Zone lands
Residential-8 (R-8) where there is opportunity to re-invest in existing single-family neighborhoods through infill or the opportunity to develop new single-family
plats at urban densities greater than four
dwelling units per acre. R-8 zoning is allowed in the Residential Medium Density land use designation.
Include missing middle typologies within the
R8 definition to expand beyond single family and infill development. This may include duplexes, triplexes, townhouses, and cottage housing. The corresponding zoning
designation allows 4-8 du/ac.
A – Policy could include specific
descriptions of geography and desired
residential typologies.
Policy L-16: Residential High Density –
Designate land for Residential High Density
(RHD) where access, topography, and
adjacent land uses create conditions appropriate for a variety of housing unit
types, or where there is existing multifamily
development. RHD unit types are designed
to incorporate features from both single family and multifamily developments, support cost-efficient housing, facilitate infill development, have close access to transit
Exclusively single-family development should
not be supported outright in the RHD zone,
but instead could be included as part of a
new development including a mix of duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes,
sixplexes, townhouses, courtyard apartments,
live/work lofts cottage housing and stacked
flats. Existing multifamily housing should not be a prerequisite to implement an RHD designation.
C – Prioritizing single family residential
development in the RHD designation is a
barrier to the implementation additional
missing middle typologies. Middle and
Multifamily housing should be prioritized.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 145 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 8
POLICY Middle Housing Support RDI Evaluation
service, and efficiently use urban services and infrastructure. Land designated RHD is
where projects will be compatible with
existing uses and where infrastructure is adequate to handle impacts from higher density uses.
Policy L-16: Residential-10 Zone – Zone
lands Residential-10 (R-10) where there is
an existing mix of single family and small-
scale multifamily use or there are vacant or underutilized parcels that could be
redeveloped as infill and are located within
¼ mile of public transit service and a major
arterial. R-10 implements the Residential High Density land use designation.
Remove the mention of single family uses as
exclusively single-family development should
not be supported outright in the RHD zone.
Include typologies that fit within this zone, these may include a mix of duplexes,
triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes,
townhouses, courtyard apartments, live/work
lofts, cottage housing and stacked flats.
Additionally, consider expanding the distance to major transit centers to ½ mile (Renton Transit Center and South Renton Transit
Center) as this is in line with the urban design
concepts for a 15-minute neighborhood and
the forthcoming HB 1110.
A – This density range could be more
supportive of missing middle housing
typologies to achieve the GMA goal for
housing.
Policy L-16: Residential-14 Zone – Zone lands Residential-14 (R-14) where it is
possible to develop a mix of compact
housing types in areas of approximately 20
acres or larger in size (may be in different ownerships) or are within or adjacent to a
Growth Center The zone functions as a
transition zone between lower intensity
residential and higher intensity mixed use zoning. R-14 implements the Residential High Density land use designation.
Include typologies that fit within this zone, these may include a mix of duplexes,
triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes,
townhouses, courtyard apartments, live/work
lofts, cottage housing and stacked flats. Consider reducing the acreage for the size of
development expected as this zone is a
target for infill development.
A – Policy could include specific
descriptions of geography and desired residential typologies.
Policy L-16: Residential Multi-Family Zone –
Zone lands Residential Multi Family (RMF)
where there is existing (or vested) multifamily development of one-acre or greater in size. Expanded RMF zoning should only be where access is from a street
classified as a Principal arterial, Minor
arterial, or Collector, and where existing
multi-family is abutting at least two property sides. RMF zoning implements the
Residential High Density land use
designation.
Expansion of the RMF designation should not
rely on the adjacency of existing multi-family
housing. In order to make this designation more flexible, the requirement for existing multifamily properties to abut at least two property sides should be removed as it is
prohibitive of future RMF expansion.
C – Policy is restrictive and preventative in
nature.
Policy L-16: Commercial Neighborhood Zone – Zone lands Commercial Neighborhood (CN) that provide goods and services on a small-scale to a surrounding
residential neighborhood and that front on
a street classified as a Principal arterial, Minor arterial, or Collector. Expanded CN zoning should only be where there is opportunity to provide small limited-scale
commercial opportunity to the immediately
surrounding residential community that
would not result in an increase in scale or intensity, which would alter the character of
the nearby residential neighborhood. The
CN zone implements the Residential High
Density land use designation.
Remove language around residential neighborhood character and adjust to encourage a mix of housing typologies in an effort to anticipate the needs of future
residents.
C – Language conflates desired
characteristics with a housing type.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 146 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 9
POLICY Middle Housing Support RDI Evaluation
PROMOTING A SAFE, HEALTHY, AND ATTRACTIVE
COMMUNITY
Policy L-57: Provide complete arranged as an interconnecting network or grid. Locate planter strips between the curb and the sidewalk in order to provide separation
between cars and pedestrians. Discourage
dead-end streets and cul-de-sacs.
Consider requiring new master planned developments in R4 – R14 zoning designations to create connected and hierarchical street networks. Alternatively,
prohibiting new master planned development
from building dead-end streets and cul-de-
sacs when not adjacent to significant or unavoidable critical areas.
A – This density range could be more
supportive of missing middle housing
typologies to achieve the GMA goal for housing.
Housing and Human Services Element
POLICY Middle Housing Support RDI Evaluation
Policy HHS-3: Work with other jurisdictions and organizations, including the Renton Housing Authority and non-profit housing
developers, to address the need for housing
to be affordable to very low-income households. This housing should focus on accessibility, mobility, and proximity to social
services
Make specific mention of the AMI this policy is planning for. Site very-low income housing in RLD land uses.
S – This policy is supportive of the
achieving the GMA goal for housing.
Policy HHS-4: Promote homeownership
opportunities for households of all incomes.
Provide explicit affordability targets for
moderate (120%), low (80% AMI), very low (50% AMI) housing, and extremely low-income (30% AMI) households. See allocations
developed regionally.1
A – Policy could include specific
affordability targets.
Policy HHS-B: Ensure a variety of housing
types are available within the City that meet the needs of the present without compromising the needs of future generations
Including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes,
fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, courtyard apartments, cottage housing and stacked flats.
A – Policy could include specific
descriptions of geography and desired
residential typologies.
Policy HHS-6: Implement inclusionary zoning
provisions and other techniques that result in
a range of housing types, at different densities, and prices in new developments that address the housing needs of all people
at all stages of life, including vulnerable
populations.
Including bonuses for middle and affordable
housing typologies. A – This policy could be more
supportive of the GMA goal for
housing.
Policy HHS-8: Continue to allow Accessory Dwelling Units in single family residential areas and ensure they are compatible with
the existing neighborhood.
Support through inclusionary zoning and financial incentive programs as well as permit-ready program. Remove vague architectural
compatibility requirements.
A – Architectural compatibility
requirements may challenge the jurisdiction’s ability to mee the GMA housing goal or interfere with anti-RDI efforts, particularly if policy language
is vague.
Policy HHS-9: Foster and locate new housing
in proximity to Employment Centers and streets that have public transportation
Include/prioritize middle and affordable
Housing typologies. A – This policy could be more
supportive of the GMA goal for
housing.
1 Available at: https://kingcounty.gov/~/media/depts/community-human-services/housing-homelessness-community-
development/documents/affordable-housing-
committee/Statements%20Issued%20by%20the%20Committee/GMPC_Motion_21-1_Recommendation_Transmittal_2022,-d-,12,-d-,29.ashx?la=en.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 147 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 10
POLICY Middle Housing Support RDI Evaluation
systems in place, and complements existing housing.
Policy HHS-26: Encourage construction of
universally designed units, supportive housing arrangements, and transitional housing in close proximity (within one-quarter mile) to public transportation.
Increase the proximity of supportive housing to
one-half mile to public transportation. A – This policy could be more
supportive of the GMA goal for
housing by increasing the proximity of
supportive housing to transit service.
Existing Code Review
The existing code review focuses on Chapter 2 – Zoning Regulations, Chapter 4 – City Wide Property
Development Standards, Chapter 6 – Street and Utility Standards, and Chapter 9 – Permits – Specific of
the Renton Municipal Code. Recommended changes to the existing code aid in adopting ordinances that
would authorize middle housing types on at least 30% of lots currently zoned as single family residential.
“Middle housing types” include duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses,
courtyard apartments, cottage housing and stacked flats. The City of Renton’s zoning by density
approach is one of the largest barriers to implementing missing middle housing typologies. The banded
zoning designations are largely designed for detached single family residential typologies with the
exception of the Residential Multi Family (RMF) zone. The following recommendations attempt to
associate the existing zoning designations with a more inclusive selection of missing middle housing
typologies.
Title IV Development Regulations
Chapter 2 – Zoning Districts – Uses and Standards
Chapter 4-2 RMC contains zone-related land use regulations, and zone-related development standards,
primarily in tabular form. Chapter 4-2 RMC additionally includes provisions for interpreting the Zoning
Map that delineate the zoning and overlay districts and provisions for determining the permissibility of
unclassified uses.
4-2-020 – Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts
This section establishes the approved density ranges for the zoning districts that implement the land use
vision in the comprehensive plan. As it is written, the zone indicates the maximum net density permitted
within the zone with the exception for density bonuses intended to allow assisted living facilities to
develop in zones with a low max net density threshold. The zoning districts correspond with land use
designations in the comprehensive plan, and as the code is written, provide a narrow range for missing
middle housing typologies to be included.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 148 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 11
Exhibit 1. 4-2-020 Existing Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts
Land Use Zone Minimum
Net Density
Maximum Net Density
Residential Low Density (RLD) R-1 N/A 1 DU/AC *Density bonus provisions, of up to eighteen (18) dwelling units per acre, are intended to allow assisted living to
develop with higher densities within the zone
R-4 N/A 4 DU/AC
Residential Medium Density (RMD) R-6 3 DU/AC 6 DU/AC
R-8 4 DU/AC 8 DU/AC
Residential High Density
(RHD)
R-10 5 DU/AC 10 DU/AC
R-14 7 DU/AC 14 DU/AC *Opportunities for bonuses up to eighteen (18) dwelling units per net acre
RMF 10 DU/AC 20 DU/AC *Opportunities for bonuses up to twenty five (25) dwelling units per net acre
Source: Renton Municipal Code, 2022.
The recommended change doubles the minimum net density of the residential zone and increases capacity
and flexibility for missing middle housing typologies. The change maintains the existing zone designations
and uses the naming convention to establish minimum net densities as opposed to maximum net densities.
This will allow greater flexibility within the individual zoning designations to accommodate missing middle
housing typologies while gently increasing residential density through the city.
Exhibit 2. 4-2-020 Recommended Changes to Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts
Land Use Zone Mean Net
Density in
Buildable
Lands
Minimum
Net
Density
Maximum Net Density
Residential Low
Density (RLD)
R-1 1.57 N/A 1 DU/AC *Density bonus provisions, of up to eighteen (18)
dwelling units per acre, are intended to allow assisted living
to develop with higher densities within the zone
R-4 3.72 2 DU/AC 6 DU/AC
Residential Medium Density (RMD) R-6 4.75 6 DU/AC 8 DU/AC
R-8 5.52 8 DU/AC 10 DU/AC
Residential High
Density (RHD)
R-10 10.79 10 DU/AC 14 DU/AC
R-14 10.78 14 DU/AC 20 DU/AC
RMF 21.35 10 DU/AC 30 DU/AC
Sources: Renton Municipal Code, 2022; BERK, 2022.
R-1, R-8, R-10, and RMF zones all have roughly 90% of units at 75%+ net density which indicates a
need for increased capacity. R-6 shows that 53% of units are at 75%+ net density which is an indicator
that single family homes are being built, likely without ADUs. R-8 and R-10 are where additional changes
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 149 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 12
to permitted uses, and increases in minimum net density will benefit the inclusion of additional missing
middle housing typologies. Additionally, RMF zoning indicates a need for increased density beyond what
can be achieved through density bonuses. Allowing a larger minimum net density range, with an
increased max net density, will allow market forces to guide housing preference.
Exhibit 3. Percentage of Housing Units Density
Zone Designation Percent of Units at 75%+ Net Density Allowed Middle Housing Typologies
Rresidential-1 97% Detached dwelling, ADUs
Residential-4 77% Detached dwelling, ADUs
Residential-6 53% Detached dwelling, ADUs
Residential-8 88% Detached dwelling, ADUs
Residential-10 89% Detached dwelling (R-10, R-14)
Live/Work (R-14)
Townhouses (All)
Attached dwellings/Flats (All)
Garden Apartments (RM-F)
Residential-14 44%
Residential Multi Family 89%
Source: BERK, 2022.
4-2-060 - Zoning Use Table – uses allowed in zoning designations
The existing permitted residential uses limit missing middle housing typologies and allow opportunities for
detached dwellings to built in all zoning designations except for RMF. Below are recommended changes
to permitted uses that increase the flexibility of missing middle housing typologies and address the
density changes recommended in 4-2-020.
Exhibit 4. 4-2-060 Zoning Use Table
Zone Designation Permitted Residential Uses Additional Recommended Permitted Housing Typologies
Rresidential-1 Detached dwelling, ADUs
Residential-4 Detached dwelling, ADUs
Residential-6 Detached dwelling, ADUs Attached Dwellings including Flats should be permitted uses in R-6 zoning
Residential-8 Detached dwelling, ADUs Attached Dwellings including Flats, Townhouses, and Carriage Houses should be permitted uses in R-8 zoning.
Residential-10 Detached dwelling, ADUs, Flats,
Townhouses, Carriage Houses
New detached dwellings should be removed as an outright permitted
use. Duplexes and Triplexes should be permitted uses in R-10 zoning.
Residential-14 Detached dwelling, ADUs, Flats, Live
Work Units, Townhouses, Carriage Houses, Congregate Residence
Detached Dwelling should be removed as an outright permitted use.
Fourplexes, fiveplexes, and sixplexes should be permitted uses in R-14 zoning.
Residential Multi Family Flats, Garden Style Apartments,
Townhouses, Carriage Houses
Congregate Residences, fourplexes, fiveplexes, and sixplexes should be
permitted uses in R-14 zoning.
Source: Renton Municipal Code, 2022.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 150 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 13
4-2-110 - Residential development standards
Commensurate with the recommendation to increase the minimum and maximum net densities for the
residential zoning designations, recommended changes to the development standards for residential
zoning designations include: allowing the maximum density determine the number of dwellings per legal
lot for medium and high density designations, increasing the max building coverage for R-8 through RMF
zones to accommodate the increased net density, and removing the cap set on maximum number of units
per building for R-10 and R-14. The underlying max net density and accompanying setback standards
will effectively regulate this. Exhibit 5, below, shows the existing development standards.
Exhibit 5. 4-2-110A1 Existing Development Standards For Residential Zoning Designations
RC R-1 R-4 R-6 R-8 R-10 R-14 RMF
Minimum Net Density (per Net
Acre)1, 2, 15
None 3 dwelling units 4 dwelling units 5 dwelling units30 7 dwelling units30 10 dwelling units30
Maximum Net
Density (per Net Acre,
Except per Net 10
Acres in RC)2, 14, 15
1 dwelling
unit
1 dwelling
unit7, 36
4 dwelling
units
6 dwelling
units
8 dwelling
units38
10 dwelling
units29
14 dwelling
units29
20 dwelling
units29
Maximum Number of
Dwellings (per Legal
Lot)2
1 dwelling
with 1
accessory dwelling unit
1 dwelling
with 1
accessory dwelling unit7
1 dwelling with 1
accessory dwelling unit
1 dwelling
with 1
accessory dwelling unit
Detached dwellings: 1
dwelling with 1 accessory
dwelling unit
Attached dwellings: n/a
Per Maximum
Net Density
Maximum Building Coverage (including
Primary and Accessory)
10% 20% 35% 40% 50% 55% 65% Townhouses: 70%
Other
Attached
Dwellings: 35%
A maximum
coverage of
45% may be
allowed through the Hearing Examiner site
development
plan review
process.
Maximum Impervious
Surface Area
15% 25% 50% 55% 65% 70% 80% 75%
Maximum Number of
Units per Building2
n/a No more
than 4 units per building.
No more
than 6 units per building.
n/a
Source: Renton Municipal Code, 2022.
The recommended changes mirror the density changes in 4-2-020 while also encoring changes to lot
coverage and maximum number dwelling per lot and maximum number of units per building. The
maximum building coverage for R8 – R14 is changed to match the approved townhouse lot coverage of
70% in the existing RMF zone. Lot coverage for other attached dwellings is increased to 65%, effectively
making each individual parcel more effective in accommodating a variety of housing typologies. R10 –
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 151 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 14
R14 previously permitted no more than 4 and 6 units per building, respectively. The recommended
change is to remove limits on units per building, and let the underlying zoning dictate the density, lot
coverage, and height of the structure as shown in Exhibit 6.
Exhibit 6. 4-2-110A Recommended Changes To Development Standards For Residential Zoning Designations
RC R-1 R-4 R-6 R-8 R-10 R-14 RMF
Minimum Net Density (per Net Acre)1,
2, 15
None 2 6 dwelling units 8 dwelling units 10 dwelling units30 14 dwelling
units30
10 dwelling units30
Maximum Net
Density (per Net Acre,
Except per Net 10
Acres in RC)2, 14, 15
1 dwelling
unit
1 dwelling
unit7, 36
4 dwelling
units
8 dwelling
units
10
dwelling
units38
14 dwelling
units29
20
dwelling
units29
30 dwelling
units29
Maximum Number of
Dwellings (per Legal
Lot)2
1 dwelling
with 1 accessory dwelling unit
1 dwelling
with 1 accessory dwelling unit7
1 dwelling with 1
accessory dwelling unit
Per
Maximum
Net Density
Per Maximum Net
Density
Per Maximum
Net Density
Maximum Building Coverage (including
Primary and Accessory)
10% 20% 35% 55% Townhouses: 70%
Other attached Dwellings: 65%
Townhouses: 70%
Other Attached
Dwellings: 65%
A maximum coverage of 45% may be
allowed through
the Hearing
Examiner site development plan review
process.
Maximum Impervious
Surface Area 15% 25% 50% 55% 65% 70% 80% 75%
Maximum Number of Units per Building2 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Source: Renton Municipal Code, 2022; BERK
4-2-115 - Residential design and open space standards
Consider the impacts of primary entry and open space requirements. When four or more units are
proposed in a development, located within an R-10 or R-14 zone, there is a fixed requirement for 350
square feet of common open space. This requirement may prevent additional lot coverage needed to
accommodate greater density in Residential High Density zones. Some communities allow for a reduction
of onsite open space if in a ¼ mile of a public park (and fee in lieu). See Exhibit 7.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 152 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 15
Exhibit 7. 4-2-115.2 Existing Open Space Standards
Standards for Common Open Space
R-10 and R-14 Developments of four (4) or more units: Required to provide common open space as outlined below. Above ground drainage facilities (i.e., ponds, swales, ditches, rain gardens, etc.) shall not be counted towards the
common open space requirement.
For each unit in the development, three hundred fifty (350) square feet of common open space shall be
provided.
Open space shall be designed as a park, common green, pea-patch, pocket park, or pedestrian entry
easement in the development and shall include picnic areas, space for recreational activities, and other activities as appropriate.
Open space shall be located in a highly visible area and be easily accessible to the neighborhood.
Open space(s) shall be contiguous to the majority of the dwellings in the development and accessible to all dwellings. For sites one acre or smaller in size, open space(s) shall be at least thirty feet (30') in at least one dimension. For sites larger than one acre in size, open space(s) shall be at least forty feet (40') in at least one
dimension. For all sites, to allow for variation, open space(s) of less than the minimum dimension (thirty feet
(30') or forty feet (40'), as applicable) are allowed; provided, that when all of a site’s open spaces are
averaged, the applicable dimension requirement is met.
A pedestrian entry easement can be counted as open space if it has a minimum width of twenty feet (20')
and within that twenty feet (20') a minimum five feet (5') of sidewalk is provided.
Source: Renton Municipal Code, 2022.
In instances where rowhouse and townhouse style housing is proposed in R-10 and R-14 zones, the
primary entrance requirements may be too prescriptive and present a barrier to site design. This may
specifically hinder walk-up style rowhouse development, which may be a typology well suited for R-14
zones. See Exhibit 8.
Exhibit 8. 4-2-115.3 Existing Residential Design Standards
Primary Entry Standards
R-10 and R-14 Both of the following are required:
The entry shall take access from and face a street, park, common green, pocket park, pedestrian easement, or open space, and
The entry shall include a porch or stoop with a minimum depth of five feet (5') and minimum height twelve inches (12") above grade.
Exception: in cases where accessibility (ADA) is a priority, an accessible route may be taken from a front
driveway.
Source: Renton Municipal Code, 2022.
4-2-116 - Accessory dwelling unit residential design standards
Renton should consider removing all architectural compatibility requirements for ADUs, as these are
arbitrary and rely on pre-existing conditions that may be undesirable and hinder the construction of
future ADUs. To simplify and streamline permitting, the City of Renton has already offered pre-approved
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 153 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 16
DADU construction plans that create a faster, easier, and more predictable design and permitting
process.2 Exhibit 9, below, shows existing Municipal code for DADUs.
Exhibit 9. 4-2-116 Existing Accessory Dwelling Unit Residential Design Standards
Scale, Bulk, And Character: Residential communities are intended for people and homes that have
appropriate scale and bulk to contribute to the sense of orientation to people.
Guidelines: The ADU shall visually demonstrate that it is accessory, or subordinate, to the primary structure by its reduced scale and bulk.
Standards:
R-4, R-6, R-8, R-10, and
R-14
The ADU shall be architecturally compatible with significant architectural details of the primary structure,
dominating forms, and design elements, such as eaves, roof pitch, roof form, porches, principal dormers, materials, and other significant architectural features.
Architectural Detailing: Architectural detailing contributes to the visual appeal of a home and the community. It
helps create a desirable human scale and a perception of a quality, well-designed home.
Guidelines: The ADU shall visually demonstrate a clear relationship with the primary structure so that the two (2) structures are
architecturally compatible. Architectural detail shall be provided that is consistent with the architectural character of the primary structure;
detailing like materials and color, fenestration, trim, columns, eaves, and/or corner boards shall reflect the architectural character of the
primary structure.
Source: Renton Municipal Code, 2022.
Chapter 4 – City-Wide Property Development Standards
Chapter 4-4 contains regulations and standards governing site development of property City-wide, such
as parking, landscaping, fencing, and others.
4-4-080 - Parking, loading, and driveway regulations
Providing off-street parking with new development increases the fixed cost of development and reduces
the net developable square footage of a parcel. Costs associated with meeting minimum parking
requirements, especially in multifamily housing, may add additional challenges to building affordable
housing by adding fixed costs to construction. According to the Victoria Transit Policy Institute, “one
parking space per unit typically increases moderate-priced housing costs approximately 12%, and two
parking spaces increases lower-priced housing costs by 25%.”3 Reducing or eliminating parking
requirements could substantially reduce the development costs of multifamily buildings, especially in
locations that are well-served by public transportation. The following recommendations reduces the
minimum parking requirements for detached dwelling and townhouses, cottage housing, and attached
dwellings in R-10, R-14, and RMF. Exhibit 10 shows the existing code, with recommendations for change
in Exhibit 11.
2 See: https://www.rentonwa.gov/city_hall/community_and_economic_development/permit_ready_a_d_u_program.
3 Victoria Transit Policy Institute, 2022.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 154 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 17
Exhibit 10. 4-4-080 Existing Parking Spaces Required Based on Land Use
Residential Uses Outside of Center Downtown Zone:
Minimum Maximum
Detached dwellings and townhouses: 2 per dwelling unit
1 per 1 bedroom unit
Cottage house developments: 1.6 per 3 bedroom and large dwelling units
1.4 per 2 bedroom units
1 per 1 bedroom and
studio units
1.6 per 3 bedroom and large dwelling units
1.4 per 2 bedroom units
1 per 1 bedroom and studio
units
Congregate residences: 1 per sleeping room
1 for the proprietor
1 additional space for each 4 persons employed on the
premise
1 per sleeping room
1 for the proprietor
1 additional space for each 4 persons employed on the
premise
Attached dwellings in RMF, R-14 and R-10 Zones: 1.6 per 3 bedroom and large dwelling units
1.4 per 2 bedroom units
1 per 1 bedroom and
studio units
1.6 per 3 bedroom and large dwelling units
1.4 per 2 bedroom units
1 per 1 bedroom and studio
units
Attached dwellings within all other zones: 1 per dwelling unit 1.75 per dwelling unit
Attached dwelling for low income: 1 per every 4 units 1.75 per unit
Live-work unit, residential unit: 1 per dwelling unit 1 per dwelling unit
Accessory dwelling unit: 1 per dwelling unit
ADUs located within 1/4 mile of a mass transit facility, as defined in
RMC 4-2-080, shall be
exempt from off-street
parking requirements.
1 per dwelling unit
Source: Renton Municipal Code, 2022.
The following recommendations reduce the minimum parking requirements for detached dwelling and
townhouses, cottage housing, and attached dwellings in R-10, R-14, and RMF (see Exhibit 11). As the
code is currently written, required parking standards are static for cottage housing and attached
dwellings in R10 – RMF zones, meaning that there is no range between the minimum and maximum
required. In order to build in flexibility and reduce the inclusion of redundant parking spaces, it is
recommended that the standard minimum parking space per unit is reduced to 1, with consideration made
for unit sizes.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 155 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 18
Exhibit 11. 4-4-080 Recommended Changes to Parking Spaces Required Based on Land Use
Residential Uses Outside of Center Downtown Zone:
Minimum Maximum
Detached dwellings and townhouses: 1 per dwelling unit
Cottage house developments: Studio: 0
1 bedroom: 1
2 bedroom: 1
3+ bedroom: 1
Studio: 1
1 bedroom: 1
2 bedroom: 1.5
3+ bedroom: 1.5
Congregate residences: 1 per sleeping room
1 for the proprietor
1 additional space for each 4 persons employed on the premise
1 per sleeping room
1 for the proprietor
1 additional space for each 4 persons employed on the premise
Attached dwellings in RMF, R-14 and R-10 Zones: Studio: 0
1 bedroom: 1
2 bedroom: 1
3+ bedroom: 1
Studio: 1
1 bedroom: 1
2 bedroom: 1.5
3+ bedroom: 1.5
Attached dwellings within all other zones: 1 per dwelling unit 1.75 per dwelling unit
Attached dwelling for low income: 1 per every 4 units 1.75 per unit
Live-work unit, residential unit: 1 per dwelling unit 1 per dwelling unit
Accessory dwelling unit: 1 per dwelling unit
ADUs located within 1/4
mile of a mass transit
facility, as defined in RMC 4-2-080, shall be exempt from off-street
parking requirements.
1 per dwelling unit
Source: Renton Municipal Code, 2022; BERK
Parking supply is essential to thriving business districts in the City of Renton. Unrestricted Parking zones
allow for a vehicle to occupy a space for up to 72 hours. The impact of unrestricted parking influences
drivers’ behavior, leading drivers to use curbside parking as a form of short-term vehicle storage. Paid
Parking zones improve the utilization of curbside parking resources and encourage short-stay parking for
those visiting and working in the neighborhood. A secondary benefit of this policy change is the positive
impact on the public realm. Frequent parking turnover will increase street level activation and pedestrian
circulation, and will contribute to a vibrant and thriving commercial core. Paid parking also influences
transportation mode choice, and may encourage more bus, streetcar, and bicycle trips to and from the
neighborhood. More trips utilizing multimodal transit translates to a more pedestrian-focused transit
environment and a more active public realm. If on-street parking is carefully managed, off-street parking
solutions will not be as urgently needed.
Source: Reinventing Transport, 2019.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 156 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 19
Chapter 6 – Street and Utility Standards
The development-related requirements for water, sewer, storm drainage and street construction are
contained in chapter 4-6 RMC.
4-6-060 - Street standards
Shared driveway standards in 4-6-060-J state that:
Where Permitted: Shared driveways may be allowed for access to no more
than four (4) residentially zoned lots, and no more than four (4) residential
units, the types of which are listed in RMC 4-2-060C, provided:
a. At least one lot abuts a public right-of-way and the street frontage of the
lot is equal to or greater than the lot width requirement of the zone;
b. The subject lots are not created by a subdivision of ten (10) or more lots;
c. A public street is not anticipated by the City of Renton to be necessary for
existing or future traffic and/or pedestrian circulation through the short
subdivision or to serve adjacent property;
d. The shared driveway would not adversely affect future circulation to
neighboring properties;
e. The shared driveway is no more than three hundred feet (300') in length;
and
f. The shared driveway poses no safety risk and provides sufficient access for
emergency vehicles and personnel.
How might this requirement limit anticipated future residential development in R-8 – RMF zoning? Within
the context of Renton’s Residential Medium and Low Density urban form, increases in future density may
necessitate that missing middle housing typologies have more than four units sharing a drive around a cul-
de-sac. The unit threshold of the existing standard should be discussed with an interdepartmental team of
City staff to understand implications of increasing the number of units permitted to share a driveway.
Chapter 9 – Permits – Specific
This Chapter contains detailed permit process and evaluation criteria for the various permits and
requests, including, but not limited to, conditional use permits, site plan review, and variances.
4-9-065 - Density bonus review
Cottage housing is currently incentivized for market rate density bonuses at a rate of 2.5 times the
maximum density that could be achieved based on the underlying zone. The City should consider
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 157 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 20
incentivizing additional missing middle typologies through similar density bonus programs. This incentive
will depend on a coordinated vision for the inclusion of missing middle housing including duplexes,
triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, courtyard apartments, and stacked flats.
4-9-065.D.3. Cottage House Developments: Bonus market-rate dwellings
may be granted at a rate of two and one-half (2.5) times the maximum
density that could be achieved in a standard subdivision based on the
development standards of the underlying residential zone. The applicant shall
submit a pro forma subdivision plan for the proposed property showing the
number of conventional lots that would be permitted by the underlying zone.
This pro forma subdivision plan will be used to determine the maximum
number unit lots allowed, by multiplying the number of lots in the pro forma
subdivision plan by two and one-half (2.5). (Ord. 6042, 12-13-2021)
Past Code Amendments
The City has made several recent changes relevant to housing development in Renton. Below is a
summary or ordinances from 2018 – 2022 that are relevant to housing development, changes in zoning
classifications, and land use.
Ordinance 6102 was adopted in 2022, establishing new standards for Multifamily Housing by
adding Section 4-4-155 and amending Section 4-11-040 of the Renton Municipal Code.
Ordinance 6101 was adopted in 2022, amending Subsections 4-2-110.E, 4-2-120.B, 4-2-120.C,
and 4-2-130.B of the Renton Municipal Code to adjust the maximum building height in the Center
Downtown Zone and correct references to the Airport Related Height restrictions.
Ordinance 6099 was adopted in 2022, amending Subsection 4-4-080.F.10 of the Renton Municipal
Code, amending parking regulations for converted land uses.
Ordinance 6078 was adopted in 2022, amending Subsection 4‐1‐220.D.2 of the Renton Municipal
Code, amending multi-family tax exemption housing types.
Ordinance 6048 was adopted in 2021, amending Subsections 4-2-110.A and 4-2-110.E.20 of the
Renton Municipal Code, amending height and setback regulations in the RMF (Residential Multi-
Family) Zone.
Ordinance 6046 was adopted in 2021, amending Subsections 4-4-080.A.7 and 4-4-080.F.10.D,
SECTION 4-9-030, and the definition of “Dwelling Unit, Accessory” in Section 4-11-040 of the
Renton Municipal Code, amending Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) regulations.
Ordinance 6042 was adopted in 2021, amending Sections 4-2-110 and 4-2-115, Subsections 4-4-
080.F.10.D, 4-4-090.A, and 4-4-090.B, Section 4-7-090, Subsections 4-9-065.A, 4-9-065.B, 4-5-
065.D, 4-9-200.B, and 4-9-200.D, and Section 4-11-030 of the Renton Municipal Code, adding
cottage house development regulations, including adding a definition of “Cottage House
Development” to Section 4-11-030.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 158 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 21
Ordinance 6015 was adopted in 2021, amending Subsection 4-2-080.A.6 of the Renton Municipal
Code, adding regulations for mixed-income housing in the Center Village (CV) Zone; lifting the
moratorium for Large Residential Projects established by Ordinance No. 5967 and as extended by
Ordinance No. 5982.
Ordinance 6008 was adopted in 2020, changing the zoning classification of twenty-nine parcels
bounded by SE Petrovitsky Road to the north, 118th Avenue SE to the East, SE 180th Street to the
south, and 116th Avenue SE to the west within the City Of Renton from Residential Four (R-4) to
Residential Six (R-6).
Ordinance 6002 was adopted in 2020, revising Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) regulations by
amending Subsections 4-2-110.C, 4-2-110.E, and 4-2-116.B.2 of the Renton Municipal Code.
Ordinance 5960 was adopted in 2019, amending Renton Municipal Code subsections 4-2-060.D, 4-
2-080.A.7, 4-2-110.A, 4-2-110.B, 4-2-110.C, 4-2-110.D, 4-2-110.E, 4-2-110.F, 4-3-110.E.5.A.I, 4-
4-080.E.2.A, 4-4-080.E.2.E, and 4-4-080.F.10.D; Chapter 4-2; and Section 4-9-030; by amending
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) development standards, including adding a new Section 4-2-116
Regulating ADU Design Standards, amending Parking Standards relating to ADUs, adding a new
Subsection 4-9-030.H.
Ordinance 5920 was adopted in 2019, establishing the zoning classification of certain property
annexed within the City of Renton from R‐4 (Urban Residential 4 Dwelling Units Per Acre, King
County Zoning) to R‐4 (Residential 4 Du/AC; four dwelling units per acre, City of Renton Zoning)
(Wolf Woods Annexation, File No. A-17-002).
Ordinance 5914 was adopted in 2018, changing the Zoning Classification of four parcels
(7227801315, 7227801290, 7227801295, 7227801300) within the City of Renton from
Residential Fourteen Dwelling Units per acre (R-14) to Center Village (CV) (CPA 2018-M-01).
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 159 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 22
Summary of Analysis
The review and analysis of the Renton Comprehensive Plan policies and Municipal Code presented
recommendations and amendments required to meet the goal of authorizing middle housing types on at
least 30% of lots currently zoned as single family residential. Recommended changes to the
Comprehensive Plan are focused on the Land Use and Housing and Human Services Elements. These
changes include specific inclusion of missing middle typologies in an effort to establish expectations for
land use designations as they relate to zoning districts. Additionally, there are recommendations for
specifying AMI bands that are being planned for and accommodated in the HHS element. Recommended
changes to the existing land use code is centered on Chapters 2 – Zoning Regulations, 4 – City Wide
Property Development Standards, 6 – Street and Utility Standards, and 9 – Permits.
Changes to Chapter 2 include revisions to the permitted net residential densities within residential zoning
districts. In an effort to increase residential density and create more flexibility for missing middle housing
typologies, it is recommended that the current naming convention for the zoning district be used to mark
the minimum net density as opposed to the maximum net density. For example, R4 would have a minimum
net density of 2 DU/AC and a maximum net 4 DU/AC instead of no minimum DU/AC.
Changes to Chapter 4 are focused on parking reductions for detached dwelling and townhouses, cottage
housing, and attached dwellings in RMF, R-14 and R-10 Zones. Parking requirements contribute to the
fixed costs of a new development, which are often passed along to future tenants. By building in a
minimum and maximum range that scales to the size of the unit, future development may reduce the at-
grade footprint for parking and reduce the cost of development.
Chapter 6 focuses on Street and Utility Standards. There is an existing requirement that shared
driveways may be used for access by no more than 4 residential units. How might this requirement limit
anticipated future residential development in R-8 – RMF zoning? Within the context of Renton’s
Residential Medium and Low Density urban form, increases in future density may necessitate that missing
middle housing typologies have more than four units sharing a drive around a cul-de-sac.
Chapter 9 focuses on Permits. A future area for discussion is around density bonuses, and if there are
additional typologies that the City wishes to incentivize through a bonus structure. There are existing
density bonusses for cottage housing.
CODE NOTES
Land Use Element Make RLD, RMD, and RHD land uses distinct by prohibiting new
standalone detached dwellings in RMD and RHD land use
designations.
Housing And Human Services Element Specify the AMI and housing typologies that are being planned for. Expand density incentives beyond cottage housing.
Chapter 2 – Zoning Regulations Adjust the max net density for RMD and RHD land uses to increase
capacity for missing middle typologies. Adjust the permitted uses to
allow a larger spectrum of uses in R-10 – RMF zones.
Chapter 4 – City Wide Property Development Standards Reduce parking minimums to make new housing development more affordable.
Chapter 6 – Street and Utility Standards Discuss street standards and clarify intent with shared driveway
requirements.
Chapter 9 – Permits - Specific Discuss density bonuses as they are applied to market rate housing
development.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 160 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 23
Racial Equity Analysis
Introduction
The purpose of the Racial Equity Analysis is to provide a review of the planning history within the city of
Renton, and a quantitative data analysis of population and housing trends, as well as to summarize key
findings. This information, in conjunction with policy and code review, will establish a baseline for making
equitable planning and code recommendations to minimize displacement and ensure that BIPOC
communities have access to affordable housing that meets their needs. A public engagement process will
help answer questions raised in this process and will inform best practices for middle housing in Renton.
Community Understanding
Historical Context
Renton pre-1900
Before Renton was incorporated as a town in 1901, the land was occupied by the Duwamish and Upper
Puyallup people, who now compose the ferderally recognized Muchelshoot Indian Tribe.4 In 1855, the
Treaty of Point Elliot was signed between the US government and many regional tribes, including the
Duwamish tribe, which exchanged 54,000 acres of land for a guarantee of reservations, and hunting and
fishing rights. Included in this land exchange was the present-day cities of Seattle, Renton, Tukwila,
Bellevue, as well as more areas across King County.5 Soon after the Treaty of Point Elliot was signed, it
was violated by European-American immigrants, thereby triggering several years of war. In 1866, a
formal recommendation was made to the United States government to establish a reservation for the
Duwamish, but this was met with a petition that ultimately blocked the action, and to this day, the Point
Elliott Treaty has not been honored.
It is important to recognize the Duwamish tribe, who are still seeking federal recognition, and more
broadly the Coast Salish people, as the original stewards of the land, and to acknowledge and address
the ongoing impacts of the American history of colonialization. As the City of Renton continues with city
planning efforts, it can begin to redress historic inequities by supporting the voices of Renton’s indigenous
communities and fostering equitable housing outcomes for all Black, Indigenous, and People of Color
(BIPOC) households.
Renton’s Industrial History and World War II
Following Renton’s 1901 incorporation, the city was a hub for industrial activity, particularly coal mining,
brick production, and manufacturing by companies like PACCAR (then called the Pacific Car and
Foundry), leading Renton to become the second largest industrial center of King County at the time.
4https://www.rentonwa.gov/city_hall/parks_and_recreation/museum/city_history/pre_1900#:~:text=CITY%20OF%20RENT
ON%20WASHINGTON&text=The%20Duwamish%20are%20the%20Coast,and%20Duwamish%20Rivers%20%26%20Ellio
tt%20Bay.
5 https://www.duwamishtribe.org/treaty-of-point-elliott
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 161 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 24
In 1941, the Boeing Company established itself in Renton to build planes for war efforts, and brought
with it significant change. In contrast to previous years of slow recovery from the Great Depression,
Renton suddenly experienced rapid growth, as Boeing’s presence brought $4 million in federal funding
for housing and infrastructural improvements.6 Later, in 1958, the Boeing Company began producing the
707 airliner and thus launching commercial jet aviation in Renton and worldwide.
Despite improved access to better housing and infrastructural assets, as well as Renton’s growing
economic success, both brought by World War II, not everyone in the city benefited. Specifically, Renton’s
Japanese American families—who in the 1920s and 1930s had been integral to Renton’s horticultural
industry and some of the region’s major green spaces, like Kubota Gardens—were displaced from their
homes within Renton and the Puget Sound area, and were forced into internment camps. Following the
announcement of Executive Order 9066 in 1942, Japanese immigrant and American households in Renton
had two days to register at the Renton Junction Civil Control Station (which is now where I-405 runs
between Renton and Tukwila) and were relocated to Fresno, California.7 After the war, housing laws
prohibited Japanese immigrant families from owning land until 1967, and former family-owned
horticultural land was replaced by development. The internment of Japanese immigrants and American
families is a direct result of systemic racism, and has lastingly impacted the Japanese community’s
accumulated wealth, access to economic opportunity, and housing opportunities.
Renton Suburbanization and Annexation
A great deal of present-day Renton has been annexed from King County in recent years.
Exhibit 12, below, shows parcels annexed by the City of Renton.
6 https://www.rentonwa.gov/cms/One.aspx?portalId=7922741&pageId=9117416
7 https://historylink.org/File/21002
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 162 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 25
Exhibit 12. Annexation History Map
Source: City of Renton, 2023
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 163 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 26
Racially Restrictive Covenants
Racially restrictive covenants are clauses in property deeds that prevent specific groups of people from
occupying land, based on their race. At the time of their use from the 1920s through 1960s, racially
restrictive covenants were legally enforceable contracts, and those who broke deed restrictions could lose
their claim to property or face financial liability. While racially restrictive covenants are illegal to act on,
they remain in many deeds across the country. In 2006, Washington Governor Christine Gregoire signed
SB 6169, making it easier for homeowners’ associations to remove racially restrictive covenants from their
language. Similarly, in 2018, the Washington Legislature added a provision that enabled property
owners to strike racial restrictions from their deeds and other property records.
The UW Seattle Civil Rights & Labor History project searched King County property records to identify
restrictions that prevented BIPOC households from owning property or living in neighborhoods citywide. In
the City of Renton, ten racially restrictive covenants could be found within its current boundary, as listed
below in Exhibit 13, and Exhibit 14 maps where these covenants were located. Most of the covenants
withing Renton restricted homeownership and property rental to only allow people who identified as
white. The red circles in Exhibit 14 show properties with racial covenants and the yellow neighborhoods
labeled as a “restricted district.”
Exhibit 13. Racially Restrictive Covenants in Renton: Representative Language from a Sample of Covenants
Subdivision Year Properties Impacted Covenant Text
C.D. Hillman’s Lake Washington
Garden of Eden, Division No. 1
1926 6 “The parties of the second part further agrees to sell to white people
only and not to permit either to be sold by forced sale; and any sale
of this contract or of any interest in said contract or in the lands
therein described without the written consent of the party of the first part will render this contract null and void.”
C.D. Hillman’s Lake Washington Garden of Eden, Division No. 4 1946 2 “No persons of any race other than the Caucasian or White race shall use or occupy any building or lot, except that this covenant shall not prevent occupancy by domestic servant of a different race domiciled with an owner or tenant.”
Cresto View Addition 1947 29 “No persons of any race other than the Caucasian or White race shall use or occupy any building or lot except that this covenant shall not
prevent occupancy domestic servants of a different race domiciled with
an owner or tenant.”
Northwestern Garden Tracts
Division 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6
1948 115 “Neither the owner or any successor in interest shall ever convey, lease
or rent to any person other than the white or Caucasian races, said
premises, or any portion thereof or permit the occupancy thereof by any such persons, except as a domestic servant.”
President Park 400 Labeled a “Restricted District” in newspaper advertisements.
Stewart’s Highland Acres 1947 2 “This property cannot be sold to any person or persons other than
those of the Caucasian race;”
Windsor Hills Addition to
Renton
1942 143 “No race or nationality other than those of the Caucasian race shall use
or occupy any dwelling on a lot, except that this covenant shall not
prevent occupancy by domestic servants of a different race or
nationally employed by a owner or tenant.”
Source: University of Washington Seattle Civil Rights & Labor History Project, 2022.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 164 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 27
Exhibit 14. Renton Map of Race-Based Covenants
Source: University of Washington Seattle Civil Rights & Labor History Project, 2022.
Analysis of Racially Disparate Impacts, Exclusion, and
Displacement
Measures
Analyzing racially disparate impacts, exclusion, and displacement in housing is a complex process that
can be approached in a variety of ways. In order to facilitate a comprehensive analysis, this evaluation
uses over a dozen measures, including income, rental prices, housing cost burden, and population density,
as shown in Exhibit 15 below.
Exhibit 15. Measures of Racially Disparate Impacts, Exclusion, and Displacement
Datapoint Source Details
Median household Income ACS 5-year, 2021 Disaggregated by race and ethnicity and
mapped by Census tract
Average rent Zillow
Average housing prices Calculated based on Zillow
median home prices for average homes and lower market homes
Housing tenure ACS 5-year, 2021 Disaggregated by race and ethnicity
Housing cost burden rates CHAS 5-year 2015-2019 Disaggregated by race and ethnicity
Rates of crowding ACS 5-year, 2021
Distribution of environmental exposure risk Washington Environmental Health Disparities Map, 2022 Disaggregated by race and ethnicity
Commute mode estimates ACS 5-year, 2021
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 165 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 28
Datapoint Source Details
Population density by race and ethnicity, mapped Census 2020
Park access City of Renton Include 10-minute walksheds
Fair housing complaints
Commute patterns by worker type LEHD based on ACS 5-year 2015-
2019 Disaggregated by income level and geographic
location
Subsidized housing locations National Housing Preservation Database
Evictions count and rate Eviction Study Mapped by Census tract
Displacement risk factors Renton Housing Needs Assessment Mapped by Census tract
Source: BERK, 2023.
Racially Disparate Impacts
Racially disparate impacts are defined as occurring when policies, practices, rules, or other systems result
in a disproportionate impact on one or more racial groups.8 Data analysis of a range of variables can
assess whether racially disparate impacts are impacting a community, including household income,
average rent and housing prices, and housing tenure, among other variables.
Median Household Income
Exhibit 16 shows that:
Median household income has generally increased from 2010 to 2021. In 2021, a much higher
percentage of the population had a median household income over $150,000 than in 2010.
Citywide, Renton has seen an increase in the number of low-income households (see Exhibit 38).
Exhibit 16. Renton Median Household Income
8 Department of Commerce Draft Racially Disparate Impacts Guidance, 2023.
16%
25%
20%
17%16%
5%
2%
11%
15%
18%
15%
20%
10%12%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Under $25,000 $25,000 to
$49,999
$50,000 to
$74,999
$75,000 to
$99,999
$100,000 to
$149,999
$150,000 to
$199,999
$200,000 or more
%
o
f
t
o
t
a
l
Income Bracket
2010 2021
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 166 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 29
Sources: US Census 2010; ACS 2021; BERK 2023.
Exhibit 17 shows that:
Median household income is relatively evenly spread within all groups, with the exception of those
who identify as AIAN alone, where people are more likely to have an income of $25,000 to
$49,999.
Those who identify as NHOPI alone, Asian alone, and White alone (non-Hispanic) are the most likely
to have an income of $200,000 or more.
Exhibit 17. Median Household Income by Race and Ethnicity
Sources: ACS 2021; BERK 2023.
Average Rent
Exhibit 18 shows that:
Average rent in Renton has increased 38% in the last five years, which is comparable to the percent
increase across the United States, but is higher than the percent increase in the Seattle-Tacoma-
Bellevue Metro area, and is much higher than the percent increase in King County.
Through the Displacement Risk analysis (see Exhibit 38).
Exhibit 18. Average Rent Comparison
City/Region Average Rent (Nov 2022) % increase in the last 5 years
(Nov 2017)
Renton $2,265 38%
10%
26%
2%
7%
12%
9%
16%
6%
14%
16%
51%
11%
0%
29%
15%
25%
17%
20%
12%
15%
35%
23%
18%
23%
14%
9%
6%
14%
26%
11%
20%
17%
19%
14%
25%
26%
3%
17%
21%
15%
12%
5%
4%
11%
4%
5%
5%
8%
13%
10%
0%
15%
19%
7%
4%
6%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino
Black alone
AIAN alone
Asian alone
NHOPI alone
Other alone
Two or more
Hispanic or Latino
Under $25,000 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 or more
10%
26%
2%
7%
12%
9%
16%
6%
14%
16%
51%
11%
0%
29%
15%
25%
17%
20%
12%
15%
35%
23%
18%
23%
14%
9%
6%
14%
26%
11%
20%
17%
19%
14%
25%
26%
3%
17%
21%
15%
12%
5%
4%
11%
4%
5%
5%
8%
13%
10%
0%
15%
19%
7%
4%
6%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino
Black alone
AIAN alone
Asian alone
NHOPI alone
Other alone
Two or more
Hispanic or Latino
Under $25,000 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 or more
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 167 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 30
King County $2,292 25%
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metro $2,220 30%
United States $2,008 37%
Sources: Zillow 2022; BERK 2023.
Exhibit 19 shows that:
Since 2015, rental prices have increased 66%.
Similar increases in rental pricing can be found in King County and in the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue
Metro area. All three of these areas, however, have experienced rental pricing increases greater
than the United States as a whole.
Exhibit 19. Rent Over Time
Sources: Zillow, 2022; BERK 2023.
Exhibit 20 shows that:
Average home prices have increased significantly.
Average home prices in Renton have increased at a rate similar to that of King County and the
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metro area.
$1,368
$2,265
+66%
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
United States Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metro King County Renton
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 168 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 31
Exhibit 20. Average home price over time
Sources: Zillow, 2022; BERK 2023.
Average Housing Prices
Exhibit 21 shows that:
Average home prices in different AMI groups in Renton have increased at similar rates.
Exhibit 21. Average home price in Renton at different AMI
Sources: Zillow, 2022; BERK 2023.
Housing Tenure
Exhibit 22 shows that:
$337,032 (+179%)
$889,984 (+264%)
$753,472 (+250%)
$759,919 (+251%)
$0
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
$800,000
$900,000
$1,000,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022
United States Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metro King County Renton
559,553
(+267%)
753,472(+250%)
1,025,053
(+225%)
$0
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022
5-35%35-65%65-95%
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 169 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 32
New residents of Renton tend to be renters rather than homeowners. More people are renting
housing in Renton since 2010 across the board. Homeownership has dropped 4% in Renton since
2010.
Homeownership rates in Renton have dropped the most with Hispanic/Latino, Non-White and multi-
racial households.
Exhibit 22. Housing Tenure Rates, 2010-2021
2010 2021 2010 2021
Renton Renter occupied Renter occupied Owner occupied Owner occupied
CITYWIDE 43% 47% 57% 53%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 40% 42% 60% 58%
Black alone 67% 72% 33% 28%
AIAN alone 62% 71% 38% 29%
Asian alone 28% 31% 72% 69%
NHOPI alone 67% 70% 33% 30%
Other alone 62% 73% 38% 27%
Two or more 53% 72% 47% 28%
Hispanic or Latino 60% 71% 40% 29%
2010 2021 2010 2021
King County Renter occupied Renter occupied Owner occupied Owner occupied
COUNTYWIDE 40% 43% 60% 57%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 35% 38% 65% 62%
Black alone 67% 72% 33% 28%
AIAN alone 63% 57% 37% 43%
Asian alone 40% 42% 60% 58%
NHOPI alone 73% 76% 27% 24%
Other alone 66% 68% 34% 32%
Two or more 55% 57% 45% 43%
Hispanic or Latino 64% 64% 36% 36%
Legend
% Increase
% Decrease
Same
Sources: US Census, 2010; ACS, 2021; BERK 2023.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 170 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 33
Housing Cost Burden Rates
Exhibit 23 shows that:
Homeowners who identified their race or ethnicity as “Other” (including multiple races, non-Hispanic)
experience the most “extreme” cost burden.
Homeowners who identified as Pacific Islander alone (non-Hispanic) experience the highest overall
percentage of cost-burden, followed by those who identified as Black or African American alone
(non-Hispanic).
Homeowners who identified as While alone (non-Hispanic) experienced the lowest overall
percentage of cost-burden.
Exhibit 23. Home Owner Cost Burden by Race and Ethnicity
Sources: ACS, 2021; BERK, 2023.
Renter Cost Burden
Exhibit 24 shows that:
All renters who identified as Pacific Islander alone (non-Hispanic) are cost-burdened.
Renters who identified as Hispanic (any race) or Black or African-American alone (non-Hispanic)
experience the second and third highest overall percentages of cost-burden, at 53% and 48%,
respectively.
Renters who identified as Asian alone (non-Hispanic) experienced the lowest overall percentage of
cost-burden, at 29%, followed by those who identified as White alone (non-Hispanic), at 42%.
77%
65%
56%
65%
74%
53%
73%
73%
15%
20%
23%
21%
26%
47%
17%
6%
7%
15%
20%
14%
0%
0%
10%
21%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
White alone, non-Hispanic
BIPOC
Black or African-American alone, non-Hispanic
Asian alone, non-Hispanic
American Indian or Alaska Native alone, non-Hispanic
Pacific Islander alone, non-Hispanic
Hispanic, any race
Other (including multiple races, non-Hispanic)
Percentage
Ra
c
e
o
r
E
t
h
n
i
c
i
t
y
Not Cost-Burdened Cost-Burdened Extremely Cost-Burdened Not Computed
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 171 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 34
Exhibit 24. Renter Cost Burden by Race and Ethnicity
Sources: ACS, 2021; BERK, 2023.
Rates of Crowding
Overcrowding is determined by a ratio of household size to number of bedrooms in their housing unit.
Any ratio greater than 1.0 is considered an overcrowded household. Exhibit 25 shows that:
Overcrowding is more prevalent in households that rent, compared to those that are home owners.
Larger sized rental options could be important to incentivize in policies and codes.
Exhibit 25. Overcrowding in Renton
TENURE OCCUPANTS PER ROOM ESTIMATE MARGIN of ERROR
Owner 0.50 or less occupants per room 15,384 817
0.51-1.00 occupants per room 5,410 458
1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room 262 102
1.51 – 2.00 occupants per room 38 36
2.01 or more occupants per room 0 30
Renter 0.50 or less occupants per room 10,113 757
0.51-1.00 occupants per room 7,240 670
1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room 900 252
58%
54%
52%
71%
53%
0%
47%
56%
21%
24%
17%
17%
47%
76%
33%
21%
20%
22%
31%
12%
0%
24%
20%
23%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
White alone, non-Hispanic
BIPOC
Black or African-American alone, non-Hispanic
Asian alone, non-Hispanic
American Indian or Alaska Native alone, non-Hispanic
Pacific Islander alone, non-Hispanic
Hispanic, any race
Other (including multiple races, non-Hispanic)
Percentage
Ra
c
e
o
r
E
t
h
n
i
c
i
t
y
Not Cost-Burdened Cost-Burdened Extremely Cost-Burdened Not Computed
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 172 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 35
TENURE OCCUPANTS PER ROOM ESTIMATE MARGIN of ERROR
1.51 – 2.00 occupants per room 525 209
2.01 or more occupants per room 139 96
Sources: ACS, 2021; BERK, 2023.
Distribution of Environmental Exposure Risk
Washington State Department of Health released an Environmental Health Disparities Map that
evaluates health risks based off threat and vulnerability. Exhibit 26, below, shows how environmental risk
was determined using 19 indicators to calculate a cumulative impact. A link to the map can be found
here.
With regards to Renton, the east half of the Highlands and the west half of the East Plateau Community
Planning areas have the lowest environmental risk of 6. Everywhere else in the city has a risk factor of at
least 8 out of 10. Higher residential densities cannot happen without a safe, multimodal transportation
system. Environmental policy recommendations are critical to ensure future populations are not impacted
by negative health factors.
Exhibit 26. Washington Environmental Health Disparities Definition
Source: Washington State Department of Health, 2023.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 173 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 36
Exhibit 27. Environmental Exposure Risk Map
Source:Washington State Department of Health, 2023.
Commute Mode Estimates
Exhibit 28 shows that:
Renton residents tend to drive alone as their commute, and at a rate higher than King County as a
whole.
Renton residents are more likely to drive, whether carpooling or driving alone, than to use public
transportation.
Renton residents are less likely than King County residents to walk as their commute method.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 174 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 37
Exhibit 28. Commute Mode Split
Sources: ACS, 2021; BERK, 2023.
Commute Patterns by Worker Type
Error! Reference source not found. in Appendix A details the Home and Work location of employed
individuals in Renton using Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics data. The map shows that the
downtown and industrial centers of Renton are concentrated locations of in-person labor in Renton, many
of those jobs attracting indivuals who live outside of Renton. The residential communities south and east of
I-405 work outside of Renton for the most part. There is a small proportion of individuals who live and
work in Renton, although there is no spatial logic for where these individuals live in the City of Renton.
Crosswalking these findings with Error! Reference source not found. - Error! Reference source not
found., the racial diversity of Renton make it difficult to determine how these Home and Work locations
impact specific racial/ethnic groups.
Race/Ethnicity Location Quotient
Exhibits 40 through 44 in Appendix A map the location quotients for different racial/ethnic groups in
Renton. Location quotients measure a race or ethincity’s share of the population in a block group, relative
to that same group’s share of the population within King County as a whole. A location quotient score of
one indicates an identical share of the population, whereas scores less than one indicate that the group
has a lower share of the population within the subarea than the county as a whole. Likewise, scores
above one indicate that the group has a higher share of the population within the subarea. These maps
indicate that:
The population of Renton proportionately holds a higher share of BIPOC individuals than King
County as a whole. Specifically, Renton has higher shares of people who identify as Hispanic or
Latino, Black alone, and Asian alone, than King County does.
68%
10%
6%
0%
0%
0%
2%
1%
13%
55%
9%
11%
0%
0%
1%
5%
1%
18%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%
Drive alone
Carpool
Public transportation
Taxicab
Motorcycle
Bicycle
Walked
Other
Worked from home
Percentage
Mo
d
e
King County Renton
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 175 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 38
Park Access
Error! Reference source not found. in Appendix A maps the areas of Renton that have access to a city
park within a ten-minute walk. This map indicates that:
The majority of Renton has access to city parks within a ten-minute walk.
The northeast and south of Renton (Benson and East Plateau CPA’s) have the widest park access
gaps. When juxtaposed with Error! Reference source not found. (BIPOC location quotient map),
these areas also represent some of the highest percentages of BIPOC households
Fair Housing Complaints
The Federal Housing and Urban Development Department tracks complaints filed under the Fair Housing
Act, which prohibits discrimination based on federally recognized bases (race, religion, etc). In
Washington State, there have been 4664 complaints in Washington State from 2000 – 2019.
Subsidized Housing Locations
According to data from the Washington State Housing Finance Commission, there are 22 publicly
subsidized apartment properties across the City of Renton. See Exhibit 29. These 22 properties provide
2,987 units of affordable housing, most of which are located in the City Center and Renton Highlands
neighborhoods.
Exhibit 29. Affordable Housing Projects in Renton
PROJECT NAME PROGRAM TYPE APPLICATION YEAR TOTAL UNITS
Compass Center Renton Lutheran
Regional Veterans' Program
9% Tax Credits 2008 58
Golden Cedars PRI
366
Heritage Grove Apartments 4% Tax Credits 1994 55
June Leonard Place 9% Tax Credits 2017 47
LaFortuna PRI
12
Liberty Square Apartments 4% Tax Credits 2006 91
Lodge at Eagle Ridge 80/20 Bonds 2005 128
Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre 80/20 Bonds
155
Peak 88 4% Tax Credits 1995 35
Renton Crest 4% Tax Credits 2018 271
Renton Family Housing 9% Tax Credits 1996 24
Reserve at Renton, The 4% Tax Credits 2014 217
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 176 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 39
Royal Hills Apartments 9% Tax Credits 2000 281
Solera Apartments 4% Tax Credits 2021 272
Spencer Court Apartments 9% Tax Credits 1991 73
Stonebrook Apartments 4% Tax Credits 2003 138
Sunset Court Apartments 9% Tax Credits 2016 50
Sunset Gardens 4% Tax Credits 2022 77
Sunset Oaks 4% Tax Credits 2019 59
Vantage Point Apartments 9% Tax Credits 2013 77
Wasatch Hills 80/20 Bonds
356
Watershed Renton PRI
145
Total
2,987
Sources: Washington State Housing Finance Commission, 2023; BERK, 2023
Evictions Count and Rate
The University of Washington has created an Eviction Study Map, seen below in Exhibit 30 through
Exhibit 36 (link). The study tracks evictions in Washington State from 2004 to 2017. It should be noted
that the study map only shows data by race and ethnicity for individuals that identified as White, Black,
Hispanic, or Asian only. There is a gap of information for other racial and multiracial communities. These
exhibits indicate that:
For eviction risk, a value greater than 1 represents a higher likelihood of eviction compared to the
rest of the study area. A value less than 1 represents a lesser likelihood. Overall, Renton has a
higher relative risk of eviction compared to Seattle, when broken down by race, individuals who
identify as Asian have a higher risk of eviction compared to other racial and ethnic groups.
Black individuals represent the highest rate of eviction rates in Renton. It is higher than many
neighboring cities.
Exhibit 30. Municpality Eviction Study Comparison
Municipality Number of Evictions Eviction Rate Eviction Risk
Renton 273 1.46% 1.05
Seattle 1,181 0.7% 0.51
Tukwila 51 1.23% 0.89
Kent 429 2.19% 1.59
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 177 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 40
Burien 174 2.01% 1.45
Source: https://tesseract.csde.washington.edu:8080/shiny/evictionmaps/
Exhibit 31. Municipality Eviction Rate: by Race and Ethnicity
Municipality White Only
Eviction Rate
Black
Eviction Rate
Hispanic
Eviction Rate
Asian
Eviction Rate
Renton 0.98% 3.65% 1.16% 1.11%
Seattle 0.52% 2.32% 0.88% 0.48%
Tukwila 0.92% 2.16% 0.74% 0.95%
Kent 1.31% 4.72% 2.2% 1.71%
Burien 1.37% 3.74% 1.98% 2.03%
Source: https://tesseract.csde.washington.edu:8080/shiny/evictionmaps/
Exhibit 32. Municipality Relative Risk of Eviction: by Race and Ethnicity
Municipality White Only
Eviction Rate
Black
Eviction Rate
Hispanic
Eviction Rate
Asian
Eviction Rate
Renton 0.93 0.89 0.65 1.35
Seattle 0.5 0.57 0.49 0.58
Tukwila 0.88 0.53 0.41 1.15
Kent 1.25 1.15 1.24 2.07
Burien 1.31 0.91 1.11 2.46
Source: https://tesseract.csde.washington.edu:8080/shiny/evictionmaps/
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 178 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 41
Exhibit 33. Evictions Study Map: Eviction Count
Source: https://tesseract.csde.washington.edu:8080/shiny/evictionmaps/
Exhibit 34. Eviction Study Map: Eviction Rate
Source: https://tesseract.csde.washington.edu:8080/shiny/evictionmaps/
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 179 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 42
Exhibit 35. Eviction Study Map: Relative Eviction Risk
Source: https://tesseract.csde.washington.edu:8080/shiny/evictionmaps/
Exhibit 36. Evictions Study Map: Relative Eviction Risk
Source: https://tesseract.csde.washington.edu:8080/shiny/evictionmaps/
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 180 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 43
Displacement Risk
Displacement risk was calcuclated at a tract level by looking at the following factors:
Social Vulnerability. Each Census tract was given a social vulnerability score based off the number
of households that rent, BIPOC share of total population and median household income. Each census
tract was sorted into quintiles, and a total score was allocated.
Demographic change. A determination was given to each census tract to note whether there has
been an increase or decrease in households that identify either as BIPOC and/or have an AMI less
than 80%. Through this analysis it was determined whether there were signs of gentrification from
looking at population change. However, it should be noted that just because there has been a
decrease or increase in BIPOC populations, it does not necessitate a sign of gentrification. Additional
research should be done to understand specific push and pull factors into specific neighborhoods.
Market Prices. Rent prices and housing appreciation was analyzed to determine whether housing
prices have been increasing or decreased. Areas with higher rents and market prices were
determind as high appreciation areas, and lower rents as more stable neighborhoods.
Exhibit 37 shows a GIS map of displacement risk in Renton and Exhibit 38 a table with detailed
information on each census tract. Furthermore, Exhibit 38 shows how much of the census tract overlaps
within current Renton city limits. The ID label in each census tract in Exhibit 37 corresponds with the tract
number in Exhibit 38.
The areas with the highest risk of displacement is in the Highlands community planning area
predominately, and along along I-405 and Hwy 900 in Benson, Cedar River, and Valley. Of these areas,
the Renton Highlands have the most census tracts at high risk of displacement followed by Benson and
Valley. All of these areas have scored high in social vulnerability. Displacement risk was also high in the
Valley Community Planning Area. However, significant portions here are zoned industrial, and additional
analysis is needed to understand housing push/pull factors here.
Signs of gentrification was highest in the Highlands, and where Benson and Cedar River meetThe
Highlands community planning area also has the highest number of census tracts with accelerating housing
market prices despite being a more affordable area for renters.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 181 of 184
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 44
Exhibit 37. Displacement Risk Index
Sources: Census 2020, BERK 2023.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 182 of 184
45
Exhibit 38. Displacement Risk Table, Renton
Final Displacement
Risk
Tract
Percent
Overlap
Renter
Quintile
BIPOC
Quintile
Median
Income Score
Social Vulnerability
Score BIPOC Change Score
Under 80% AMI Change
Score
Demographic
Change Score
High or Low
Rent Area Appreciation Rate
Market Price
Score
247.03 21%1 3 1 5 Decreasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs No High rent area High appreciation Appreciated Low
247.04 12%2 3 1 6 Tracking county change Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment High rent area High appreciation Appreciated Low
251.01 98%3 4 3 10 Decreasing BIPOC Tracking county change Gentrification Low rent area High appreciation Accelerating High
251.03 100%3 5 2 10 Tracking county change Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Low
251.04 65%1 4 2 7 Tracking county change Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Low
252.01 100%2 4 3 9 Decreasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs No Low rent area High appreciation Accelerating Low
252.02 90%4 4 3 11 Tracking county change Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment Low rent area High appreciation Accelerating Moderate
253.02 90%5 4 5 14 Tracking county change Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Low
253.03 100%5 4 4 13 Increasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment High rent area Low or mod appreciation Appreciated Low
253.04 100%4 3 2 9 Tracking county change Decreasing Low Income HHs Gentrification High rent area High appreciation Appreciated Possible displacement
254.01 100%5 5 4 14 Tracking county change Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Low
254.02 100%4 5 3 12 Decreasing BIPOC Decreasing Low Income HHs Gentrification Low rent area High appreciation Accelerating High
255.00 100%4 5 4 13 Decreasing BIPOC Tracking county change Gentrification Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable High
256.01 100%3 5 4 12 Decreasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs No Low rent area High appreciation Accelerating High
256.02 68%1 4 1 6 Increasing BIPOC Decreasing Low Income HHs No Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Low
257.02 80%2 3 2 7 Decreasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs No High rent area Low or mod appreciation Appreciated Low
257.03 100%5 4 4 13 Increasing BIPOC Tracking county change No Low rent area High appreciation Accelerating High
257.04 100%4 3 4 11 Decreasing BIPOC Decreasing Low Income HHs Gentrification Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable High
258.03 100%4 5 4 13 Decreasing BIPOC Decreasing Low Income HHs Gentrification Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable High
258.04 77%2 4 4 10 Decreasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs No High rent area Low or mod appreciation Appreciated Moderate
258.05 100%4 5 4 13 Tracking county change Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Low
258.06 100%4 5 3 12 Decreasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs No Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Moderate
260.03 62%5 5 4 14 Decreasing BIPOC Decreasing Low Income HHs Gentrification Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable High
260.04 51%2 5 2 9 Decreasing BIPOC Decreasing Low Income HHs Gentrification Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Low
261.01 3%4 5 4 13 Decreasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs No Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Moderate
262.00 1%5 5 4 14 Tracking county change Decreasing Low Income HHs Gentrification Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable High
293.04 29%2 4 3 9 Tracking county change Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment High rent area Low or mod appreciation Appreciated Low
293.05 30%1 5 3 9 Tracking county change Tracking county change No Low rent area High appreciation Accelerating Low
293.08 100%3 5 3 11 Decreasing BIPOC Tracking county change Gentrification High rent area Low or mod appreciation Appreciated Possible displacement
293.09 100%4 5 4 13 Tracking county change Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment High rent area Low or mod appreciation Appreciated Low
319.06 3%1 2 2 5 Increasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Low
319.10 46%1 3 3 7 Decreasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs No High rent area Low or mod appreciation Appreciated Low
319.12 3%1 2 3 6 Increasing BIPOC Increasing Low Income HHs Disinvestment Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Low
319.13 45%1 3 1 5 Increasing BIPOC Decreasing Low Income HHs No Low rent area Low or mod appreciation Stable Low
Social Vulnerability Demographic Change Market Prices
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
9
.
a
)
Pa
g
e
1
8
3
o
f
1
8
4
46
Summary of Analysis Findings
Renton has a proportionally larger BIPOC population than King County overall. East Plateau has
seen higher rates of increases of BIPOC households compared to other community planning areas.
However, there are lower rates of BIPOC households moving into some of Renton’s most diverse
neighborhoods (Benson, Highlands).
Median income in Renton has increased.
Renton’s average rental prices have increased more than the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metro area,
and significantly more than in King County. The housing market has been appreciating highest in
Kennydale and Highlands.
More people are renting housing in Renton across the board, and homeownership rates have
dropped.
Homeownership rates in Renton have dropped the most within Hispanic/Latino, Non-White
populations.
Most of Renton has relatively high environmental health risk.
Those who identify as Black or African American represent the highest eviction rates in Renton.
The Renton Highlands and Benson have the highest risk of displacement in Renton. This is attributed to
higher housing costs in low-rent areas, slower rates of households that are BIPOC and have an AMI <
80% compared to the county. The initial displacement risk analysis indicates that there is potential
gentrification, and further analysis is needed through public engagement
East Plateau and City Center has some of the lowest risk for displacement due to low rents and
housing appreciation rates. More households that are BIPOC and/or with an AMI <80% have been
moving here as well.
Overall, Renton is a diverse city with a variety of housing options. It’s a city of both increases in both
households with higher, moderate- and low-income households. Middle housing can be a solution to
increase affordable homeownership opportunities and prevent displacement. Additional outreach and
engagement is needed to complicate the data narrative in understanding push/pull factors for housing.
Outreach for this project will better understand local narratives on what makes Renton a thriving
community for all.
AGENDA ITEM #9. a)
Page 184 of 184