HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinal Agenda Packet
CITY OF RENTON
AGENDA - City Council Regular Meeting
7:00 PM - Monday, December 9, 2024
Council Chambers, 7th Floor, City Hall – 1055 S. Grady Way
Please note that this regular meeting of the Renton City Council is being offered as a hybrid
meeting and can be attended in person at the Council Chambers, 7th floor of City Hall, 1055 S
Grady Way, Renton, 98057 or remotely through Zoom.
For those wishing to attend by Zoom: Please (1) click this link
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84938072917?pwd=TUNCcnppbjNjbjNRMWpZaXk2bjJnZz09 (or
copy/paste the URL into a web browser) or (2) call-in to the Zoom meeting by dialing 253-215-
8782 and entering 849 3807 2917 Passcode 156708, or (3) call 425-430-6501 by 5 p.m. on the
day of the meeting to request an invite with a link to the meeting.
Registration for Audience Comment: Registration will be open at all times, but speakers must
register by 5 p.m. on the day of a Council meeting in order to be called upon. Anyone who
registers after 5 p.m. on the day of the Council meeting will not be called upon to speak and
will be required to re-register for the next Council meeting if they wish to speak at that next
meeting.
Request to Speak Registration Form:
o Click the link or copy/paste the following URL into your browser:
https://forms.office.com/g/bTJUj6NrEE
You may also call 425-430-6501 or email jsubia@rentonwa.gov or
cityclerk@rentonwa.gov to register. Please provide your full name, city of residence,
email address and/or phone number, and topic in your message.
A sign-in sheet is also available for those who attend in person.
Video on Demand: Please click the following link to stream Council meetings live as they
occur, or to select previously recorded meetings:
Renton Channel 21 Video on Demand
1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ROLL CALL
3. SPECIAL PRESENTATION
a) Recognition of Renton Sustainability Programs
b) Renton Businesses Recognition for Shift Green Program
4. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
a) Administrative Report
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
All remarks must be addressed to the Council as a whole, if a response is requested
please provide your name and address, including email address, to the City Clerk to
allow for follow-up.
Speakers must sign-up prior to the Council meeting.
Each speaker is allowed three minutes.
When recognized, please state your name & city of residence for the record.
NOTICE to all participants: Pursuant to state law, RCW 42.17A.555, campaigning for or
against any ballot measure or candidate in City Hall and/or during any portion of the council
meeting, including the audience comment portion of the meeting, is PROHIBITED.
6. CONSENT AGENDA
The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and
the recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for
further discussion if requested by a Councilmember.
a) Approval of Council Meeting minutes of December 2, 2024.
Council Concur
b) AB - 3719 Community & Economic Development Department submits a draft ordinance
streamlining the land use appeal process and recommends the ordinance be referred to
the Planning Commission for review at its next available meeting so it can provide a
recommendation to Council.
Refer to Planning Commission and Planning & Development Committee
c) AB - 3714 Executive Services Department recommends execution of Amendment 2-24 to
CAG-19-024, contractor Valley Defenders, PLLC, in the amount of $227,711.16, which
extends the contract through March 31, 2025.
Council Concur
d) AB - 3713 Police Department recommends approval to execute an agreement with the
Washington Traffic Safety Commission for Law Enforcement Liaison to accept $5,000 in
grant funds to increase law enforcement participation in traffic safety enforcement and
to serve as a resource for the region's Target Zero manager.
Refer to Finance Committee
e) AB - 3715 Public Works Transportation Systems Division recommends execution of a sub-
award agreement with the Puget Sound Regional Council, to accept $400,000 in US
Department of Transportation grant funds with a $100,000 city match ($500,000 total)
for the Renton Comprehensive Safety Action Plan.
Refer to Finance Committee
f) AB - 3716 Public Works Transportation Systems Division recommends adoption of a
resolution authorizing a 120-day closure of Houser Way N, between January 21, 2025 and
May 22, 2025, for the purpose of installing a watermain and improving storm drainage
facilities in support of the I-405 to Bellevue Widening and Express Toll Lane project.
Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee
g) AB - 3717 Public Works Transportation Systems Division recommends execution of
Amendment #1 to the Project Coordinator Agreement with the Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT), increasing WSDOT's payment to Renton from
$240,000 to $440,000, in support of the Renton to Bellevue Widening and Express Toll
Lane project.
Refer to Finance Committee
h) AB - 3718 Public Works Utility Systems Division reports bid opening on November 12,
2024 for the Renton Highlands Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Phase 3 project (CAG-24-
001), and recommends awarding the contract to the lowest responsive and responsible
bidder, Insituform Technologies, LLC, in the amount of $2,808,428.24.
Council Concur
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics
marked with an asterisk (*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be
held by the Chair if further review is necessary.
a) Committee on Committees: 1) 2025 Council Committee Assignments
b) Committee of the Whole: 1) Allocation of Lodging Tax Funding for 2025
c) Finance Committee: 1) Vouchers; 2) Agreement for Hazardous Materials/Encampment
Cleanups Using State Master Contract #09321; 3) Water Quality Grant Agreement No.
WQC-2025-Renton-00120 (CAG-24-261) with the State of Washington Department of
Ecology for the Lind Ave SW Conveyance and Water Quality Retrofit Project; 4) Renewal
of Liability Insurance Policies for 2025; 5) Housing Opportunity Grant Award to
Homestead Community Land Trust for Willowcrest Townhomes Phase II
d) Planning & Development Committee: 1) 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update*
8. LEGISLATION
Resolution:
a) Resolution No. 4544: Adopting Housing Plan Amendments (See Item 7.d)
Ordinances for first reading and advancement to second and final reading:
a) Ordinance No. 6153: Adopting 2025 Comp Plan (See Item 7.d)
b) Ordinance No. 6154: Amend Title IV Zoning – RMF2 (See Item 7.d)
9. NEW BUSINESS
(Includes Council Committee agenda topics; visit rentonwa.gov/cityclerk for more
information.)
10. ADJOURNMENT
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AGENDA
(Preceding Council Meeting)
5:45 p.m. - 7th Floor - Conferencing Center
Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21
To view Council Meetings online, please visit rentonwa.gov/councilmeetings
Mayor’s Office
Memorandum
DATE: December 5, 2024
TO: Ed Prince, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
FROM: Armondo Pavone, Mayor
Ed VanValey, Chief Administrative Officer
SUBJECT: Administrative Report
Get into the holiday spirit and join us for a bigger and better Battle of the Badges,
Saturday, December 14 from 5:30-8 p.m. at Renton Technical College. Over 30
public safety agencies will showcase their creativity by competing for the best
decorated vehicle or display, with the community voting for their favorites. Enjoy
music and food trucks, such as Fisher Scones, Café de la Loba, Dirty Dawgz, and
Uncle Bill’s Famous Corn Dog Shack. This is a free event open to the public.
Additionally, we will be collecting non-perishable food and monetary donations to
support the Salvation Army Food Bank. Find the full list of agencies competing and
other information a rentonwa.gov/battle.
Adopt a new dog or cat! The City of Renton, Renton Police Department, and
Eastside Veterinary Associations will host the annual Renton Animal Care and
Control adoption event Saturday, December 14 from 1-4 p.m. at Eastside Veterinary
Associates; 1700 NE 44th Street; Renton. Adoption fees are reduced by 50%. Adopt
a dog for $50 or cat for $25. All pets are fully vaccinated, spayed/neutered, and
micro-chipped.
• Information about preventative street maintenance, traffic impact projects,
and road closures happening this week can be found at
http://rentonwa.gov/traffic. All projects are weather permitting and unless
otherwise noted, streets will always remain open.
Monday, December 9 through Friday, December 13, 8:00am-3:00pm.
Intermittent lane closure on Sunset Blvd NE and Bronson Way NE for
construction work. Approved traffic control plans were issued for all work and will
be followed. Questions may be directed to Kip Braaten, 206-503-1746.
Monday, December 9 through Friday, December 13, 8:00am-3:00pm.
Intermittent lane closure on Rainier Ave N between Airport Way and S 3rd St for
construction work. Approved traffic control plans were issued for all work and will
be followed. Questions may be directed to Joe Nerlfi, 425-757-9657.
AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
Ed Prince, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
Page 2 of 2
December 5, 2024
Monday, December 9 through Friday, December 13, 8:00am-3:00pm.
Intermittent lane closure on NE Sunset Blvd between Edmonds Ave NE and
Kirkland Ave NE for construction work. Approved traffic control plans were issued
for all work and will be followed. Questions may be directed to Brad Stocco, 425-
282-2373.
Monday, December 9 through Friday, December 13, 8:00am-3:00pm. Shifting
lane closures both east and west on NE Sunset Blvd between Redmond Pl NE to
Union Ave NE for utility installation and frontage improvements. Approved traffic
control plans were issued for all work and will be followed. Questions may be
directed to Brad Stocco, 425-282-2373.
Monday, December 9 through Friday, December 13, 8:30am-3:00pm.
Intermittent northbound lane closure on Wells Ave S north of intersection S 2nd St
for utility installation. Approved traffic control plans were issued for all work and
will be followed. Questions may be directed to Casey Grant, 206-532-4380.
Monday, December 9 through Friday, December 13, 8:00am-3:00pm.
Intermittent lane closure on Williams Ave S between Cedar River and S 3rd St for
construction work. Approved traffic control plans were issued for all work and will
be followed. Questions can be directed to Rob Blackburn, 206-379-1489.
AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
December 2, 2024 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF RENTON
MINUTES - City Council Regular Meeting
7:00 PM - Monday, December 2, 2024
Council Chambers, 7th Floor, City Hall – 1055 S. Grady Way
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pavone called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order at 7:00 PM and led the
Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Present:
Ed Prince, Council President
James Alberson, Jr., Council Position No. 1
Carmen Rivera, Council Position No. 2
Valerie O'Halloran, Council Position No. 3
Ryan McIrvin, Council Position No. 4
Ruth Pérez, Council Position No. 6
Kim-Khánh Vǎn, Council Position No. 7
Councilmembers Absent:
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF PRESENT
Armondo Pavone, Mayor
Ed VanValey, Chief Administrative Officer
Alex Tuttle, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Jason Seth, City Clerk
Kim Gilman, Interim Human Resources / Risk Management Administrator
Young Yoon, IT Director
Eric Perry, Government Affairs Manager
Commander Susan Hassinger, Police Department
Attended Remotely:
Judith Subia, Chief of Staff
Kari Roller, Finance Administrator
Martin Pastucha, Public Works Administrator
Ron Straka, Public Works Utility Systems Director
AGENDA ITEM #6. a)
December 2, 2024 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
CAO Ed VanValey reviewed a written administrative report summarizing the City’s recent
progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2024 and
beyond. Items noted were:
• Adopt a new dog or cat! The City of Renton, Renton Police Department, and Eastside
Veterinary Associations will host the annual Renton Animal Care and Control adoption
event Saturday, December 14 from 1-4 p.m. at Eastside Veterinary Associates; 1700
NE 44th Street; Renton. Adoption fees are reduced by 50%. Adopt a dog for $50 or
cat for $25. All pets are fully vaccinated, spayed/neutered, and micro-chipped.
• Preventative street maintenance will continue to impact traffic and result in
occasional street closures.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
• Patrick Dickinson, Renton, urged city officials to remove fluoride from Renton's
drinking water supply. He also expressed disapproval of raising the allowable property
tax increase from one percent to three percent.
CONSENT AGENDA
The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the
recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further
discussion if requested by a Councilmember.
a) Approval of Council Meeting minutes of 11/25/2024. Council Concur.
b) AB - 3455 Community & Economic Development Department recommended awarding a
$100,000 grant to Homestead Community Land Trust for the Willow Townhomes Phase II
project; and approving the Housing Opportunity Fund Affordable Housing Agreement with
Homestead Community Land Trust. Refer to Finance Committee.
c) AB - 3709 Community & Economic Development Department submitted the Lodging Tax
Advisory Committee funding allocation recommendations; and requests approval of the
allocations and authorization to execute contracts with the successful applicants. Refer to
Committee of the Whole.
d) AB - 3695 Human Resources / Risk Management Department recommended approval of the
city's 2025 liability insurance renewals; and authorization to execute the implementing
documents when they are ready. Refer to Finance Committee.
e) AB - 3711 Parks & Recreation Department recommends approval of a Master Non-Exclusive
On-Call Small Public Works Agreement, with Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc., in
the amount of $235,000, using State Master Contract #09321, for Hazardous
Materials/Encampment Clean-ups through December 31, 2025. Refer to Finance Committee.
f) AB - 3710 Public Works Transportation Systems Division reported bid opening on October 4,
2024, for CAG-24-109, S 7th St Corridor Improvements project, and recommends awarding
the contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder Active Construction, Inc., in the
amount of $1,887,887. Council Concur.
AGENDA ITEM #6. a)
December 2, 2024 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
g) AB - 3712 Public Works Utility Systems Division recommended execution of Water Quality
Grant Agreement No. WQC-2025-Renton-00120 (CAG-24-261) with the Department of
Ecology to accept grant funds in the amount of $297,500 for the Lind Ave SW Conveyance and
Water Quality Retrofit project. The city's match is $52,500. Refer to Finance Committee.
MOVED BY PRINCE, SECONDED BY ALBERSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE CONSENT
AGENDA AS PUBLISHED CARRIED.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics marked
with an asterisk (*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by the Chair if
further review is necessary.
a) Utilities Committee: Chair Văn presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff
recommendation to approve the extension of the preliminary latecomer’s approval and grant
Tuscany Construction LLC final approval of a latecomer agreement for a period of 20 years from
the date of execution of the final agreement for the purpose of recovering a portion of the cost
of extending a sanitary sewer main along Hoquiam Avenue NE, north of NE 5th Place. The
application for a Latecomer's Agreement request was submitted by Bob Wenzl (Tuscany
Construction LLC) on November 16, 2017, and the preliminary costs were approved by the City
Council on December 11, 2017. The city inspected and accepted the improvements,
workmanship, and materials on March 20, 2023. Staff has received as-built plans, reviewed the
final costs, and received the final contractor's total cost of $75,217.00. The Committee further
recommends that the final assessment roll be forwarded to the City Clerk, who will notify the
affected property owner of the latecomer's potential assessment and the right to appeal, with
Council retaining the right to rule on the final action. If no appeals have been submitted within
20 days of the date of mailing the assessment notice, the Mayor and City Clerk are authorized to
execute and record the latecomer agreement to finalize the matter.
MOVED BY VǍN, SECONDED BY RIVERA, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED.
b) Transportation Committee: Chair McIrvin presented a report recommending concurrence in the
staff recommendation to deny the petition for vacation of the unopened Lyons Avenue NE Right-
of-Way, south of NE 4th Street.
MOVED BY MCIRVIN, SECONDED BY VǍN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED.
LEGISLATION
Ordinances for second and final reading:
a) Ordinance No. 6155: An Ordinance of the City of Renton, Washington, adopting the 2021
Edition of the International Fire Code as adopted and amended by the State Building Code
Council in Chapter 51-54A WAC, revising the City’s amendments thereto in Section 4-5-070 of
the Renton Municipal Code, authorizing corrections, providing for severability, and
establishing an effective date.
MOVED BY PÉREZ, SECONDED BY ALBERSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE
AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED.
AGENDA ITEM #6. a)
December 2, 2024 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
b) Ordinance No. 6156: An Ordinance of the City of Renton, Washington, amending and
replacing the 2025 City of Renton Salary Table previously adopted in Ordinance No. 6147,
authorizing corrections, providing for severability, and establishing an effective date.
MOVED BY O'HALLORAN, SECONDED BY PÉREZ, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE
AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED.
NEW BUSINESS
(Includes Council Committee agenda topics; visit rentonwa.gov/cityclerk for more information.)
a) Mayor Pavone called for nominations for 2025 Council President. Council President Prince
nominated Councilmember Alberson. There being no additional nominations, Mayor Pavone
called for a voice vote:
• Prince - Aye
• Pérez - Aye
• Văn - Abstained
• Alberson - Aye
• Rivera - Aye
• O'Halloran - Aye
• McIrvin - Aye
Councilmember Alberson was elected 2025 Council President.
b) Mayor Pavone called for nominations for 2025 Council President Pro Tempore.
Councilmember Alberson nominated Councilmember Pérez. There being no additional
nominations, Mayor Pavone called for a voice vote:
• Prince - Aye
• Pérez - Aye
• Văn - Abstained
• Alberson - Aye
• Rivera - Aye
• O'Halloran - Aye
• McIrvin - Aye
Councilmember Pérez was elected 2025 Council President Pro Tempore.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY PRINCE, SECONDED BY ALBERSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. TIME: 7:16 PM
Jason A. Seth, MMC, City Clerk
Jason Seth, Recorder
02 Dec 2024
AGENDA ITEM #6. a)
December 2, 2024 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
AGENDA ITEM #6. a)
Council Committee Meeting Calendar
December 2, 2024
December 9, 2024
Monday
1:00 p.m. Public Safety Committee, Chair Rivera
Location: Council Conference Room/Videoconference
1. Blake Fix Update
2. Downtown Patrol Unit Update
3. Pedestrian Safety Update
4. RRFA Briefing
5. Emerging Issues in Public Safety
2:15 p.m. Community Services Committee, Chair Alberson
Location: Council Conference Room/Videoconference
1. Emerging Issues in Parks & Recreation
3:00 p.m. Finance Committee, Chair O’Halloran
Location: Council Conference Room/Videoconference
1. Agreement for Hazardous Materials/Encampment Cleanups Using State
Master Contract #09321
2. Water Quality Grant Agreement No. WQC-2025-Renton-00120 (CAG-24-
261) with the State of Washington Department of Ecology for the Lind
Ave SW Conveyance and Water Quality Retrofit Project
3. Renewal of Liability Insurance Policies for 2025
4. Housing Opportunity Grant Award to Homestead Community Land Trust
for Willowcrest Townhomes Phase II
5. Vouchers
6. Emerging Issues in Finance
3:45 p.m. Planning & Development Committee, Chair Pérez
Location: Council Conference Room/Videoconference
1. 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update
2. Emerging Issues in CED
4:30 p.m. Committee on Committees, Chair Alberson
Location: Council Conference Room
1. 2025 Council Committee Assignments
5:45 p.m. Committee of the Whole, Chair Prince
Location: Conferencing Center
1. Allocation of Lodging Tax Funding for 2025
2. Review of Every Other Week Garbage Collection Program
7:00 p.m. Council Meeting
Location: Council Chambers/Videoconference
AGENDA ITEM #6. a)
AB - 3719
City Council Regular Meeting - 09 Dec 2024
SUBJECT/TITLE: Consideration of Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeal Procedures
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Planning Commission and Planning & Development
Committee
DEPARTMENT: Community & Economic Development Department
STAFF CONTACT: Matt Herrera, Planning Director
EXT.: 6593
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
No known fiscal impact.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Agenda Bill Summary: Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals Process
The Renton Municipal Code currently contemplates that the City Council act as a quasi-judicial appellate body
for appeals of most land use decisions.
Staff recommends adoption of an ordinance that streamlines the land use appeals process by removing the
City Council from hearing appeals of land use decisions. This change aims to improve efficiency and clarify the
Council's role in the city's governance.
Key Points:
Current System: Land use decisions are made by a professional hearing examiner, with appeals heard by the
City Council in a quasi-judicial closed record process.
Proposed Change: The proposed draft ordinance would eliminate the City Council's role in hearing these
appeals, making the hearing examiner's decision final and subject only to further challenge in King County
Superior Court.
Rationale for Change:
The City Council's primary role as a legislative body conflicts with the quasi-judicial nature of closed
record appeals
The Council is currently restricted from considering new evidence or testimony during appeals and not
allowed to change laws through the quasi-judicial process, limiting its ability to engage with
constituents' and risking creation of false expectations that it can act on such concerns
A professional hearing examiner is well-qualified to make these decisions, making the Council's review
unnecessary
Alignment with Other Cities: As discussed in the attached MRSC article, most cities with hearing examiner
systems have already removed their city councils from hearing land use appeals. City staff reviewed the codes
of several cities in King County and it appears that none of those surveyed contemplates closed record appeals
to their respective city councils for land use decisions. The cities that do contemplate City Council review of
land use applications appear limited to decisions that are intended to be treated as legislative decisions rather
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
than quasi-judicial closed record appeals (e.g. decisions on requests for changes in or interpretation of land
use designations).
EXHIBITS:
A. Draft Ordinance
B. MRSC Article regarding Quasi-Judicial Hearings
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
To speed implementation of the proposed changes, staff recommends Council refer the proposed draft ordinance to the
Planning Commission and to schedule a public hearing before the Planning Commission at its next available meeting so
that it can make a recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of the draft proposed ordinance, with or
without changes.
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
1
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. ________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, STREAMLINING LAND
USE APPEALS BY REMOVING CITY COUNCIL CLOSED RECORD APPEAL HEARINGS
FROM THE REVIEW PROCESS AND CLARIFYING REFERENCES TO THE APPEAL
PROCESS BY AMENDING SUBSECTIONS 4-3-010.F.2.e, 4-7-230.P, 4-8-070.H.1, 4-
8-070.I, 4-8-080.G, 4-8-110.A, 4-8-110.C, 4-8-110.E.4 AND 4-9-240.K.3 OF THE
RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE AND REPEALING 4-8-110.F OF THE RENTON
MUNICIPAL CODE; AUTHORIZING CORRECTIONS; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City currently has a system in which parties of record to certain
permit applications, code enforcement actions, and land use appeals appear before a
professional land use hearing examiner, who gathers testimony and evidence from the
interested parties, creates findings of fact and conclusions of law upon which
professionally rendered decisions are made in accordance with applicable laws; and
WHEREAS, under the current system, after the professional hearing examiner
renders a decision, parties may appeal the hearing examiner decision to the City Council,
and the City Council’s decision is then generally subject to further challenge in King County
Superior Court; and
WHEREAS, the appeal to the City Council is a quasi-judicial closed record appeal,
which means the Council is not allowed to consider new evidence or testimony, but only
argument as to whether the professional hearing examiner’s decision was erroneous
based upon the evidence that was considered by the hearing examiner. Under this
process, the City Council is not allowed to consider any additional evidence or testimony
or have contacts with the parties of record about the appeal or underlying issues; and
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
2
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
WHEREAS, the City Council is a legislative body, which strives to be responsive to
its constituents and listen to their concerns in order to take legislative actions, such as
passing new laws, amending existing laws, or appropriating budget resources to impact
the operations of the City. However, when the Council sits in its quasi-judicial capacity, it
is not allowed to consider concerns that are outside of the hearing examiner record and
it is required to render a decision based upon how existing laws apply to the individual
circumstances of the matter being appealed. It cannot rendered a decision based upon
what it thinks the law should have been or even what it has changed the law to after the
underlying matter vested to certain standards; and
WHEREAS, this inability to engage with constituents' conflicts with the Council's
primary legislative role, and that limitation is unnecessary in light of fact that it has hired
a professional hearing examiner to make decisions for which the hearing examiner is well
qualified to make; and
WHEREAS, most or all other cities that have adopted a hearing examiner process
do not include an appeal process to their city councils; and
WHEREAS, this matter was duly referred to the Planning Commission for investigation
and study, and the matter was considered by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, on ______[DATE], the City notified the State of
Washington of its intent to adopt amendments to its development regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on ________[DATE],
considered all relevant matters, and heard all parties in support or opposition, and subsequently
forwarded a recommendation to the City Council;
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
3
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. All portions of the Renton Municipal Code in this ordinance that are not
shown in strikethrough and underline edits or are not explicitly repealed herein remain in effect
and unchanged.
SECTION II. Subsection 4-3-010.F.2.e of the Renton Municipal Code is amended as
follows:
e. Appeals: Rights to appeal the decision are governed by the provisions of
RMC 4-8-110E8 and F6.
SECTION III. Subsection 4-7-230.P of the Renton Municipal Code is amended as follows:
P. APPEALS:
See RMC 4-8-110H.
SECTION IV. Subsection 4-8-070.H.1 of the Renton Municipal Code is amended as
follows:
1. Authority: The Hearing Examiner shall review and act on the following:
a. Appeals of administrative decisions/determinations (including, but not
limited to, parking, sign, street, tree cutting/routine vegetation management
standards, and Urban Center Design Overlay District regulations) and ERC
decisions, excepting determinations of whether an application is a bulk storage
facility which shall be appealable to the City Council,
b. Appeals relating to RMC 4-5-060, Construction Administrative Code,
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
4
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
c. Bulk storage special permit and variances from the bulk storage
regulations,
d. Conditional use permit,
e. Dedications of property for public purposes,
f. Fill and grade permit, special,
g. Master Plan review (overall plan) and major amendments to an overall
Master Plan,
h. Mobile home parks, preliminary and final,
i. Planned urban development, preliminary,
j. Preliminary plats and major amendments to plats,
k. Shoreline conditional use permit,
l. Shoreline variance,
m. Site plan approvals requiring a public hearing,
n. Special permits,
o. Temporary use permits, tier III Temporary Homeless Encampments,
p. Variances from wireless communication facility development standards,
the provisions of the subdivision regulations, and variances associated with a
development permit that requires review by the Hearing Examiner, and
q. Building permits submitted in conjunction with any of the above.
SECTION V. Subsection 4-8-070.I of the Renton Municipal Code is amended as follows:
I. CITY COUNCIL:
The City Council shall review and act on the following:
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
5
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
1. Annexations,
2. Appeals of Hearing Examiner decisions (any appeal from a Hearing
Examiner’s decision, whether an appeal from an administrative determination or
an original decision, shall be appealable to the City Council pursuant to RMC 4-8-
110E8),
3 Appeals of staff determinations of whether or not a proposal is considered a
bulk storage facility,
4 3. Comprehensive Plan map or text amendment,
5 4. Dedications of property for public purposes,
6 5. Development and zoning regulations text amendment,
7 6. Release of easements,
8 7. Rezones with associated Comprehensive Plan amendment,
9 8. Rezones with associated Comprehensive Plan map or text amendment,
10 9. Street vacations,.
SECTION VI. Subsection 4-8-080.G of the Renton Municipal Code is amended as shown in
Attachment A.
SECTION VII. Subsection 4-8-110.A of the Renton Municipal Code is amended as follows:
A. SCOPE AND PURPOSE:
This Section provides the basic procedures for processing appeals to the
Hearing Examiner and City Council of land use and development-related decisions.
Specific requirements are based upon the type/level of appeal and the appeal
authority.
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
6
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
SECTION VIII. Subsection 4-8-110.C of the Renton Municipal Code is amended as follows:
C. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICABLE TO APPEALS:
The following applies to appeals to the Hearing Examiner and City Council
unless otherwise provided elsewhere in the RMC or by state law:
1. Standing: Only the applicant, City or a person who has been made a party
of record prior to the issuance of a decision may appeal the decision. In order to
appeal, the person shall be aggrieved or affected by the decision pursuant to
RCW 36.70C.060.
2. Time to File: Except for final EIS decisions, all appeal periods shall be
fourteen (14) calendar days, which shall begin either three (3) calendar days after
the date of mailing of the decision to the parties of record via U.S. Postal mail by
the City Clerk, or the date the decision is electronically transmitted, posted or
emailed to the appellant and parties of record by the City Clerk, if such electronic
transmittal method has been previously approved or agreed to by the parties. The
appeal period for a final EIS shall be twenty (20) calendar days from the publication
of the final decision.
3. Required Form for and Content of Appeals: Any appeal shall be filed in
writing with the City Clerk. The written notice of appeal shall fully, clearly and
thoroughly specify the substantial error(s) in fact or law which exist in the record
of the proceedings from which the appellant seeks relief. If the appeal is unclear
and does not sufficiently explain the basis for the appeal, an order requiring the
appellant amend the appeal within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the order
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
7
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
may be issued. If the appeal is not satisfactorily amended within the time allowed,
it shall be dismissed.
4. Filing of Appeal and Fee: The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a
fee in accordance with the City of Renton fee schedule.
5. Facsimile Filings: Whenever any application or filing is required under this
Chapter, it may be made by facsimile. Any facsimile filing received at the City after
five o’clock (5:00) p.m. on any business day will be deemed to have been received
on the following business day. Any facsimile filing received after five o’clock (5:00)
p.m. on the last date for filing will be considered an untimely filing. Any party
desiring to make a facsimile filing after four o’clock (4:00) p.m. on the last day for
the filing must call the City Clerk’s office and indicate that the filing is being made
by facsimile and the number to which the facsimile copy is being sent. The filing
party must ensure that the facsimile filing is transmitted in adequate time so that
it will be completely received by the City before five o’clock (5:00) p.m. In all
instances in which filing fees are to accompany the filing of an application, those
filing fees must be received by the City before the end of the business day on the
last day of the filing period or the filing will be considered incomplete and will be
rejected.
6. Motions: The Hearing Examiner may dismiss an appeal to the Hearing
Examiner, without hearing, when it is determined by the Hearing Examiner to be
untimely, without merit on its face, incomplete, or frivolous. Any application to
the Hearing Examiner for an order shall be by motion which, unless made during
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
8
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
a hearing, shall be in writing, stating the reasons for the request and setting forth
the relief or order sought. Written motions shall be received at least five (5)
business days in advance of the hearing.
7. Parties: The parties in appeal hearings shall be the City, the applicant, and
the appellant(s), if different from the applicant or the City. No other persons shall
be allowed to testify unless serving as an expert witness for one of the parties.
8. Notice of Appeal Filed: If an appeal is filed with the City Clerk, the City Clerk
shall notify all parties of record to the decision subject to the appeal. Notice shall
be sent within five (5) calendar days via U.S. Postal mail by the City Clerk, or on
the date the application of appeal is received if electronic transmittal (email) had
been previously approved or agreed to by the parties, and at least ten (10) days
prior to the appeal hearing. A hearing for the appeal shall be set within twenty
one (21) days after acceptance of a complete application for appeal.
9. Restrictions on Subsequent Actions: Any later request to interpret, explain,
modify, or retract the decision shall not be deemed to be a new administrative
determination creating a new appeal period for any new third party to the permit.
10. Limit on Number of Appeals: Pursuant to
RCW 36.70B.050 and 43.21C.075, the City has consolidated the permit process to
allow for only one open record appeal of all permit decisions associated with a
single development application.
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
9
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
There shall be no more than one appeal on a procedural determination or
environmental determination such as the adequacy of a determination of
significance, nonsignificance, or of a final environmental impact statement.
Any appeal of the action of the Hearing Examiner in the case of appeals from
environmental determinations shall be joined with an appeal of the substantive
determination.
11. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies: No person may seek judicial
review of any decision of the City unless that person first exhausts the
administrative remedies provided by the City.
SECTION IX. Subsections 4-8-110.E.4 of the Renton Municipal Code is amended to add
a new subsection 4-8-110E.4.g, Hearing Examiner Decisions Final, to read as follows:
g. Hearing Examiner Decisions Final: The action of the Hearing Examiner
approving, modifying, or rejecting an application or decision being appealed shall
be final and conclusive unless timely appealed.
SECTION X. Subsections 4-8-110.F, Appeals to City Council, of the Renton Municipal
Code is hereby repealed.
SECTION XI. Subsection 4-9-240.K.3.p of the Renton Municipal Code is amended as as
follows:
p. Review Authority, Appeals, and Permit Revocation: Decision authority
is at the Hearing Examiner level with a public hearing, as designee for the
Administrator, and the decision is final appeal authority is with City Council. If a
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
10
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
permit is revoked pursuant to subsection R1 of this Section, the applicant may
request an appeal before the City Council.
SECTION XII. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk is authorized to direct
the codifier to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the corrections of
scriveners or clerical errors; references to other local, state, or federal laws, codes, rules, or
regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering and references. The City
Clerk is further authorized to direct the codifier to update any chapter, section, or subsection
titles in the Renton Municipal Code affected by this ordinance.
SECTION XIII. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the constitutionality of any other
section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance.
SECTION XIV. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication
of a summary of this ordinance in the City’s official newspaper. The summary shall consist of this
ordinance’s title.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL the day of , 2024.
Jason A. Seth, City Clerk
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
11
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2024.
Armondo Pavone, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Shane Moloney, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
ORD-CED:242ORD026:12/3/2024
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
12
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
ATTACHMENT A
RMC 4-8-080.G
G. LAND USE PERMIT PROCEDURES:
LAND USE PERMITS PUBLIC NOTICE
OF APPLICATION RECOMMENDATION OPEN RECORD
HEARING7
DECISION/
ADOPTION
OPEN RECORD
APPEAL
CLOSED RECORD
APPEAL
JUDICIAL
APPEAL
TYPE I
Building and Grading Permits1 Staff HE CC SC
Deferrals Staff HE CC SC
Final Plats Staff CC SC
Lot Line Adjustments Staff HE CC SC
Minor Modification to
Previously Approved Site Plan
(<10%)
Staff HE CC SC
Modifications, Deviations,
Alternates of Various Code
Standards2
Staff HE CC SC
Public Art Exemption
Certificate
Staff HE CC SC
Routine Vegetation
Management Permits (SEPA
exempt)
Staff HE CC SC
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
6
.
b
)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
13
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
LAND USE PERMITS PUBLIC NOTICE
OF APPLICATION RECOMMENDATION OPEN RECORD
HEARING7
DECISION/
ADOPTION
OPEN RECORD
APPEAL
CLOSED RECORD
APPEAL
JUDICIAL
APPEAL
Shoreline Exemptions Staff HE CC SC
Small Cell Permits Staff HE CC SC
Special Fence Permits Staff HE CC SC
Temporary Use Permit: Tier I Staff HE CC SC
Waivers2 Staff HE CC SC
Other SEPA Exempt
Activities/Actions
Staff HE CC SC
TYPE II
Additional Animals Permit Yes Staff HE CC SC
Additional Vehicles Permit Yes Staff HE CC SC
Conditional Approval Permit
(nonconforming structures)
Yes Staff HE CC SC
Critical Area Permit Yes Staff HE CC SC
Home Occupation Permit,
special
Yes Staff HE CC SC
Planned Urban Development,
final
Yes Staff HE CC SC
Temporary Use Permits: Tier II Yes Staff HE CC SC
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
6
.
b
)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
14
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
LAND USE PERMITS PUBLIC NOTICE
OF APPLICATION RECOMMENDATION OPEN RECORD
HEARING7
DECISION/
ADOPTION
OPEN RECORD
APPEAL
CLOSED RECORD
APPEAL
JUDICIAL
APPEAL
Temporary Emergency
Wetland Permit
Yes Staff HE CC SC
Variances, Administrative Yes Staff HE CC SC
Binding Site Plans Yes Staff HE CC SC
Conditional Use Permit
(administrative)
Yes Staff HE CC SC
Development Permit (special
flood hazard)
Yes Staff HE CC SC
Environmental Review9 Yes Staff HE CC SC
Master Site Plan Approvals
(individual phases)
Yes Staff HE CC SC
Site Plan Review
(administrative)
Yes Staff HE CC SC
Shoreline Permit Yes Staff DOE CC SC
Short Plats Yes Staff HE CC SC
TYPE III4
Bulk Storage Special Permit Yes Staff HE HE CC SC
Conditional Use Permit
(Hearing Examiner)
Yes Staff HE HE CC SC
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
6
.
b
)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
15
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
LAND USE PERMITS PUBLIC NOTICE
OF APPLICATION RECOMMENDATION OPEN RECORD
HEARING7
DECISION/
ADOPTION
OPEN RECORD
APPEAL
CLOSED RECORD
APPEAL
JUDICIAL
APPEAL
Fill and Grade Permit, Special Yes Staff HE HE CC SC
Major Amendments to Plats Yes Staff HE HE CC SC
Master Site Plan Approval
(overall plan)
Yes Staff HE HE CC SC
Mobile Home Parks,
Preliminary and Final
Yes Staff HE HE CC SC
Planned Urban Development,
preliminary
Yes Staff HE HE CC SC
Preliminary Plats – 10 Lots or
More
Yes Staff HE HE CC SC
Shoreline Conditional Use
Permit6
Yes Staff HE DOE, HE SHB
Shoreline Variance6 Yes Staff HE DOE, HE SHB
Site Plan Review (Hearing
Examiner)
Yes Staff HE HE CC
Special Permits Yes Staff HE HE CC
Temporary Use Permits: Tier
III Temporary Homeless
Encampments
Yes Staff HE HE CC SC
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
6
.
b
)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
16
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
LAND USE PERMITS PUBLIC NOTICE
OF APPLICATION RECOMMENDATION OPEN RECORD
HEARING7
DECISION/
ADOPTION
OPEN RECORD
APPEAL
CLOSED RECORD
APPEAL
JUDICIAL
APPEAL
Variances (associated with
Hearing Examiner land use
review)
Yes Staff HE HE CC
TYPE IV4
Rezones (site-specific, not
associated with a
Comprehensive Plan
amendment)
Yes Staff, HE HE CC SC
TYPE V4
Street Vacations8 Yes Public Works Staff CC CC SC
TYPE VI4
Development Regulation Text
Amendments8
Yes Staff, PC PC CC GMHB
Comprehensive Plan Map or
Text Amendments (may
include associated rezones)8
Yes Staff, PC PC CC GMHB
LEGEND:
Staff – Community and Economic Development Staff
ERC – Environmental Review Committee
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
6
.
b
)
ORDINANCE NO. ________
17
Draft Proposed Ordinance Streamlining Land Use Appeals 12/9/24 Council Referral
PC – Planning Commission
Admin. – Community and Economic Development Administrator
HE – Hearing Examiner
CC – City Council
DOE – Washington State Department of Ecology
SC – Superior Court
SHB – Shoreline Hearings Board
GMHB – Growth Management Hearings Board
BLANK – Not Applicable
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
6
.
b
)
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
AGENDA ITEM #6. b)
AB - 3714
City Council Regular Meeting - 09 Dec 2024
SUBJECT/TITLE: Amendment 2 to CAG-19-024 for Primary Public Defense Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council Concur
DEPARTMENT: Executive Services Department
STAFF CONTACT: Kristi Rowland, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
EXT.: 6500
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
The fiscal impact to extend CAG-19-024 with Valley Defenders, PLLC for public defender services is $75,903.72
per month for a total of $227,711.16. The amendment will be covered using the 2025 allocation to
Contracted Services 000.000000.003.513.10.41.003.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
In 2019 the city contracted with Valley Defenders for public defender services under CAG-19-024. The agreement was
extended via Amendment 1-24 on March 26, 2024. City staff has commenced search for a new public defender using a
request for proposal process (RFQ). The RFQ is expected to open in the next few weeks. The overall process lasts
approximately 8-10 weeks. Amendment 2-24 is needed to cover public defender services from January 1-March 31,
2025 during the RFQ process. A new public defender is expected to be under contract and ready to commence services
April 1, 2025.
During negotiations for a short-term agreement, the city considered extending the existing agreement on a
month-to-month basis, however for Valley Defenders to provide adequate coverage with appropriate staffing,
it was discovered a three-month agreement would better serve both parties.
EXHIBITS:
A. Amendment 2-24
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Mayor to sign Amendment 2-24 to CAG-19-024 for $75,903.72 per month for a total of
$227,711.16 for a 3-month extension to the agreement with Valley Defenders, PLLC for public defender
services.
AGENDA ITEM #6. c)
CAG-19-024, Adden #2-24
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AGREEMENT FOR PRIMARY PUBLIC
DEFENSE SERVICES
THIS AMENDMENT, dated for reference purposes only as December 2, 2025, is by and between
the City of Renton (the “City”), a Washington municipal corporation, and Valley Defenders, PLLC
(“ Public Defender”), a Washington Professional Limited Liability Company.. The City and the
Public Defender are referred to collectively in this Amendment as the “Parties.” Once fully
executed by the Parties, this Amendment is effective as of the last date signed by both parties.
Whereas, the City engaged the services of the Consultant under Agreement CAG-19-024, dated
April16, 2019, to provide necessary services for the primary public defense services (referred to
herein as the “Agreement”);
Whereas, the Parties wish to amend the Agreement to extend the term of the agreement in order
to continue primary public defense services through March 31, 2025.
NOW THEREFORE, It is mutually agreed upon that CAG-19-024 is amended as follows:
1. Time of Performance: Section 3.C, End of Term, is amended to continue appointments
under the Agreement through March 31, 2025.
2. Compensation: Section 4.A, Basic Compensation, is amended so that starting on January
1, 2025, the monthly compensation payable to the Public Defender will be $ 75,903.72
per month.
3. All terms of the Agreement not explicitly modified herein shall remain in full force and
effect and such terms shall apply to Work performed according to this Amendment as if
fully set forth herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have voluntarily entered into this Amendment as of the date
last signed by the Parties below.
CITY OF RENTON
By:_____________________________
CONSULTANT
By:____________________________
Armondo Pavone
Mayor
Shawn McCully
Owner, Valley Defenders, PLLC
AGENDA ITEM #6. c)
PAGE 2 OF 2
_____________________________
Date
_____________________________
Date
Attest
_____________________________
Jason A. Seth
City Clerk
Approved as to Legal Form:
By email on December 2, 2024, by
Shane Moloney, City Attorney
Contract Template Updated 06/17/2021
AGENDA ITEM #6. c)
AB - 3713
City Council Regular Meeting - 09 Dec 2024
SUBJECT/TITLE: Interagency Agreement-2025-Sub-grants 5489 Region 7_8 Law
Enforcement Liaison
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Finance Committee
DEPARTMENT: Police Department
STAFF CONTACT: Steve Morris, Commander
EXT.: 7597
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
The sub-grant reimburses the Renton Police Department for costs related to the Law Enforcement Liaison
Program between October 7,2024, and September 30, 2025, up to $5,000. Budget adjustment will be made in
Q1 of 2025.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Receive funds from the Washington Traffic Safety Commission for Law Enforcement Liaison to increase law
enforcement participation in traffic safety enforcement and to serve as a resource for the regions Target Zero
Manager.
EXHIBITS:
A. Agreement
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the interagency agreement with the Washington Traffic Safety Commission for Law Enforcement
Liaison to receive up to $5,000 in grant funds to increase law enforcement participation in traffic safety
enforcement and to serve as a resource for the regions Target Zero Manager.
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
Interagency Agreement-2025-Sub-grants-5489-Region 7/8 Law Enforcement Liaison
INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE
Washington Traffic Safety Commission
AND
Renton Police Department
2025-Sub-grants-5489-Region 7/8 Law Enforcement Liaison
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the Washington Traffic Safety
Commission, hereinafter referred to as “WTSC,” and Renton Police Department, hereinafter referred to
as “SUB-RECIPIENT.”
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the authority provided to WTSC in RCW 43.59 and RCW 39.34,
terms, conditions, covenants, and performance contained herein, or attached and incorporated and made
a part hereof, the parties mutually agree as follows:
1. PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT:
The purpose of this Agreement is to provide funding, provided by the United States Department of
Transportation (USDOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and allowed under the
Assistance Listing #20.600, for traffic safety grant project 2025-Sub-grants-5489-Region 7/8 Law
Enforcement Liaison.
2. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE
The period of performance of this Agreement shall commence upon the date of execution by both parties
or October 07, 2024, whichever is later, and remain in effect until September 30, 2025, unless terminated
sooner, as provided herein.
page 1 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
3. STATEMENT OF WORK
The SUB-RECIPIENT shall carry out the provisions of the traffic safety project described here as the
Statement of Work (SOW). If the SUB-RECIPIENT is unable to fulfill the SOW in any manner on this
project, the SUB-RECIPIENT must contact the WTSC program manager immediately and discuss a
potential amendment. All Federal and State regulations will apply.
3.1 SCOPE OF WORK
3.1.1 Problem ID and/or Opportunity
The Law Enforcement Liaison (LEL) program provides an opportunity for the WTSC to work with local law
enforcement agencies to develop and implement statewide initiatives focusing on traffic safety education
and culture change at the local level. The frequency of contact with local law enforcement is important to
help facilitate their cooperation in achieving the Washington State Traffic Safety Commission’s (WTSC)
mission of building partnerships to save lives and prevent injuries on our roadways for the health, safety,
and benefit of our communities. The LEL program provides the conduit to make those connections while
helping the WTSC and local coordinators implement agency strategies.
3.1.2 Project Purpose and Strategies
The purpose of this project is to increase law enforcement participation in traffic safety enforcement and
to serve as a resource for local law enforcement agencies for other WTSC supported programming.
This project supports the effectiveness of many other WTSC-funded projects, particularly those that
involve law enforcement activity.
3.2 PROJECT GOALS
1) Grow participation in regional traffic safety activities, with a goal of 75% of law enforcement agencies in
the region participating in HVE events in the fiscal year.
2) Provide leadership in the development of professional development for traffic safety minded officers,
with the long term goal of increasing the number of law enforcement agency leaders/admin who believe
that traffic safety is a priority.
3) Provide guidance/feedback on law enforcement topics to the regional Target Zero Manager and traffic
safety coalition (if applicable).
3.2.1 The objectives, measures and timelines listed in Appendix A will be reviewed at least annually by
the designated contacts of the SUB-RECIPIENT and WTSC, and may be updated pursuant to clause 6 of
this AGREEMENT. For the purposes of this section only, the parties’ DESIGNATED CONTACTS, as
listed in clause 42, are authorized to execute these amendments to Appendix A.
page 2 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
3.3. COMPENSATION
3.3.1 The cost of accomplishing the work described in the SOW will not exceed $5,000.00, for the entire
period of performance, as allocated to each year of this agreement in Section 3.4 PROJECT COSTS.
Unspent contract funds from each year do NOT carry over into subsequent years and each year’s budget
is independent of the others.
3.3.2 Payment for satisfactory performance of the work shall not exceed this amount unless the parties
mutually agree to a higher amount in a written Amendment to this Agreement executed by both parties.
3.3.3 After the first year, continuation is subject to funding availability, agreement on future objectives and
measures, and satisfactory progress toward completion of agreed upon goals (as determined by WTSC),
as set forth in the SOW.
3.3.4 If the SUB-RECIPIENT intends to charge indirect costs, an Indirect Cost Rate must be established
in accordance with WTSC policies, and an approved cost allocation plan may be required to be submitted
to the WTSC before any performance is conducted under this Agreement. Indirect cost rates are subject
to change based on updated Indirect Rate Letters from a cognizant federal agency or approved cost
allocation plans. If the indirect rate increases, the budget will be modified by deducting the amount of the
indirect rate increase from other budget categories so that the total budget does not increase. The total
budget may not increase without an amendment to this agreement executed by both parties.
3.3.5 WTSC will only reimburse the SUB-RECIPIENT for travel related expenses for travel defined in the
scope of work and budget or for which approval was expressly granted. The SUB-RECIPIENT must
submit a travel authorization form (A-40) to request approval for any travel not defined in the SOW and
for all travel outside of the continental United States.
3.3.6 WTSC will reimburse travel related expenses consistent with the written travel policies of the SUB-
RECIPIENT. If no written policy exists, state travel rates and policies (SAAM Chapter 10) apply. If WTSC
makes travel arrangements on behalf of the SUB-RECIPIENT, state travel policies must also be followed.
Washington State Administrative & Accounting Manual (SAAM) Chapter 10 can be obtained at this
website: https://www.ofm.wa.gov/sites/default/files/public/legacy/policy/10.htm. If for any reason, this
information is not available at this website, contact the WTSC office at 360-725-9860 to obtain a copy. If
following state travel policies, the SUB-RECIPIENT must provide appropriate documentation (receipts) to
support reimbursement requests, including the A-40 Travel Authorization form if required.
3.3.7. Any equipment that will be purchased under this agreement with a purchase price over $10,000
must be pre-approved by NHTSA prior to purchase. Pre-approval must also be gained if funding from this
agreement is used to purchase a portion of an item with a purchase price of $10,000 or higher. Approval
page 3 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
for these purchases will be facilitated by WTSC. WTSC will notify the SUB-RECIPIENT when approval
has been gained or denied. Failure to receive pre-approval will preclude reimbursement. Any equipment
purchased with NHTSA funds must be used exclusively for traffic safety purposes or the cost must be
pro-rated. If required under the Buy America Act, SUB-RECIPIENT will provide WTSC with purchase
price, quote, manufacturer, description of its use in the project, and documentation showing that it is
made in America.
3.3.8. All equipment must be inventoried by the SUB-RECIPIENT. The SUB-RECIPIENT agrees to
maintain the equipment, continue to use it for project purposes, and report on its status to WTSC each
year when requested.
3.3.9. Equipment is defined as any asset with a useful life greater than one year AND a unit cost of
$10,000 or greater, and small and attractive assets. Small and attractive assets are the following if they a
unit cost of $300 or more:
Laptops and Notebook Computers
Tablets and Smart phones
Small and attractive assets also include the following if they have a unit cost of $1000 or more:
Optical Devices, Binoculars, Telescopes, Infrared Viewers, and Rangefinders
Cameras and Photographic Projection Equipment
Desktop Computers (PCs)
Television Sets, DVD Players, Blu-ray Players and Video Cameras (home type)
3.4 PROJECT COSTS
The costs for the work under the SOW to be provided by the SUB-RECIPIENT are as follows:
Year 1: $5,000.00
APPLICABLE STATE AND FEDERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
4. ACTIVITY REPORTS
The SUB-RECIPIENT will submit progress reports on the activity of this project in the form provided by
page 4 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
the WTSC using the WTSC Enterprise Management System (WEMS) Progress Reporting process or
other alternate means pre-approved by WTSC. The SUB-RECIPIENT will include copies of publications,
training reports, advertising, social media posts, meeting agendas, and any statistical data generated in
project execution in the reports. The final report will be submitted to WTSC within 30 days of termination
of this Agreement. WTSC reserves the right to delay the processing of invoices until activity reports are
received and approved.
5. ADVANCE PAYMENTS PROHIBITED
No payments in advance of or in anticipation of goods or services to be provided under this Agreement
shall be made by the WTSC.
6. AGREEMENT ALTERATIONS AND AMENDMENTS
This Agreement may be amended by mutual agreement of the parties in the form of a written Amendment
to this Agreement. Such amendments shall only be binding if they are in writing and signed by personnel
authorized to bind each of the parties.
7. ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN
This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties. No other
understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to
exist or to bind any of the parties hereto.
8. SUBCONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS
The SUB-RECIPIENT may not assign the work to be provided under this Agreement, in whole or in part,
without the express prior written consent of the WTSC, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.
The SUB-RECIPIENT shall provide the WTSC a copy of all third-party contracts and agreements entered
into for purposes of fulfilling the SOW. Such third-party contracts and agreements must follow applicable
federal, state, and local law, including but not limited to procurement law, rules, and procedures. If any of
the funds provided under this Agreement include funds from NHTSA, such third-party contracts and
agreements must include the federal provisions set forth in this Agreement in sections 33 through 42.
9. ATTORNEYS’ FEES
In the event of litigation or other action brought to enforce the Agreement terms, each party agrees to
bear its own attorney fees and costs.
10. BILLING PROCEDURE
The SUB-RECIPIENT shall submit monthly invoices for reimbursement to WTSC with supporting
documentation as WTSC shall require. All invoices for reimbursement shall be submitted through the
WEMS invoicing process, or via alternate method if approved by WTSC. Payment to the SUB-
RECIPIENT for approved and completed work will be made by warrant or account transfer by WTSC
page 5 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
within 30 days of receipt of such properly documented invoices acceptable to WTSC. Upon expiration of
the Agreement, any claim for payment not already made shall be submitted within 45 days after the
expiration date of this Agreement. All invoices for goods received or services performed on or prior to
June 30, must be received by WTSC no later than August 10 of the same calendar year. All invoices for
goods received or services performed between July 1 and September 30, must be received by WTSC no
later than November 15 of the same calendar year. WTSC reserves the right to delay the processing of
invoices until activity reports required by Section 4 of this agreement, are received and approved.
11. CONFIDENTIALITY / SAFEGUARDING OF INFORMATION
The SUB-RECIPIENT shall not use or disclose any information concerning the WTSC, or information
which may be classified as confidential, for any purpose not directly connected with the administration of
this Agreement, except with prior written consent of the WTSC, or as may be required by law.
12. COST PRINCIPLES
Costs incurred under this Agreement shall adhere to provisions of 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart E.
13. COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES
The SUB-RECIPIENT warrants that it has not paid, and agrees not to pay, any bonus, commission,
brokerage, or contingent fee to solicit or secure this Agreement or to obtain approval of any application
for federal financial assistance for this Agreement. The WTSC shall have the right, in the event of breach
of this section by the SUB-RECIPIENT, to annul this Agreement without liability.
14. DISPUTES
14.1. Disputes arising in the performance of this Agreement, which are not resolved by agreement of the
parties, shall be decided in writing by the WTSC Deputy Director or designee. This decision shall be final
and conclusive, unless within 10 days from the date of the SUB-RECIPIENT’s receipt of WTSC’s written
decision, the SUB-RECIPIENT furnishes a written appeal to the WTSC Director. The SUB-RECIPIENT’s
appeal shall be decided in writing by the Director or designee within 30 days of receipt of the appeal by
the Director. The decision shall be binding upon the SUB-RECIPIENT and the SUB-RECIPIENT shall
abide by the decision.
14.2. Performance During Dispute. Unless otherwise directed by WTSC, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall
continue performance under this Agreement while matters in dispute are being resolved.
14.3 In the event that either Party deems it necessary to institute legal action or proceedings to enforce
any right or obligation under this Agreement, the Parties hereto agree that any such action or
proceedings shall be brought in the superior court situated in Thurston County, Washington.
15. GOVERNANCE
page 6 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
15.1. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to and under the authority granted by the laws of the state
of Washington and any applicable federal laws. The provisions of this Agreement shall be construed to
conform to those laws.
15.2. In the event of an inconsistency in the terms of this Agreement, or between its terms and any
applicable statute or rule, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order:
15.2.1. Applicable federal and state statutes and rules
15.2.2. Terms and Conditions of this Agreement
15.2.3. Any Amendment executed under this Agreement
15.2.4. Any SOW executed under this Agreement
15.2.5. Any other provisions of the Agreement, including materials incorporated by reference
16. INCOME
Any income earned by the SUB-RECIPIENT from the conduct of the SOW (e.g., sale of publications,
registration fees, or service charges) must be accounted for, reported to WTSC, and that income must be
applied to project purposes or used to reduce project costs.
17. INDEMNIFICATION
17.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall indemnify and hold harmless the
WTSC, its officers, employees, and agents, and process and defend at its own expense any and all
claims, demands, suits at law or equity, actions, penalties, losses, damages, or costs of whatsoever kind
(“claims”) brought against WTSC arising out of or in connection with this Agreement and/or the SUB-
RECIPIENT’s performance or failure to perform any aspect of the Agreement. This indemnity provision
applies to all claims against WTSC, its officers, employees, and agents arising out of, in connection with,
or incident to the acts or omissions of the SUB-RECIPIENT, its officers, employees, agents, contractors,
and subcontractors. Provided, however, that nothing herein shall require the SUB-RECIPIENT to
indemnify and hold harmless or defend the WTSC, its agents, employees, or officers to the extent that
claims are caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the WTSC, its officers, employees or agents; and
provided further that if such claims result from the concurrent negligence of (a) the SUB-RECIPIENT, its
officers, employees, agents, contractors, or subcontractors, and (b) the WTSC, its officers, employees, or
agents, or involves those actions covered by RCW 4.24.115, the indemnity provisions provided herein
shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of the SUB-RECIPIENT, its officers,
employees, agents, contractors, or subcontractors.
17.2. The SUB-RECIPIENT agrees that its obligations under this Section extend to any claim, demand
and/or cause of action brought by, or on behalf of, any of its employees or agents in the performance of
this agreement. For this purpose, the SUB-RECIPIENT, by mutual negotiation, hereby waives with
respect to WTSC only, any immunity that would otherwise be available to it against such claims under the
page 7 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
Industrial Insurance provisions chapter 51.12 RCW.
17.3. The indemnification and hold harmless provision shall survive termination of this Agreement.
18. INDEPENDENT CAPACITY
The employees or agents of each party who are engaged in the performance of this Agreement shall
continue to be employees or agents of that party and shall not be considered for any purpose to be
employees or agents of the other party.
19. INSURANCE COVERAGE
19.1. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall comply with the provisions of Title 51 RCW, Industrial Insurance, if
required by law.
19.2. If the SUB-RECIPIENT is not required to maintain insurance in accordance with Title 51 RCW, prior
to the start of any performance of work under this Agreement, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall provide WTSC
with proof of insurance coverage (e.g., vehicle liability insurance, private property liability insurance, or
commercial property liability insurance), as determined appropriate by WTSC, which protects the SUB-
RECIPIENT and WTSC from risks associated with executing the SOW associated with this Agreement.
20. LICENSING, ACCREDITATION, AND REGISTRATION
The SUB-RECIPIENT shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal licensing, accreditation,
and registration requirements and standards necessary for the performance of this Agreement. The SUB-
RECIPIENT shall complete registration with the Washington State Department of Revenue, if required,
and be responsible for payment of all taxes due on payments made under this Agreement.
21. RECORDS MAINTENANCE
21.1. During the term of this Agreement and for six years thereafter, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall maintain
books, records, documents, and other evidence that sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and indirect
costs expended in the performance of the services described herein. These records shall be subject to
inspection, review, or audit by authorized personnel of the WTSC, the Office of the State Auditor, and
federal officials so authorized by law. All books, records, documents, and other material relevant to this
Agreement will be retained for six years after expiration. The Office of the State Auditor, federal auditors,
the WTSC, and any duly authorized representatives shall have full access and the right to examine any of
these materials during this period.
21.2. Records and other documents, in any medium, furnished by one party to this Agreement to the
other party, will remain the property of the furnishing party, unless otherwise agreed. The receiving party
will not disclose or make available this material to any third parties without first giving notice to the
furnishing party and giving them a reasonable opportunity to respond. Each party will utilize reasonable
page 8 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
security procedures and protections to assure that records and documents provided by the other party
are not erroneously disclosed to third parties.
22. RIGHT OF INSPECTION
The SUB-RECIPIENT shall provide right of access to its facilities to the WTSC or any of its officers, or to
any other authorized agent or official of the state of Washington or the federal government, at all
reasonable times, in order to monitor and evaluate performance, compliance, and/or quality assurance
under this Agreement. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall make available information necessary for WTSC to
comply with the right to access, amend, and receive an accounting of disclosures of their Personal
Information according to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) or any
regulations enacted or revised pursuant to the HIPAA provisions and applicable provisions of Washington
State law. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall upon request make available to the WTSC and the United States
Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services all internal policies and procedures, books,
and records relating to the safeguarding, use, and disclosure of Personal Information obtained or used as
a result of this Agreement.
23. RIGHTS IN DATA
23.1. WTSC and SUB-RECIPIENT agree that all data and work products (collectively called “Work
Product”) pursuant to this Agreement shall be considered works made for hire under the U.S. Copyright
Act, 17 USC §101 et seq., and shall be owned by the state of Washington. Work Product includes, but is
not limited to, reports, documents, pamphlets, advertisement, books, magazines, surveys, studies,
computer programs, films, tapes, sound reproductions, designs, plans, diagrams, drawings, software,
and/or databases to the extent provided by law. Ownership includes the right to copyright, register the
copyright, distribute, prepare derivative works, publicly perform, publicly display, and the ability to
otherwise use and transfer these rights.
23.2. If for any reason the Work Product would not be considered a work made for hire under applicable
law, the SUB-RECIPIENT assigns and transfers to WTSC the entire right, title, and interest in and to all
rights in the Work Product and any registrations and copyright applications relating thereto and any
renewals and extensions thereof.
23.3. The SUB-RECIPIENT may publish, at its own expense, the results of project activities without prior
review by the WTSC, provided that any publications (written, visual, or sound) contain acknowledgment
of the support provided by NHTSA and the WTSC. Any discovery or invention derived from work
performed under this project shall be referred to the WTSC, who will determine through NHTSA whether
patent protections will be sought, how any rights will be administered, and other actions required to
protect the public interest.
24. SAVINGS
page 9 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
In the event funding from state, federal, or other sources is withdrawn, reduced, or limited in any way
after the effective date of this Agreement and prior to completion of the SOW under this Agreement, the
WTSC may terminate the Agreement under the "TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE" clause, without
the 30 day notice requirement. The Agreement is subject to renegotiation at the WTSC’s discretion under
any new funding limitations or conditions.
25. SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this Agreement or any provision of any document incorporated by reference shall be
held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Agreement which can be given
effect without the invalid provision, if such remainder conforms to the requirements of applicable law and
the fundamental purpose of this Agreement, and to this end the provisions of this Agreement are declared
to be severable.
26. SITE SECURITY
While on WTSC premises, or while interacting with WTSC’s personnel, the SUB-RECIPIENT, its agents,
employees, or sub-contractors shall conform in all respects with all WTSC physical, fire, or other security
policies and applicable regulations and not interfere with WTSC’s operations.
27. TAXES
All payments of payroll taxes, unemployment contributions, any other taxes, insurance, or other such
expenses for the SUB-RECIPIENT or its staff shall be the sole responsibility of the SUB-RECIPIENT.
28. TERMINATION FOR CAUSE
If the SUB-RECIPIENT does not fulfill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under this Agreement
or violates any of these terms and conditions, the WTSC will give the SUB-RECIPIENT written notice of
such failure or violation, and may terminate this Agreement immediately. At the WTSC’s discretion, the
SUB-RECIPIENT may be given 15 days to correct the violation or failure. In the event that the SUB-
RECIPIENT is given the opportunity to correct the violation and the violation is not corrected within the
15-day period, this Agreement may be terminated at the end of that period by written notice of the WTSC.
29. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE
Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, either party may terminate this Agreement, without
cause or reason, with 30 days written notice to the other party. If this Agreement is so terminated, the
WTSC shall be liable only for payment required under the terms of this Agreement for services rendered
or goods delivered prior to the effective date of termination.
30. TREATMENT OF ASSETS
30.1. Title to all property furnished by the WTSC shall remain property of the WTSC. Title to all property
furnished by the SUB-RECIPIENT for the cost of which the SUB-RECIPIENT is entitled to be reimbursed
page 10 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
as a direct item of cost under this Agreement shall pass to and vest in the WTSC upon delivery of such
property by the SUB-RECIPIENT. Title to other property, the cost of which is reimbursable to the SUB-
RECIPIENT under this Agreement, shall pass to and vest in the WTSC upon (i) issuance for use of such
property in the performance of this Agreement, or (ii) commencement of use of such property in the
performance of this Agreement, or (iii) reimbursement of the cost thereof by the WTSC in whole or in part,
whichever first occurs.
30.2. Any property of the WTSC furnished to the SUB-RECIPIENT shall, unless otherwise provided
herein or approved by the WTSC, be used only for the performance of this Agreement.
30.3. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall be responsible for any loss or damage to property of the WTSC which
results from the negligence of the SUB-RECIPIENT or which results from the failure on the part of the
SUB-RECIPIENT to maintain and administer that property in accordance with sound management
practices.
30.4. If any WTSC property is lost, destroyed, or damaged, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall immediately notify
the WTSC and shall take all reasonable steps to protect the property from further damage.
30.5. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall surrender to the WTSC all property of the WTSC prior to settlement,
upon completion, termination, or cancellation of this Agreement.
30.6. All reference to the SUB-RECIPIENT under this clause shall also include SUB-RECIPIENT's
employees, agents, or sub-contractors.
31. STATE NONDISCRIMINATION
31.1 Nondiscrimination Requirement. During the term of this Contract, Contractor, including any
subcontractor, shall not discriminate on the bases enumerated at RCW 49.60.530(3). In addition,
Contractor, including any subcontractor, shall give written notice of this nondiscrimination requirement to
any labor organizations with which Contractor, or subcontractor, has a collective bargaining or other
agreement.
31.2 Obligation to Cooperate. Contractor, including any subcontractor, shall cooperate and comply with
any Washington state agency investigation regarding any allegation that Contractor, including any
subcontractor, has engaged in discrimination prohibited by this Contract pursuant to RCW 49.60.530(3).
31.3 Default. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, WTSC may suspend Contractor, including
any subcontractor, upon notice of a failure to participate and cooperate with any state agency
investigation into alleged discrimination prohibited by this Contract, pursuant to RCW 49.60.530(3). Any
such suspension will remain in place until WTSC receives notification that Contractor, including any
page 11 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
subcontractor, is cooperating with the investigating state agency. In the event Contractor, or
subcontractor, is determined to have engaged in discrimination identified at RCW 49.60.530(3), WTSC
may terminate this Contract in whole or in part, and Contractor, subcontractor, or both, may be referred
for debarment as provided in RCW 39.26.200. The Contractor or subcontractor may be given a
reasonable time in which to cure this noncompliance, including implementing conditions consistent with
any court-ordered injunctive relief or settlement agreement.
31.4 Remedies for Breach. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, in the event of Contract
termination or suspension for engaging in discrimination, Contractor, subcontractor, or both, shall be
liable for contract damages as authorized by law including, but not limited to, any cost difference between
the original contract and the replacement or cover contract and all administrative costs directly related to
the replacement contract, which damages are distinct from any penalties imposed under Chapter 49.60,
RCW. WTSC shall have the right to deduct from any monies due to Contractor or subcontractor, or that
thereafter become due, an amount for damages Contractor or subcontractor will owe WTSC for default
under this provision.
32. WAIVER
A failure by either party to exercise its rights under this Agreement shall not preclude that party from
subsequent exercise of such rights and shall not constitute a waiver of any other rights under this
Agreement.
APPLICABLE CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANTS (23 CFR
PART 1300 APPENDIX A):
33. BUY AMERICA ACT
The SUB-RECIPIENT will comply with the Buy America requirement (23 U.S.C. 313) when purchasing
items using federal funds. Buy America requires the SUB-RECIPIENT to purchase only steel, iron, and
manufactured products produced in the United States, unless the Secretary of Transportation determines
that such domestically produced items would be inconsistent with the public interest, that such materials
are not reasonably available and of a satisfactory quality, or that inclusion of domestic materials will
increase the cost of the overall project contract by more than 25 percent. In order to use federal funds to
purchase foreign produced items, the WTSC must submit a waiver request that provides an adequate
basis and justification, and which is approved by the Secretary of Transportation.
34. DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION
Instructions for Lower Tier Certification
34.1. By signing this Agreement, the SUB-RECIPIENT (hereinafter in this section referred to as the “lower
tier participant”) is providing the certification set out below and agrees to comply with the requirements of
page 12 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
2 CFR part 180 and 23 CFR part 1200.
34.2. The certification in this section is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed
when this transaction was entered into. If it is later determined that the lower tier participant knowingly
rendered an erroneous certification, in addition to other remedies available to the federal government, the
department or agency with which this transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including
suspension and/or debarment.
34.3. The lower tier participant shall provide immediate written notice to the WTSC if at any time the lower
tier participant learns that its certification was erroneous when submitted or has become erroneous by
reason of changed circumstances.
34.4. The terms covered transaction, civil judgement, debarment, suspension, ineligible, participant,
person, principal, and voluntarily excluded, as used in this clause, are defined in 2 CFR parts 180 and
1200.
34.5. The lower tier participant agrees by signing this Agreement that it shall not knowingly enter into any
lower tier covered transaction with a person who is proposed for debarment under 48 CFR part 9, subpart
9.4, debarred, suspended, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this covered
transaction, unless authorized by WTSC.
34.6. The lower tier participant further agrees by signing this Agreement that it will include the clause
titled “Instructions for Lower Tier Certification” including the “Certification Regarding Debarment,
Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion - Lower Tier Covered Transaction,” without modification,
in all lower tier covered transactions and in all solicitations for lower tier covered transactions, and will
require lower tier participants to comply with 2 CFR part 180 and 23 CFR part 1200.
34.7. A participant in a covered transaction may rely upon a certification of a prospective participant in a
lower tier covered transaction that it is not proposed for debarment under 48 CFR part 9, subpart 9.4,
debarred, suspended, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from the covered transaction, unless it knows that
the certification is erroneous. A participant is responsible for ensuring that its principals are not
suspended, debarred, or otherwise ineligible to participate in covered transactions. To verify the eligibility
of its principals, as well as the eligibility of any prospective lower tier participants, each participant may,
but is not required to, check the System for Award Management Exclusions website
(https://www.sam.gov/).
34.8. Nothing contained in the foregoing shall be construed to require establishment of a system of
records in order to render in good faith the certification required by this clause. The knowledge and
information of a participant is not required to exceed that which is normally possessed by a prudent
page 13 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
person in the ordinary course of business dealings.
34.9. Except for transactions authorized under paragraph 34.5. of these instructions, if a participant in a
covered transaction knowingly enters into a lower tier covered transaction with a person who is proposed
for debarment under 48 CFR part 9, subpart 9.4, suspended, debarred, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded
from participation in this transaction, in addition to other remedies available to the Federal government,
the department or agency with which this transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including
suspension or debarment.
Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion - Lower Tier
Covered Transactions
34.10. The lower tier participant certifies, by signing this Agreement, that neither it nor its principals are
presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from
participation in this transaction by any federal department or agency.
33.11. Where the lower tier participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification,
such participant shall attach an explanation to this Agreement.
35. THE DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE ACT OF 1988 (41 U.S.C. 8103)
35.1. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall:
35.1.1. Publish a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing,
possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the SUB-RECIPIENT'S workplace, and shall
specify the actions that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition.
35.1.2. Establish a drug-free awareness program to inform employees about the dangers of drug abuse
in the workplace; the SUB-RECIPIENT’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; any available drug
counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and the penalties that may be imposed
upon employees for drug violations occurring in the workplace.
35.1.3. Make it a requirement that each employee engaged in the performance of the grant be given a
copy of the statement required by paragraph 35.1.1. of this section.
35.1.4. Notify the employee in the statement required by paragraph 35.1.1. of this section that, as a
condition of employment under the grant, the employee will abide by the terms of the statement, notify the
employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than
five days after such conviction, and notify the WTSC within 10 days after receiving notice from an
employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction.
page 14 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
35.1.5. Take one of the following actions within 30 days of receiving notice under paragraph 35.1.4. of
this section, with respect to any employee who is so convicted: take appropriate personnel action against
such an employee, up to and including termination, and/or require such employee to participate
satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a
federal, state, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency.
35.1.6. Make a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of
all of the paragraphs above.
36. FEDERAL FUNDING ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY ACT (FFATA)
In accordance with FFATA, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall, upon request, provide WTSC the names and total
compensation of the five most highly compensated officers of the entity, if the entity in the preceding
fiscal year received 80 percent or more of its annual gross revenues in federal awards, received
$25,000,000 or more in annual gross revenues from federal awards, and if the public does not have
access to information about the compensation of the senior executives of the entity through periodic
reports filed under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or section 6104 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
37. FEDERAL LOBBYING
37.1. The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that:
37.1.1. No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned,
to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member
of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection
with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan,
the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or
modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
37.1.2. If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for
influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an
officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this federal
contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard
Form-LLL, Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying, in accordance with its instructions.
37.1.3. The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award
documents for all sub-awards at all tiers (including sub-contracts, sub-grants, and contracts under grant,
loans, and cooperative agreements), and that all sub-recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.
page 15 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
37.2. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this
transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or
entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file
the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than
$100,000 for each such failure.
38. FEDERAL NONDISCRIMINATION (Title VI, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.)
38.1. During the performance of this Agreement, the SUB-RECIPIENT agrees:
38.1.1. To comply with all federal statutes and implementing regulations relating to nondiscrimination
(“Federal Nondiscrimination Authorities”). These include but are not limited to:
38.1.1.1. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., 78 stat. 252
38.1.1.2. 49 CFR part 21
38.1.1.3. 28 CFR section 50.3
38.1.1.4. The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970
38.1.1.5. Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973, (23 U.S.C. 324 et seq.)
38.1.1.6. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, (29 U.S.C. 794 et seq.)
38.1.1.7. The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 6101 et seq.)
38.1.1.8. The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987
38.1.1.9. Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. 12131-12189)
38.1.1.10. Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations
38.1.1.11. Executive Order 13166, Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English
Proficiency
38.1.1.12. Executive Order 13985, Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities
through the Federal Government
38.1.1.13. Executive Order 13988, Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender
Identity or Sexual Orientation
38.1.2. Not to participate directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by any federal non-
discrimination law or regulation, as set forth in Appendix B of 49 CFR Part 21 and herein.
38.1.3. To keep and permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its
facilities as required by the WTSC, USDOT, or NHTSA in a timely, complete, and accurate way.
Additionally, the SUB-RECIPIENT must comply with all other reporting, data collection, and evaluation
requirements, as prescribed by law or detailed in program guidance.
38.1.4. That, in the event a contractor/funding recipient fails to comply with any nondiscrimination
provisions in this contract/funding Agreement, the WTSC will have the right to impose such
page 16 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
contract/agreement sanctions as it or NHTSA determine are appropriate, including but not limited to
withholding payments to the contractor/funding recipient under the contract/agreement until the
contractor/funding recipient complies, and/or cancelling, terminating, or suspending a contract or funding
agreement, in whole or in part.
38.1.5. In accordance with the Acts, the Regulations, and other pertinent directives, circulars, policy,
memoranda, and/or guidance, the SUB-RECIPIENT hereby gives assurance that it will promptly take any
measures necessary to ensure that: “No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color,
or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected
to discrimination under any program or activity, for which the Recipient receives Federal financial
assistance from DOT, including NHTSA”.
38.1.6 To insert this clause, including all paragraphs, in every sub-contract and sub-agreement and in
every solicitation for a sub-contract or sub-agreement that receives federal funds under this program.
39. POLITICAL ACTIVITY (HATCH ACT)
The SUB-RECIPIENT will comply with provisions of the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. 1501-1508), which limit the
political activities of employees whose principal employment activities are funded in whole or in part with
federal funds.
40. PROHIBITION ON USING GRANT FUNDS TO CHECK FOR HELMET USAGE
The SUB-RECIPIENT will not use 23 U.S.C. Chapter 4 grant funds for programs to check helmet usage
or to create checkpoints that specifically target motorcyclists. This Agreement does not include any
aspects or elements of helmet usage or checkpoints, and so fully complies with this requirement.
41. STATE LOBBYING
None of the funds under this Agreement will be used for any activity specifically designed to urge or
influence a state or local legislator to favor or oppose the adoption of any specific legislative proposal
pending before any state or local legislative body. Such activities include both direct and indirect (e.g.,
“grassroots”) lobbying activities, with one exception. This does not preclude a state official whose salary
is supported with NHTSA funds from engaging in direct communications with state or local legislative
officials, in accordance with customary state practice, even if such communications urge legislative
officials to favor or oppose the adoption of a specific pending legislative proposal.
42. CERTIFICATION ON CONFLICT OF INTEREST
General Requirements
42.1. No employee, officer or agent of the SUB-RECIPIENT who is authorized in an official capacity to
negotiate, make, accept or approve, or to take part in negotiating, making, accepting or approving any
page 17 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
subaward, including contracts or subcontracts, in connection with this grant shall have, directly or
indirectly, any financial or personal interest in any such subaward. Such a financial or personal interest
would arise when the employee, officer, or agent, any member of his or her immediate family, his or her
partner, or an organization which employs or is about to employ any of the parties indicated herein, has a
financial or personal interest in or a tangible personal benefit from an entity considered for a subaward.
42.2. Based on this policy:
42.2.1. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall maintain a written code or standards of conduct that provide for
disciplinary actions to be applied for violations of such standards by officers, employees, or agents. The
code or standards shall provide that the SUB-RECIPIENT’s officers, employees, or agents may neither
solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from present or potential sub-
awardees, including contractors or parties to subcontracts and establish penalties, sanctions or other
disciplinary actions for violations, as permitted by State or local law or regulation.
42.2.2. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall maintain responsibility to enforce the requirements of the written code
or standards of conduct.
Disclosure Requirements
42.3. No SUB-RECIPIENT, including its officers, employees or agents, shall perform or continue to
perform under a grant or cooperative agreement, whose objectivity may be impaired because of any
related past, present, or currently planned interest, financial or otherwise, in organizations regulated by
NHTSA or in organizations whose interests may be substantially affected by NHTSA activities.
42.3.1. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall disclose any conflict of interest identified as soon as reasonably
possible, making an immediate and full disclosure in writing to WTSC. The disclosure shall include a
description of the action which the recipient has taken or proposes to take to avoid or mitigate such
conflict.
42.3.2. NHTSA will review the disclosure and may require additional relevant information from the
recipient. If a conflict of interest is found to exist, NHTSA may (a) terminate the award, or (b) determine
that it is otherwise in the best interest of NHTSA to continue the award and include appropriate provisions
to mitigate or avoid such conflict.
43.3.3 Conflicts of interest that require disclosure include all past, present or currently planned
organizational, financial, contractual or other interest(s) with an organization regulated by NHTSA or with
an organization whose interests may be substantially affected by NHTSA activities, and which are related
to this award. The interest(s) that require disclosure include those of any SUB-RECIPIENT, affiliate,
proposed consultant, proposed subcontractor and key personnel of any of the above. Past interest shall
be limited to within one year of the date of award. Key personnel shall include any person owning more
page 18 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
than a 20 percent interest in a SUB-RECIPIENT, and the officers, employees or agents of a recipient who
are responsible for making a decision or taking an action under an award where the decision or action
can have an economic or other impact on the interests of a regulated or affected organization.
43. DESIGNATED CONTACTS
The following named individuals will serve as designated contacts for each of the parties for all
communications, notices, and reimbursements regarding this Agreement:
The Contact for the SUB-RECIPIENT is:The Contact for WTSC is:
Corey Jacobs
CJacobs@Rentonwa.gov
425-430-7596
Jerry Noviello
jnoviello@wtsc.wa.gov
360-725-9897 ext.
44. AUTHORITY TO SIGN
The undersigned acknowledge that they are authorized to execute this Agreement and bind their
respective agencies or entities to the obligations set forth herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement.
Renton Police Department
_____________________________________
Signature
_____________________________________
Printed Name
_____________________________________
Title
_____________________________________
page 19 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
Date
WASHINGTON TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
_____________________________________
Signature
_____________________________________
Printed Name
_____________________________________
Title
_____________________________________
Date
page 20 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
APPENDIX A
Project Costs
Year 1
BUDGET CATEGORY DESCRIPTION DIRECT
AMOUNT
Indirect Cost
Rate
Indirect
Amount
Total
Budget
Employee salaries and
benefits $5,000.00 0% $0.00 $5,000.00
Travel $0.00 0% $0.00 $0.00
Contract Services $0.00 0% $0.00 $0.00
Goods and Services $0.00 0% $0.00 $0.00
Equipment $0.00 0% $0.00 $0.00
TOTAL $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00
Budget may be modified between budget categories with email or phone request to the assigned WTSC
Program Manager.
It is expected that the designated law enforcement liaison (LEL) will attend various trainings and other
meetings. These may take place in WA or in other states in the country. In some cases, WTSC will reimburse
travel and conference related expenses using other grant funds. Approval for training events is confirmed via
separate award letter.
Important Notes:
1. Indirect cost rates are subject to change based on updated Indirect Rate Letters from a cognizant federal
agency or approved cost allocation plans. If the indirect rate increases, the budget will be modified by
deducting the amount of the indirect rate increase from other budget categories so that the total budget does
not increase.
2. The total annual budget may not increase without a written amendment to this agreement executed by
both parties.
page 21 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
3. Adjustments between budget categories within the same year can be made upon mutual agreement of the
contact for WTSC and the contact for the SUB-RECIPIENT.
Objectives and Measures
Goal 1 - Grow participation in regional traffic safety activities, with a goal of 75% of law
enforcement agencies in the region participating in HVE events in the fiscal year.
Objective Objective Details Completion Date
Actively participate in your region/county traffic
safety task force. Encourage participation in
HVE activities from all agencies in the region.
Troubleshoot options if an agency is
experiencing staffing or political issues that
impact their participation in local HVE
programming.
09/30/2025
Facilitate the development of performance
expectations for HVE participation for your
region.
Along with the TZM, monitor HVE performance
and follow up with officers if their performance
doesn't meet the task force's expectations.
The WTSC relies on LELs to ensure that HVE
funds are being used in an appropriate and
effective manner. Work with your task force to
determine appropriate performance
expectations and processes for following up
when needed.
09/30/2025
Build support for traffic safety by
meeting/presenting to department leadership
about traffic safety. These can be a great
opportunity to gather feedback about their
priorities for the region and discuss
current/future planned activities.
09/30/2025
Measure Reporting
Frequency Type Target
page 22 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
Percent of law enforcement agencies in your region that
participate in HVE activities.Annual Process 75
Goal 2 - Provide leadership in the development of professional development for traffic
safety minded officers, with the long term goal of increasing the number of law
enforcement agency leaders/admin who believe that traffic safety is a priority.
Objective Objective Details Completion Date
Seek out opportunities for professional
development for yourself and others in your
region that will grow traffic safety leaders in
your region.
Some examples of this include the Traffic
Safety Champions event, CJTC supervisor
training courses, etc.
It is critical that LELs have the knowledge and
skills to be a trusted leader in traffic safety to
their peers in the region. They should seek
training opportunities to stay at the cutting
edge of the field.
Preapproval required to attend training events.
For non-WTSC led trainings, LEL will provide
an after-training summary that describes how
the learned skills and information will be used
in the field.
09/30/2025
Goal 3 - Provide guidance/feedback on law enforcement topics to the regional Target
Zero Manager and traffic safety coalition (if applicable).
Objective Objective Details Completion Date
Support the TZM in building relationships with
law enforcement departments in your region.09/30/2025
page 23 of 23
AGENDA ITEM #6. d)
AB - 3715
City Council Regular Meeting - 09 Dec 2024
SUBJECT/TITLE: Authorize Sub-Agreement with the Puget Sound Regional Council for
the Renton Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Finance Committee
DEPARTMENT: Public Works Transportation Systems Division
STAFF CONTACT: Ellen Talbo, Transportation Planning Manager
EXT.: 7319
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
This sub-agreement provides $100,000 from Fund 317 as a local match toward $400,000 of federal USDOT
grant funds that were awarded to the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) in February 2023. The total project
cost of $500,000 is for Renton to complete a citywide comprehensive safety action plan specifically adhering
to federal Safe Streets 4 All (SS4A) principles. The $100,000 local match funds have been included in the 2025-
2026 capital improvement plan budget.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) issued a notice of funding opportunity in 2022 for
the new Safe Streets 4 All discretionary program. The SS4A program provides grant funding to regional, local,
and Tribal initiatives intended to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries. The City partnered with other
cities and the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) to submit a grant application with PSRC as the lead agency
and the City of Renton as a sub-recipient along with several other cities. The grant application was accepted
and PSRC was designated by USDOT to serve as the grant facilitator. A sub-recipient funding agreement with
the PSRC is necessary to implement Renton’s proposed scope of work of developing a citywide safety action
plan that outlays the foundations for a citywide “Vision Zero” traffic safety program.
Previously the city completed a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) in 2022 that lays out an evidenced-based
analysis of crashes with recommendations for spot improvements at top crash locations. The SS4A safety
action plan would expand on the LRSP and will enable the City to qualify and compete for additional federal
funding specific to addressing road-related serious injuries and fatalities. An SS4A-qualified Action Plan will
include engagement with public and non-profit community stakeholders, as well as identify and prioritize
safety treatments with education and outreach on a Safe Systems Approach that focuses on reducing serious
and fatal crashes. The project is estimated to cost $500,000 including a local match of 20% ($100,000). The
competitive procurement of professional services will begin in January 2025and kick off the start of the work
by April 2025.
EXHIBITS:
A. Subaward Agreement
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the subaward agreement with PSRC for the Renton
Comprehensive Safety Action Plan.
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
Subaward Agreement Between
Puget Sound Regional Council
and
City of Renton
for
Renton Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
Date Entered into Agreement: Date Signed
Subaward Agreement #: 2024-12
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
1.0. SUBAWARD AGREEMENT
Pass-through Entity (PTE): Puget Sound
Regional Council Subrecipient: City of Renton
Subaward Period of Performance:
Start: Date Signed End:
Amount Funded:
$400,000
Subaward Agreement #:
2024-12
Federal Awarding Agency: Puget Sound
Regional Council FAIN: 693JJ32440280
Federal Award Issue Date: 04/17/2024 Total Amount of Matching Funds: $100,000
ALN No. and Name: 20.939, Safe Streets and Roads for All
Project Title: Renton Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
R & D Award Yes No Unique Entity ID #UG2PSBS6UJJ3
This SUBAWARD (hereinafter the "Award"), is made and entered into as of date of signing by and
between the Pass-through Entity, Puget Sound Regional Council, (hereinafter "PSRC") and Subrecipient
City of Renton(hereinafter "COR"), and supports the work described in the approved final scope of work,
which is incorporated by reference into this Award and attached in Exhibit A. All work on this project
should be consistent with the Authorized Scope of Work unless modified by the appropriate authority as
described in 4.2 below.
PSRC is a Metropolitan Planning Organization under federal law (23 USC 134) and a Regional Planning
Transportation Planning Organization under state law (RCW 47.80) and has all powers necessary for the
performance of the work and obligations of this Agreement, and has the authority to contract with member
and non-member agencies for special services; and
COR is a US Local Government under state law (RCW 43.21C.120) and has all powers necessary for the
performance of the work and obligations of this Agreement;
The U.S. Department of Transportation (hereinafter the “USDOT”), has expressly consented to this
Award; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, assurances and mutual promises herein the
Parties agree as follows:
2.0. DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES
To ensure effective intergovernmental cooperation and efficiencies, the Parties each designate a
representative (the "Designated Representative") who shall be responsible for coordination of
communications between the Parties and shall act as a central point of contact for each Party. The
Designated Representatives shall each be responsible for the administration and performance of the
Scope of Work of this Award, as well as ensuring that schedule, budget, and funding limitations of this
Agreement are satisfied. Each Designated Representative is also responsible for coordinating the input
and work of its respective governmental agency or department staff, consultants and contractors as it
relates to the scope of this Agreement.
A Party may change its Designated Representative by written notice to the other Party. Each Party’s
Designated Representative is named below with the individual’s contact information.
PSRC Designated Representative. The Designated Representative for PSRC is Gary Simonson. They
may designate other staff as the principal contact for daily work coordination. All official correspondence
concerning this Agreement shall be directed to the Designated Representative at the following address:
Puget Sound Regional Council Phone: (206) 971-3276
Attn: Gary Simonson, Senior Planner Fax: 206-587-4825
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
1201 3rd Avenue, Suite 500 Email: gsimonson@psrc.org
Seattle, WA 98101
COR Designated Representative. The Designated Representative for COR is Ellen Talbo. They may
designate other staff as the principal contact for daily work coordination. All official correspondence
concerning this Agreement shall be directed to the Designated Representative at the following address:
City of Renton Phone: (425) 430-7319
Attn: Ellen Talbo
Title: Transportation Planning Manager
1055 South Grady Way
Public Works
Renton, WA 98057 Email: etalbo@rentonwa.gov
3.0. TERMS AND CONDITIONS
3.1. In its performance of this Subaward Agreement, COR shall be an independent entity and not an
employee or agent of PSRC.
3.2. COR must obtain the prior written approval of PSRC whenever any programmatic changes are
anticipated, including but not limited to the following:
a) Any revision of the Scope of Work or objectives of the project (regardless of whether there is an
associated budget revision requiring prior approval).
b) Changes in key persons in cases where specified in an application or a grant award. In research
projects, a change in the project director or principal investigator shall always require approval
unless waived by the USDOT.
c)Under non-construction projects, contracting out, subgranting (if authorized by law) or otherwise
obtaining the services of a third party to perform activities, which are central to the purposes of
the award.
d)Transfer of budgeted amounts.
e)No-cost extensions.
3.3. Governmentwide Debarrment and Suspension
COR shall comply with the provisions of 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II, “Contract Provisions for Non-
Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Award”, Section I, (published in the Federal Register on
December 26, 2013, 78 FR 78608), which generally prohibit entities that have been debarred,
suspended, or voluntarily excluded from participating in Federal nonprocurement transactions either
through primary or lower tier covered transactions, and which sets forth the responsibilities of recipients of
Federal financial assistance regarding transactions with other persons, including subrecipients and
contractors.
COR (and all subcontractors, if any) must maintain current registration in the System for Award
Management (www.sam.gov) at all times during which they have active federal awards or subawards,
including for this Agreement.
3.4. Indemnification
To the extent permitted by law, each Party to this Agreement shall indemnify the other Party and its
officers, officials, employees, and agents, while acting within the scope of their employment, from any and
all costs, claims, demands, judgments, damages, or liability of any kind including injuries to persons or
damages to property, which arise out of, or in any way result from, due to, any acts or omissions of the
indemnifying Party in the implementation of this Agreement or any agreement between COR and its
subcontractor(s).
No Party shall be required to indemnify the other Party if the claim, suit, or action for injuries, death, or
damages is caused by the sole negligence of the Party seeking indemnification.
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
Where such claims, suits, or actions result from concurrent negligence of the Parties, the indemnity
provisions provided herein shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the Party's own negligence.
Each Party by mutual negotiation, hereby waives, with respect to the other Party only, any immunity that
would otherwise be available against such claims under the industrial insurance provisions of Title 51
RCW.
This indemnification shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
3.5. Compliance with Federal Award Obligations. The Award is subject to, and COR shall comply with,
the terms and conditions of the Award and the Department of Transportation General Terms and
Conditions (February 8, 2023) (see attachments 1 and 2), including all applicable statutes, regulations,
executive orders (E.O.s), Office of Management and Budget (OMB) circulars, provisions of the OMB
Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards
(codified at 2 C.F.R. Part 200) (OMB Uniform Guidance), and approved applications.
COR is also a party to the award, and the parties want COR to carry out certain Project components with
PSRC’s assistance, financial management, internal controls, and oversight as described in Article 17 of
this agreement. PSRC, as a pass-through entity, shall monitor the activities COR in compliance with 2
C.F.R 200 332(d) with respect to a subrecipient’s performance of work under a subaward of this SS4A
Grant.
4.0. BUDGET & PAYMENT PROCEDURE
4.1. Budget
The estimated budget to accomplish the tasks described in the Scope of Work for this is incorporated in
Exhibit B of this Agreement. This budget reflects the Parties' best estimates of the amounts that may be
required to accomplish the total work under this Agreement. Actual amounts reimbursable shall be based
on actual work performed. In the event it is determined that the Scope of Work has been accomplished
by COR for a lesser amount, PSRC shall only pay reimbursements for documented costs. In no event
shall COR be paid for costs that are not documented pursuant to the requirements of this Agreement.
4.2. Payments/Invoices
PSRC shall reimburse COR not more often than monthly for costs incurred in the performance of this
Award, which are determined to be allowable, allocable, & reasonable in accordance with 2 CFR Part
200. All invoices shall be submitted using COR’s standard invoice, but at a minimum shall include current
and cumulative costs, subaward number, and certification (Exhibit C), as required in 2 CFR 200.415 (a).
PSRC shall not transfer nor be obligated to transfer any funds in advance of its approval of such
requests.
Documentation of all expenses eligible for reimbursement shall be maintained by COR and shall, upon
request by PSRC, be provided prior to reimbursement as required by this Award. All invoices presented
for payment shall include a reasonable description of the tasks performed that correspond to the amounts
invoiced.
To assure payment processing in a timely manner, COR shall submit all invoices, required reports, and
documentation to the attention of:
PSRC
Attn: Finance
1201 3rd Ave, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98101
finance@psrc.org
PSRC’s shall review and pay reimbursable amounts within 45 days of receipt of the invoice.
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
PSRC reserves the right to withhold payments pending timely delivery and proper completion of the
reports or documents as may be reasonably required under this Agreement.
4.3. Prohibited Use of Funds
COR may not use funds for the following ineligible activities:
(a)Ineligible costs under 2 C.F.R Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles,
and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards;
(b) Any activities prohibited under the Grant between USDOT and PSRC dated.
4.4. Final Payment
Final payment will be made to COR upon final completion of the work and upon written acceptance by
PSRC’s Designated Representative. Any required adjustments shall be reflected in the final invoice.
4.5. Use of Consultants/Contractors
For all proposals and contracts where costs are expected to exceed $100,000, the scope of work and the
costs of such must be submitted to and approved by USDOT prior to employment of such consultants or
contractors. COR will ensure that any consultant or contractor paid from funds provided under this award
is bound by all applicable award terms and conditions. USDOT shall not be liable hereunder to a third
party nor to any party other than the PSRC.
In addition, all procurements shall adhere to PSRC’s Procurement Policies and Procedures as updated
March 2023.
$10,000 or under Micro purchase: No competition required.
$10,001-$250,000* Small purchase: Competition required with documentation of an adequate
number of price/rate quotes.
Over $250,000* Competitive proposal: Competition required with documentation of at least
two formal, written bids, proposals or qualifications, as well as an
independent cost estimate.
Pre-approval required Noncompetitive proposal: Only when competitive method is infeasible and
certain situations apply.
*In addition, all contracts over $100,000 shall include applicable lobbying certifications as stated in
section 10.15.
5.0. REPORTING AND RECORDS
5.1. Reports and Documentation
Project Progress Reports: COR agrees to assist PSRC with Project Progress Reports on a quarterly
basis. COR will supply report content, e.g. summaries of work completed, to PSRC no later than 10 days
following the end of the period. Reports are due no later than 30 days following the end of the period.
Performance Progress Reports submitted to USDOT by PSRC should include the following:
i. Provide a clear, concise overview of the activities undertaken during the Project Period;
ii. Document accomplishments, benefits, and impacts that the Project and Activities are having.
Recipients should note specific outcomes where activities have led to job creation/retention,
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
private investment, increased regional collaboration, engagement with historically excluded
groups or regions, enhanced regional capacity, and other positive economic benefits;
iii. Highlight any upcoming or potential press events or opportunities for collaborative press events to
highlight benefits of the USDOT investment;
iv. Compare progress with the project timeline, explaining any departures from the targeted
schedule, identifying how these departures are going to be remedied, and projecting the course
of work for the next period;
v. Outline challenges that currently impact or could impact progress on the grant over the next
reporting period and identify ways to mitigate this risk; and
vi. Outline any areas where USDOT assistance is needed to support the project or any other key
information that would be helpful for your USDOT Project Officer to know.
Final Project Reports may be posted on USDOT’s website, used for promotional materials or policy
reviews, or may be otherwise shared. Recipients should not include any copyrighted or other sensitive
business information in these reports. There is no specific page limit for Final Project Reports; however,
such reports should concisely communicate key project information, and should:
i. Outline the specific regional need that the project was designed to address and update on
progress made during the reporting period that will mitigate need and advance economic
development;
ii. Provide a high-level overview of the activities undertaken;
iii. Detail lessons learned during the project period that may be of assistance to USDOT or other
communities undertaking similar efforts;
iv. Outline the expected and actual economic benefits of the project as the time that the report is
written; and
v. Any other key information from the relevant project period
5.2. Availability of Records
All project records in support of all costs and actual expenditures incurred by COR and its Sub-
Contractor(s) under this Agreement shall be maintained by COR and its Sub-Contractor(s) and open to
inspection by PSRC (or its federal funding agency) during normal business hours, and shall be retained
and made available for such inspection for the duration of the State and Federal records retention
requirements from final payment of funds under this Agreement to PSRC. Copies of said records shall be
furnished to PSRC and/or its federal funding agency upon request. This requirement shall be included in
all subcontracts related to the work entered into by COR to fulfill the terms of this Agreement.
6.0. Certifications and Assurances
By signing the Subaward Agreement, the Authorized Official of Subrecipient certifies, to the best of
his/her knowledge and belief, that:
Certification Regarding Lobbying
1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the Subrecipient,
to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a
Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of
Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal
grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the
extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant,
loan, or cooperative agreement.
2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person
for influencing or intending to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of
Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in
connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the Subrecipient
shall complete and submit Standard Form -LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," to the
Pass-through Entity.
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
3) The Subrecipient shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award
documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under
grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose
accordingly.
This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction
was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this
transaction imposed by section 1352, title 31, U. S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required
certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for
each such failure.
Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters
Subrecipient certifies by signing this Subaward Agreement that neither it nor its principals are presently
debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from
participation in this transaction by any federal department or agency.
Audit and Access to Records
Subrecipient certifies by signing this Subaward Agreement that it complies with the Uniform Guidance, will
provide notice of the completion of required audits and any adverse findings which impact this subaward
as required by 2 C.F.R. parts 200.501 and 200.521, and will provide access to records as required by
parts 200.336, 200.337, and 200.201 as applicable.
Right to Audit and Disallow and Recover Funds
The Federal government reserves the right to seek recovery of any funds that were not expended in
accordance with the requirements or conditions of this Agreement based upon USDOT review, the final
audit, or any other special audits or reviews undertaken. USDOT has the right to order a special audit,
even if PSRC’s auditor or a cognizant agency has already conducted one.
7.0. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION and SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING
COR shall be solely responsible for the administration of and the completion and quality of work
performed under any contracts executed by COR. In no event shall any contract executed by COR be
construed as obligating PSRC. Any claims arising out of the separate contracts of COR for work under
this Agreement are the sole responsibility of COR. All contracts shall comply with all applicable public
works and procurement laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, applicable bonding, prevailing
wage, nondiscrimination, retainage, insurance, and workers compensation requirements.
7.1. Direct Supervision
Nothing in PSRC’s exercise of the right to inspect or accept the work performed by COR shall reduce
COR 's responsibility for the proper execution of the work or relieve COR from its responsibility for direct
supervision of the work. When PSRC exercises its right to inspect or accept the work performed by COR,
it shall not be deemed or construed to be in control of the work under this Agreement.
7.2. Sub-recipient Monitoring
PSRC reserves the right to monitor and manage subrecipients, including lower tier subrecipients. At a
minimum, monitoring of COR will include:
i. Review of financial and programmatic reports;
ii. Following-up and ensuring that COR takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies
pertaining to the Federal award provided to COR from PSRC detected through audits, on-site
reviews, and other means; and
iii. If applicable, issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the Federal award
provided to COR from PSRC as required by 2 C.F.R. § 200.521 (Management decision).
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
PSRC requires all subrecipients, including lower tier subrecipients, under the award to comply with the
provisions of the award, including applicable provisions of the OMB Uniform Guidance (2 C.F.R. Part 200)
and all associated terms and conditions.
8.0. INSURANCE
COR will maintain at all times during the term of this Agreement, satisfactory limits of insurance and/or
self-insurance to protect against claims arising out of this Agreement. Such insurance or self-insurance
shall include General Liability, Business Automobile Liability, and Workers' Compensation in accordance
with statutory requirements under Title 51 RCW.
Each Party will require and cause its respective subcontractors of all tiers to maintain such insurance as
described above in sufficient amounts to protect the interest of the Parties. Such insurance shall be
confirmed by a Certificate of Insurance prior to commencement of the work.
The Parties hereby agree to require their respective insurers and their respective subcontractors of all
tiers, to waive subrogation rights against the other Party and such other Party's insurers.
It is understood and agreed that insurance and/or self-insurance provided by the Parties under this
Agreement is not intended to and shall not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations
assumed by the Parties or their Contractors of any tier under their respective contracts or imposed by
applicable laws or regulations.
9.0. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
9.1. Termination for Default
Either Party may terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, if the other Party substantially fails to fulfill
any or all of its obligations under this Agreement through no fault of the other Party, provided that insofar
as practicable, the Party terminating the Agreement will give:
a.Notice of intent to terminate at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the date of termination stating
the manner in which the other Party has failed to perform the obligations under this Agreement; and
b.An opportunity for the other Party to cure the default. If COR is the party in default, PSRC shall
provide an opportunity of COR to cure the default as provided in Section 14.2. If PSRC is the party
in default, COR shall give PSRC a Notice of Termination stating the time period in which cure is
permitted and any other appropriate conditions.
c.Provided however, that if PSRC’s funding agency terminates financial support for the project at any
time, either party shall have the right to immediately terminate this Agreement by giving written
notice thereof.
If the other Party fails to remedy the default or the breach to the satisfaction of the other Party within the
time period established in the Notice of Termination or any extension thereof granted by the Party not at
fault, the other Party may terminate this Agreement. However, any terms of this Agreement relevant to a
dispute that is unresolved at the time of termination shall survive until the dispute is finally resolved.
9.2. Termination for Convenience
Either Party may terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, for its convenience provided that the
terminating Party shall provide the other Party with an advance notice of at least thirty (30) calendar days.
9.3. Notice of Termination
Notice of termination shall be given by the Party terminating this Agreement to the other Party in writing.
The notice shall specify the effective date of termination, which shall not be sooner than the non-
terminating Party’s receipt of the notice.
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
9.4. Rights and Duties of Parties Upon Termination
A termination by any Party shall not extinguish or release either Party from liability, claims, or obligations
to third parties existing as of the time of termination. Any costs incurred prior to the effective date of
termination will be borne by the Parties in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and this Section.
The record keeping requirements, payment, release and indemnification provisions set forth in this
Agreement and all remedial provisions shall survive termination of this Agreement.
Upon termination of this Agreement by expiration of the term or upon termination for the convenience of
the Parties, the Parties agree to work together cooperatively to develop a coordinated plan for terminating
the scope of work rendered up until the time of termination and determining reasonable contract close-out
costs for termination for convenience or as a result of PSRC’s default or breach. In the event of
termination by default or breach, PSRC shall only be obligated to compensate COR for the portion of
work that has been satisfactorily rendered to the date of termination according to the terms of this
agreement.
10.0. GENERAL CONTRACT PROVISIONS
10.1. Rights and Remedies
The rights and remedies of the Parties to this Agreement are in addition to any other rights and remedies
provided by law, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement.
10.2. No Agency
No joint venture or partnership is formed as a result of this Agreement. No employees, agents or
subcontractors of one Party shall be deemed, or represent themselves to be, employees of any other
Party.
10.3. Third Party Rights
It is understood and agreed that this Agreement is solely for the benefit of the Parties hereto and USDOT
and gives no right to any other entity. Nothing in this Agreement, whether express or implied, is intended
to confer any rights or remedies under or by reason of this Agreement on any persons other than the
Parties and USDOT.
10.4. Assignment/Successors
No Party shall assign any interest, obligation, or benefit in this Agreement or transfer any interest in the
same, whether by assignment or novation, without prior written consent by the other Party. This limitation
does not, however, prevent COR from selecting subcontractors or consultants to perform the work
authorized by this Agreement. All of the terms, provisions, and conditions of this Agreement will be
binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective successors, permitted
assigns, and legal representatives.
10.5. Compliance with Laws
COR shall comply, and to the best of its ability shall ensure, that its employees, agents, consultants, and
representatives comply with all federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances applicable to
the work to be performed. The work performed by COR under this Agreement shall comply with all
applicable public works and procurement laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, bonding,
prevailing wage, nondiscrimination, retainage, insurance, and workers compensation requirements.
10.6. Governing Law and Venue
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
This Agreement will be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the
State of Washington. Any legal action resulting from this Agreement shall be brought in the Superior
Court of King County.
10.7. Notice
All notices or requests required or permitted under this Agreement shall be in writing, shall be personally
delivered or sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, or by facsimile transmission
and shall be deemed received three (3) business days following the date when mailed or on the date
when delivered or faxed (provided the fax machine has issued a printed confirmation of receipt). All
notices or requests shall be sent to the PSRC and COR addressed as shown in Section 3.0.
10.8. Waiver of Default
Waiver of any default shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver of breach of
a provision of this Agreement, including failure to require full and timely performance of any provision,
shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a
modification of the terms of this Agreement unless stated to be such in writing, signed by authorized
parties, and attached to the original Agreement.
10.9. Severability
If any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement are determined to be invalid or unenforceable by a
court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining terms and conditions unaffected thereby shall remain in full
force and effect. The Parties agree to negotiate in good faith to reform the Agreement to replace any
invalid or unenforceable term and/or condition with a valid and enforceable term and/or condition that
comes as close as possible to the intention of the stricken term and/or condition.
10.10. Warranty of Right to Enter into Agreement
The Parties each warrant that they have the authority to enter into this Agreement and that the persons
signing this Agreement have the authority to bind such person's respective entity.
10.11. Publicity
The Parties to this Agreement shall not make any formal press releases, news conferences or similar
public statements concerning this Agreement without prior consultation with the other Party.
10.12. Future Support
PSRC makes no commitment of future support and assumes no obligation for future support of the
activity contracted herein except as set forth in this Agreement.
10.13. Exhibits
All exhibits referenced in and attached to this Agreement are incorporated herein, except to the extent
otherwise provided herein.
10.14. Limitation on Payments to Influence Certain Federal Transactions
Section 1352 of Title 31 of the U.S. Code provides in part that no appropriated funds may be expended
by the recipient of a Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement to pay any person for
influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, and
officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of Member of Congress in connection with any of the
following covered Federal actions: the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant,
the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension,
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative
agreement.
10.15. Lobbying Restrictions
Statutory Provisions
1. Non-Federal entities shall comply with 2 C.F.R. § 200.450 (“Lobbying”), which incorporates the
provisions of 31 U.S.C. § 1352; the “New Restrictions on Lobbying” published at 55 FR 6736
(February 26, 1990); and OMB guidance and notices on lobbying restrictions. In addition, non-Federal
entities must comply with the DOC regulations published at 15 C.F.R. Part 28, which implement the
“New Restrictions on Lobbying”. These provisions prohibit the use of Federal funds for lobbying the
executive or legislative branches of the Federal Government in connection with the award and require
the disclosure of the use of non-Federal funds for lobbying. Lobbying includes attempting to
improperly influence, meaning any influence that induces or tends to induce a Federal employee or
officer to give consideration or to act regarding a Federal award or regulatory matter on any basis
other than the merits of the matter, either directly or indirectly. Costs incurred on to improperly
influence are unallowable. See 2 C.F.R. § 200.450(b) and (c).
2.Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
Any non-Federal entity that receives more than $100,000 in Federal funding shall submit a completed
Form SF-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities,” regarding the use of non-Federal funds for
lobbying. The Form SF-LLL shall be submitted within 30 days following the end of the calendar
quarter in which there occurs any event that requires disclosure or that materially affects 22 |
December 26, 2014, the accuracy of the information contained in any disclosure form previously filed.
The non-Federal entity must submit any required Forms SF-LLL, including those received from
subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors, to the Grants Officer.
10.16. Confidentiality
The Parties acknowledge that the prohibitions against disclosure of information or records described in
this Section 18.20 is limited by and not applicable where any law, rule, regulation or court proceeding
requires or allows disclosure of information and documents, and neither Party is required to notify the
other or any program beneficiary regarding such allowed or required disclosure.
COR and any subgrantees, subcontractors or vendors must maintain confidential files on individual
program beneficiaries served associated with this Agreement. Recipient staff must keep paper files in a
locked filing cabinet and protect all electronic files related to individual beneficiaries with a personal
password.
The service providers shall maintain primary access to individual beneficiary files. Other project
management staff may have access to these files only if they contain a “release of information” consent
form signed by the individual beneficiary. A release of information form must clearly indicate which
parties may have access to an individual beneficiary’s file. Such parties might include the management
staff and USDOT staff. COR may only share individual beneficiary files with those parties listed on the
signed form. If an individual beneficiary has not signed the consent form the parties listed may not read
that individual beneficiary’s file.
These categories serve as guidelines to COR staff and management staff. COR must determine if the
individual beneficiary’s confidential information will significantly affect the safety and security of that
individual or COR itself.
10.17. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, including its Recitals and Exhibits, embodies the Parties entire Agreement on the
matters covered by it, except as supplemented by subsequent amendments to this Agreement. All prior
negotiations and draft written agreements are merged into and superseded by this Agreement.
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
20.0. FLOW DOWN PROVISIONS
If COR contracts or subawards funds under this Agreement with a person or entity to perform work under
this award, COR shall include in the contract or subaward agreement such provisions as may be
necessary to ensure that all contractors and subgrantees comply with the requirements of the grant and
reporting provisions as set forth in these terms and conditions or as established by USDOT and the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)
All subgrantees are required to obtain a Unique Entity ID (or update its existing record), in the System for
Award Management prior to award.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby agree to the terms and conditions of this Agreement as of
the date written below.
Subawardee:PSRC:
1055 South Grady Way Puget Sound Regional Council
Public Works 1201 3rd Avenue, Suite 500
Renton, WA 98507 Seattle, Washington 98101
By:By:
Armondo Pavone
Mayor, City of Renton
Josh Brown, Executive Director
Puget Sound Regional Council
Date: Date:
Approved as to form:
NAME,CONTRACTOR Attorney
By: __________________________
NAME,TITLE
Subawardee
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
Exhibit A
Scope of Work for City of Renton
Anticipated Tasks and Timeline: See Attached Schedule (Exhibit A Schedule)
Objective/Task Date/Period of Completion
1. Data Collection and Analysis of Road Network 3/1/2025
Review and update city’s high injury network and validate the serious injury or fatality (SIF) rate, crash
data analysis, crash risk factors, and roadway geometry.
Objective: summarize and compare analysis against previous 5-year period for any growth in SIF
crashes or risk factors
2. Existing Policy and Safety Program Review 3/1/2025
Review existing city policies, traffic operations practices & policies, and other traffic safety policies &
programs.
Objectives: Evaluate the city’s policy framework for gaps or need for additional policy steps to achieve
Vision Zero goals & initiatives.
3. Equity Analysis & Focused Engagement 3/31/2025
Evaluate and understand which communities may be most impacted by transportation planning
decisions, Engage community members on what they consider equity priorities
Objectives: Develop a framework for incorporating equity into roadway safety; Augment quantitative
data analysis with community input to include populations who may be underrepresented in
traditional data and processes
4. Policy Development and Action Plan Initiatives 5/31/2025
Consultant will be asked to use engagement and participation outcomes to develop draft strategies or
initiatives that can be implemented reasonably or with cooperation from stakeholders.
Objectives: Convene a task force or work group to develop principles and goals for Vision Zero
strategies that prioritize: building and sustaining leadership, collaboration and accountability;
collecting and analyzing data on an ongoing basis; equity and engagement; leading wit roadway
design that prioritizes safety; managing speed; and leverage technology advances.
5. Scoping and Development of Prioritized Safety
Projects/Initiatives
6/30/2025
Consultant will be asked to develop conceptual scope(s) of work for any specific roadway safety
projects or programs that would improve safety conditions meeting the Vision Zero principals and
goals.
Objective: Rank or prioritize potential capital safety projects for implementation as well as any
programs such as educational safety programs that could be implemented by the City on a frequent
basis.
Community Outreach/Task Force Work Group 7/31/2025
Consultant will be asked to assist with forming and facilitating a task force or work group comprised
of a blend of city staff, police staff, and community members to lead the evaluation of Vision Zero
principals, equity goals, and program goals and outcomes. The task force may conduct a community
road safety audit to engage fully with community members about identified road concerns.
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
Objectives: Engage citizen or task force participation in identifying safety features in their community;
Provide regular public updates about the Plan and collect public feedback.
6. Council Report-outs and Plan Adoption 10/1/2025
Consultant may be asked to assist with graphics,
presentation slides, or materials for council briefings during
the Plan
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
Exhibit B
Project Budget
Amounts Based on $400,000 Grant Award, $100,000 Match
Item Grant Share Match
Personnel 8000 2,000
Fringe Benefits 0 0
Travel 0 0
Equipment 0 0
Contractual (Professional Services)
(expenses for public engagement and/or citizen safety
audit event may be an allowable expense from
consultant - such as but not limited to bike helmets,
safety vests, prizes/financial incentives, lunches - as
allowed per FHWA Guidelines and 2 CFR § 200.403;
language interpretation and translation services may
be an allowable expense from consultant)
392000 8000
Construction 0 0
Total Direct Charges 400000 100000
Indirect Charges
Total Charges 400000 100000
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
Exhibit C
Requisition for Payment
and Reporting Template
To: Puget Sound Regional Council
Attn: Accounts Payable
1201 3rd Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, Washington 98101
From: City of Renton
Attn: Ellen Talbo
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98507
Project Title: Renton Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
Project Agreement Number: 2024-12
Invoice Period: From to .
Budget Table
Line Item Current Expense Total Expense
to Date Contract Budget
Personnel $ $ $
Fringe Benefits $ $ $
Travel $ $ $
Equipment $ $ $
Supplies $ $ $
Contractual $ $ $
Other $ $ $
Total Direct Charges $ $ $
Indirect Charges $ $ $
Total Requisition this Period $ $ $
I certify that the expenses listed above have been properly incurred in the accomplishment of the services
of this agreement.
Name, Title Date
AGENDA ITEM #6. e)
AB - 3716
City Council Regular Meeting - 09 Dec 2024
SUBJECT/TITLE: 120 Day Closure – Houser Way North
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee
DEPARTMENT: Public Works Transportation Systems Division
STAFF CONTACT: Jim Seitz, Transportation Systems Director
EXT.: 7245
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
There is no fiscal impact to the city by adopting the resolution.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The I-405, Renton to Bellevue Widening and Express Toll Lanes (ETL) Project is intended to increase the
capacity of the I-405 freeway. The project also builds infrastructure for Sound Transit’s Stride Bus Rapid Transit
system including a new inline transit station at Northeast 44th Street in Renton. Bus rapid transit, paired with
the ETL system, will provide more reliable transportation options for people.
As part of this project, a 120-day closure of Houser Way North between Lake Washington Boulevard North and
Lowe’s business access road is needed in 2025 to perform vital work for the project. This project needs to
complete the installation of a City of Renton watermain, install shoring, and excavate to construct two large
drainage outfall structures. This 120-day closure is anticipated to occur between January 21, 2025, and May
22, 2025, with notifications provided to the public in accordance with the Public Outreach Plan in Exhibit A. All
business access will be maintained throughout the duration of the closure.
Work performed during this period includes the following:
1. Installation of a 12” City of Renton watermain.
2. Installation of soldier pile shoring to support two storm drainage outfall structures.
3. Storm drainage structure excavation.
4. Jack and bore of (3) 42” diameter storm drainage pipes.
This milestone will create the space needed to install City water infrastructure and provide improved storm
drainage as part of the I-405, Renton to Bellevue, Widening and Express Toll Lanes Project.
WSDOT’s public outreach plan is attached and includes one flier for businesses within proximity to the street
closure along with the localized detour plan.
EXHIBITS:
A. Public Outreach Plan
B. WSDOT Project Flier with Primary Detour Routes
C. Resolution
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
AGENDA ITEM #6. f)
Adopt the resolution authorizing the 120-day closure to occur between January 21, 2025, and May 22, 2025,
for the purpose of installing the City of Renton watermain and improving storm drainage facilities supporting
the I-405, Renton to Bellevue, Widening and Express Toll Lane Project.
AGENDA ITEM #6. f)
Page | 1
I- 5Renton to Bellevue Wideningand Express Toll Lanes Project
2025 Closure of Houser Way North between Lake Washington Boulevard North
and the Lowe’s Business Access Road
Houser Way North: 120 Day Closure – occurring between January 21, 2025, and
May 22, 2025
Scope of work: 120-day closure of Houser Way North between Lake Washington Boulevard
North and Lowes Business Access to install a City of Renton watermain and construct storm
drainage improvements. Completing this work supports the construction of WSDOT Express
Toll Lanes and Sound Transit Bus Rapid Transit systems.
Outreach methods:
• 14-day advanced notification to
businesses and residents
• Fliers to businesses and
residents outlined in the
Figure 1 map to the right
• Flier provided to City of Renton
for internal distribution
• Social media and WSDOT Blog
posts notifying the public of the
closure
o Coordination with the
City of Renton to share
social media posts from
the project
• Hotline and project inbox
information provided on fliers,
blogposts, and project
website
• Message boards will be placed
14 days before the closure to
notify the traveling public
• Emergency services briefing
ahead of closure
• WSDOT availability for
media
Figure 1: Business flier area
AGENDA ITEM #6. f)
I-405, Renton to Bellevue Widening a n d Express Toll Lanes Project
120-day Closure of Houser Way North between Lake Washington
Boulevard North and the Lowe’s Business Access
Overview
Crews working for the Washington State
Department of Transportation are fully
closing Houser Way North for 120 days
for crews to install a City of Renton water
main and construct critical storm drainage
infrastructure. Houser Way North will be
closed between Lake Washington
Boulevard North and the Lowe’s Business
Access. Detours will be provided for
bicyclists and pedestrians within the work
area. Motorists and material deliveries will
be routed to Garden Avenue and North
8th Street. Access to all businesses is
maintained throughout the duration of
the closure.
This key milestone for the I-405, Renton to
Bellevue Widening and Express Toll Lanes
project is necessary to complete widening
of the I-405 freeway.
Work during this closure period will
include:
Installation of a 12” City of Renton
Watermain
Installation of soldier pile
shoring to support two storm
drainage outfall structures
Storm drainage structure
excavation
Houser Way North will be closed between Lake Washington Boulevard North and Lowe’s
Business Access Road. Access to all businesses is maintained.
Jack and bore of (3) 42” diameter storm
drainage pipes
Lane and Ramp Closures
120-day closure between January 21, 2025 and May 22, 2025 (advance notice provided)-Full closure of
Houser Way North between Lake Washington Boulevard North and Lowe’s Business Access
AGENDA ITEM #6. f)
1
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING
TEMPORARY FULL STREET CLOSURE OF HOUSER WAY NORTH BETWEEN LAKE
WASHINGTON BOULEVARD NORTH AND LOWE’S BUSINESS ACCESS ROAD.
WHEREAS, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) is constructing
the I-405, Renton to Bellevue Widening and Express Toll Lanes (ETL) project; and
WHEREAS, this construction activity will require a temporary street closure of Houser
Way North between Lake Washington Boulevard and Lowe’s business access road; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the City Code section 9-9-3, such street closures require City
Council authorization by means of a resolution;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The City Council does hereby authorize the temporary closure of Houser Way
North between Lake Washington Boulevard North and Lowe’s business access road for a 120-day
period to occur between the dates of January 21, 2025 through May 22, 2025 for the purpose of
completing construction activities related to the I-405, Renton to Bellevue Widening and Express
Toll Lanes (ETL) project .
SECTION II. Notice of the closure shall be posted and published as required by RMC 9-9-2
and RMC 9-9-3.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL the day of , 2024.
AGENDA ITEM #6. f)
RESOLUTION NO. _______
2
______________________________
Jason A. Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2024.
______________________________
Armondo Pavone, Mayor
Approved as to form:
__________________________
Shane Moloney, City Attorney
RES- PW:24RES029:11/26/2024
AGENDA ITEM #6. f)
AB - 3717
City Council Regular Meeting - 09 Dec 2024
SUBJECT/TITLE: Amendment #1 – GCB 2433, WSDOT Project Coordinator Agreement
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Finance Committee
DEPARTMENT: Public Works Transportation Systems Division
STAFF CONTACT: Jim Seitz, Transportation Systems Director
EXT.: 7245
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
Amendment #1 increases the maximum amount payable by WSDOT to the City by $200,000, from $240,000 to
$440,000.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The I-405, Renton to Bellevue Widening and Express Toll Lanes (ETL) Project is intended to increase the
capacity of the I-405 freeway. The project also builds infrastructure for Sound Transit’s Stride Bus Rapid Transit
system including a new inline transit station at Northeast 44th Street in Renton. Bus rapid transit, paired with
the ETL system, will provide more reliable transportation options for people.
Back on March 11, 2019, the City entered into an agreement (GCB 2433) in which WSDOT agreed to reimburse
the city for costs directly related to services for the I-405 – Renton to Bellevue Corridor Widening and Express
Toll Lanes Project. Services include project coordination and expedited reviews.
The purpose of this amendment #1 is to increase the maximum amount payable by WSDOT to the City by
$200,000, from $240,000 to $440,000 and increase the number of billable hours from 3,000 to 5,500.
The amendment is needed because the project was originally scheduled to be completed by the end of 2024
and now is projected to be completed by the end of 2025.
EXHIBITS:
A. Amendment #1 – GCB 2433
B. Resolution
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Amendment # 1 – GCB, WSDOT Project
Coordinator agreement, in support of the I-405, Renton to Bellevue, Widening and Express Toll Lane Project.
AGENDA ITEM #6. g)
GCB 2433 Amendment No. 1 Page 1 of 2
GCB 2433
Coordinator Agreement
City of Renton
I-405 – Renton to Bellevue Corridor Widening and Express Toll Lanes Project
Amendment No. 1
THIS Amendment No. 1 is made and entered into by the City of Renton (CITY) and the Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT), collectively referred to as the “Parties” and individually referred
to as “Party.”
Recitals
A. The Parties entered into the Design-Build Coordinator and City Staff Review Agreement (“GCB
2433”) on March 11, 2019, which provided CITY expedited services and WSDOT to reimburse the
CITY for costs directly related to services for the project known as the I-405 – Renton to Bellevue
Corridor Widening and Express Toll Lanes Project (“Project”).
B. GCB 2433 Section 7.1 allows for the Parties to adjust or increase the number of hours based on the
Project contract duration as mutually agreed by both Parties.
C. The Project contract duration has been extended to a later date than anticipated at the signing of
GCB 2433.
D. In consideration of the change in the Project contract duration, GCB 2433 estimate does not reflect
the actual number of hours for CITY services in GCB 2433 and it is necessary to amend GCB
2433 to reflect the current estimate and the maximum Agreement amount agreed to by the Parties.
Now therefore, pursuant to Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 39.34.080, which authorizes a public
agency to contract with another public agency to perform any governmental service that each public
agency is authorized to perform, and in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants, and
performances contained herein, it is mutually agreed as follows:
1. The dates in the first sentence of Section 5.2 “June 2019 and December 2024”, are hereby
replaced with “June 2019 and December 2025”.
2. The number of hours in the third to last sentence in Section 7.1 “three thousand (3000)”, is hereby
replaced with “five thousand five hundred (5500)”.
3. Section 7.4 is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
7.4 The maximum amount payable by WSDOT to the CITY under this Agreement is Four Hundred
Forty Thousand Dollars ($440,000).
AGENDA ITEM #6. g)
GCB 2433 Amendment No. 1 Page 2 of 2
4. All other terms and conditions of the original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect, except
as modified by this Amendment No. 1.
In witness whereof, the Parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 1 as of the latest date
written below:
CITY WASHINGTON STATE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By:
By:
Armondo Pavone Lisa Hodgson
Mayor
I-405/SR 167 Program Administrator
Date:
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM
By:
By:
Not required per WSDOT process.
Printed:
Printed:
Not required per WSDOT process.
Title:
Assistant Attorney General
Not required per WSDOT process.
Date:
Date:
Not required per WSDOT process.
AGENDA ITEM #6. g)
1
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO ENTER INTO CAG-19-059 AMENDMENT NO 1, TO
AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH WSDOT, WHICH AMENDMENT IS TITLED
“GCB 2433 COORDINATOR AGREEMENT CITY OF RENTON I-405 – RENTON TO
BELLEVUE CORRIDOR WIDENING AND EXPRESS TOLL LANES PROJECT,
AMENDMENT NO. 1.”
WHEREAS, the City and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) are
authorized, pursuant to RCW Chapter 39.34, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, to enter into an
interlocal government cooperative agreement; and
WHEREAS, City and WSDOT entered into “GCB 2433 Coordinator Agreement City of
Renton I-405 – Renton to Bellevue Widening and Express Toll Lanes Project” (the “Agreement”)
in March 2019, which provides that WSDOT will reimburse the City for certain costs spent by a
City project coordinator on the I-405 – Renton to Bellevue Corridor Widening and Express Toll
Lanes Project (the “Project”) City Numbered CAG-19-059; and
WHEREAS, the duration of the Project has increased from the originally estimated
duration, requiring the City and WSDOT to adjust the terms of the Agreement relating to project
duration, number of hours spent by the project coordinator, and the maximum agreement
amount;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into CAG-19-059
Amendment No 1, to an interlocal agreement with WSDOT, which amendment is titled “GCB
AGENDA ITEM #6. g)
RESOLUTION NO. _______
2
2433 Coordinator Agreement City of Renton I-405 – Renton to Bellevue Corridor Widening and
Express Toll Lanes Project, Amendment No. 1” attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated
by this reference.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL the day of , 2024.
Jason A. Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2024.
Armondo Pavone, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Shane Moloney, City Attorney
RES- PW:24RES030:11/27/2024
AGENDA ITEM #6. g)
RESOLUTION NO. _______
3
EXHIBIT “A”
Click or tap here to enter text.
AGENDA ITEM #6. g)
GCB 2433 Amendment No. 1 Page 1 of 2
GCB 2433
Coordinator Agreement
City of Renton
I-405 – Renton to Bellevue Corridor Widening and Express Toll Lanes Project
Amendment No. 1
THIS Amendment No. 1 is made and entered into by the City of Renton (CITY) and the Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT), collectively referred to as the “Parties” and individually referred
to as “Party.”
Recitals
A. The Parties entered into the Design-Build Coordinator and City Staff Review Agreement (“GCB
2433”) on March 11, 2019, which provided CITY expedited services and WSDOT to reimburse the
CITY for costs directly related to services for the project known as the I-405 – Renton to Bellevue
Corridor Widening and Express Toll Lanes Project (“Project”).
B. GCB 2433 Section 7.1 allows for the Parties to adjust or increase the number of hours based on the
Project contract duration as mutually agreed by both Parties.
C. The Project contract duration has been extended to a later date than anticipated at the signing of
GCB 2433.
D. In consideration of the change in the Project contract duration, GCB 2433 estimate does not reflect
the actual number of hours for CITY services in GCB 2433 and it is necessary to amend GCB
2433 to reflect the current estimate and the maximum Agreement amount agreed to by the Parties.
Now therefore, pursuant to Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 39.34.080, which authorizes a public
agency to contract with another public agency to perform any governmental service that each public
agency is authorized to perform, and in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants, and
performances contained herein, it is mutually agreed as follows:
1. The dates in the first sentence of Section 5.2 “June 2019 and December 2024”, are hereby
replaced with “June 2019 and December 2025”.
2. The number of hours in the third to last sentence in Section 7.1 “three thousand (3000)”, is hereby
replaced with “five thousand five hundred (5500)”.
3. Section 7.4 is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
7.4 The maximum amount payable by WSDOT to the CITY under this Agreement is Four Hundred
Forty Thousand Dollars ($440,000).
AGENDA ITEM #6. g)
GCB 2433 Amendment No. 1 Page 2 of 2
4. All other terms and conditions of the original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect, except
as modified by this Amendment No. 1.
In witness whereof, the Parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 1 as of the latest date
written below:
CITY WASHINGTON STATE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By:
By:
Armondo Pavone Lisa Hodgson
Mayor
I-405/SR 167 Program Administrator
Date:
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM
By:
By:
Not required per WSDOT process.
Printed:
Printed:
Not required per WSDOT process.
Title:
Assistant Attorney General
Not required per WSDOT process.
Date:
Date:
Not required per WSDOT process.
AGENDA ITEM #6. g)
AB - 3718
City Council Regular Meeting - 09 Dec 2024
SUBJECT/TITLE: Bid Award-Renton Highlands Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Phase 3
CAG-24-001, Project No. WWP-27-04282
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council Concur
DEPARTMENT: Public Works Utility Systems Division
STAFF CONTACT: Jesse Neman
EXT.:
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
Insituform Technologies, LLC submitted the lowest bid of $2,808,428.24, exceeding the engineer’s estimate of
$1,940,000 by $872,282.57 (45%). This project is a collaboration between the Wastewater and Surface Water
Utility Sections.
The Wastewater Utility’s portion of the construction cost is $2,496,109.39. There are sufficient funds available
in the remaining unencumbered 2024 adjusted budget for the Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation and Replacement
account (426.465521) of $1,760,007 and the approved 2025 budget of $2,000,000 for the project. The total
available budget for the project is $3,760,007.
The Surface Water Utility’s portion of the project construction cost is $312,318.85. The remaining
unencumbered funds in the 2024 adjusted budget for the for the Small-Scale Stormwater Projects account
(427.475015) is $784,000, which is sufficient funding for the project.
Both accounts have the adequate funds needed for the award of the construction contract.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Renton Highlands Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project Phase 3 will rehabilitate approximately 31,277
linear feet (LF) of deteriorated sewer main and 2,526 LF of deteriorated storm main with Cured in Place Pipe
(CIPP). The pipe sizes to be lined with CIPP range from 8-inches to 12-inches in diameter.
The bid opening met the following Council crieria:
1) There was more than one bid submitted;
2) The lowest responsive and responsible bid was within budget; and
3) There were no substantive irregularities with the lowest responsive and responsible bid.
Bids for this construction contract were received and opened on Tuesday, November 12, 2024. Three bids
were submitted, and the bid amounts are summarized below.
Engineers Estimate $1,940,000.00
Bid submitted by Bid amount
Insituform Technologies, LLC $2,808,428.24
AGENDA ITEM #6. h)
Iron Horse, LLC $2,830,919.09
SAK Construction, LLC $2,926,375.53
The lowest responsible bid is within each project budget and contains no irregularities.
Determination of responsive bid and responsible bidder
The Wastewater Utility staff has reviewed the submitted bid and determined that it is responsive.
Additionally, Insituform Technologies, LLC has been deemed a responsible bidder in accordance with RCW
39.04.350, Renton City Policy 250-02, and section 1-02.14 of the project specifications (refer to Exhibit B). As
an industry leader in CIPP technology, Insituform Technologies, LLC brings extensive experience working with
multiple jurisdictions, including the City of Renton.
EXHIBITS:
A. Final Bid Tabulation
B. Bidder Assessment
C. City Clerk Bid Tab
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Award the construction contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, Insituform Technologies,
LLCin the amount of $2,808,428.24 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the construction
contract CAG-24-001.
AGENDA ITEM #6. h)
Project Renton Highlands Sanitary Sewer Rehab PH III City of Renton Insituform Technologies, LLC Iron Horse, LLC SAK Construction, LLC
BID DATE:12-Nov-24 Engineers Estimate
Item No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Bid Amount Unit Price Bid Amount Unit Price Bid Amount Unit Price Bid Amount
Schedule A
A01 Mobilization & Demobilization Lump Sum 1 60,000.00 60,000.00 2,718.00 2,718.00 $125,000.00 125,000.00 $19,000.00 19,000.00
A02 Temporary Traffic Control Lump Sum 1 50,000.00 50,000.00 195,723.00 195,723.00 $165,000.00 165,000.00 $180,000.00 180,000.00
Subtotal A 110,000.00 Subtotal A 198,441.00 Subtotal A 290,000.00 Subtotal A 199,000.00
Sales Tax A (10.3%)11,330.00 Sales Tax A (10.3%)20,439.42 Sales Tax A (10.3%)29,870.00 Sales Tax A (10.3%)20,497.00
Total A 121,330.00 Total A 218,880.42 Total A 319,870.00 Total A 219,497.00
Schedule B
Sewer Items
B01 CIPP Pre-installation Cleaning and Inspection Linear Foot 31,277 3.25 101,650.25 9.00 281,493.00 $4.00 125,108.00 $6.00 187,662.00
B02 Furnish and Install 8" Cured-in-Place Pipe Linear Foot 30,154 40.00 1,206,160.00 49.00 1,477,546.00 $56.00 1,688,624.00 $60.75 1,831,855.50
B03 Furnish and Install 10" Cured-in-Place Pipe Linear Foot 936 50.00 46,800.00 130.00 121,680.00 $62.00 58,032.00 $62.00 58,032.00
B04 Furnish and Install 12" Cured-in-Place Pipe Linear Foot 187 55.00 10,285.00 332.00 62,084.00 $115.00 21,505.00 $64.00 11,968.00
B05 Lateral Reinstatement Each 417 180.00 75,060.00 187.00 77,979.00 $150.00 62,550.00 $200.00 83,400.00
B06 Trim Intruding Laterals Each 2 500.00 1,000.00 271.00 542.00 $300.00 600.00 $1,500.00 3,000.00
B07 Point Repairs Each 1 1,000.00 1,000.00 3,805.00 3,805.00 $7,800.00 7,800.00 $32,000.00 32,000.00
B08 Post Installation Inspection Linear Foot 31,277 1.00 31,277.00 1.00 31,277.00 $1.00 31,277.00 $1.00 31,277.00
B09 Minor Change Per Estimate 1 30,000.00 30,000.00 30,000.00 30,000.00 $30,000.00 30,000.00 $30,000.00 30,000.00
Subtotal B 1,503,232.25 Subtotal B 2,086,406.00 Subtotal B 2,025,496.00 Subtotal B 2,269,194.50
Sales Tax B (10.3%)154,832.92 Sales Tax B (10.3%)214,899.82 Sales Tax B (10.3%)208,626.09 Sales Tax B (10.3%)233,727.03
Total B 1,658,065.17 Total B 2,301,305.82 Total B 2,234,122.09 Total B 2,502,921.53
Percentage Sewer Cost 91%Percentage Sewer Cost 89%Percentage Sewer Cost 89%Percentage Sewer Cost 92%
Schedule C
Storm Items
C01 CIPP Pre-installation Cleaning and Inspection Linear Foot 2,526 3.25 8,209.50 11.00 27,786.00 $4.00 10,104.00 $6.00 15,156.00
C02 Furnish and Install 8" Cured-in-Place Pipe Linear Foot 326 40.00 13,040.00 86.00 28,036.00 $56.00 18,256.00 $63.00 20,538.00
C03 Furnish and Install 10" Cured-in-Place Pipe Linear Foot 1,021 50.00 51,050.00 53.00 54,113.00 $62.00 63,302.00 $65.00 66,365.00
C04 Furnish and Install 12" Cured-in-Place Pipe Linear Foot 1,179 55.00 64,845.00 135.00 159,165.00 $141.00 166,239.00 $68.00 80,172.00
C05 Lateral Reinstatement Each 6 180.00 1,080.00 179.00 1,074.00 $150.00 900.00 $200.00 1,200.00
C06 Trim Intruding Laterals Each 2 500.00 1,000.00 271.00 542.00 $300.00 600.00 $1,500.00 3,000.00
C07 Post Installation Inspection Linear Foot 2,526 1.00 2,526.00 1.00 2,526.00 $1.00 2,526.00 $1.00 2,526.00
C08 Minor Change Per Estimate 1 15,000.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 $15,000.00 15,000.00 $15,000.00 15,000.00
Subtotal C 156,750.50 Subtotal C 288,242.00 Subtotal C 276,927.00 Subtotal C 203,957.00
Sales Tax C 0.00 Sales Tax C 0.00 Sales Tax C 0.00 Sales Tax C 0.00
Total C 156,750.50 Total C 288,242.00 Total C 276,927.00 Total C 203,957.00
Percentage Storm Cost 9.00%Percentage Storm Cost 11%Percentage Storm Cost 11%Percentage Storm Cost 8%
Total Sewer Cost A +B
(Tax Inc.)
1,768,475.47 Total Sewer Cost A +B
(Tax Inc.)
2,496,109.39 Total Sewer Cost A +B
(Tax Inc.)
2,518,806.39 Total Sewer Cost A +B
(Tax Inc.)
2,704,858.77
Total Storm Cost A +C
(Tax inc.)
167,670.20 Total Storm Cost A +C
(Tax inc.)
312,318.85 Total Storm Cost A +C
(Tax inc.)
312,112.70 Total Storm Cost A +C
(Tax inc.)
221,516.76
Total All Schedules 1,936,145.67 Total All Schedules 2,808,428.24 Total All Schedules 2,830,919.09 Total All Schedules 2,926,375.53
Corrected Sum (JN)
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
6
.
h
)
Item Description Determination
1. A Proposal will be considered irregular and will be rejected if:
Criteria Met
(Per Below)
1.a. The bidder is not prequalified when so required;
Not required for this
project.
1.b. The authorized proposal form furnished by the Contracting Agency is not used or is altered.
Authorized proposal form
used.
1.c. The complete proposal form contains any unauthorized additions, deletions, alternate bids, or conditions;
No edits to proposal
conditions.
1.d. The bidder adds provisions reserving the right to reject or accept the award, or enter into the Contract;
No edits to proposal
conditions.
1.e. A price per unit cannot be determined from the bid proposal;
Price per unit clearly
identified.
1.f. The proposal form is not properly executed;
Proposal form submitted
with bid.
Signed by Whittney
Schulte.
1.g. The Bidder fails to submit or properly complete a Subcontractor list, if applicable, as required in Section 1-02.6.
Subcontractor list
submitted with bid.
1.h.The bidder fails to submit or properly complete a Disadvantaged, Minority or Women’s Business Enterprise Certification, if
applicable, as required in Section 1-02.6; or Not applicable
1.i. The bid proposal does not constitute a definite and unqualified offer to meet the material terms of the bid invitation.
Definite and unqualified
offer.
1.j. More than one proposal is submitted for the same project from a Bidder under the same or different names.One proposal submitted.
Item Description Determination
2. A Proposal may be considered irregular and may be rejected if:
Criteria Met
(Per Below)
2.a. The Proposal does not include a unit price for every Bid item.
Unit price included for
every bid item.
2.b.Any of the unit prices are excessively unbalanced (either above or below the amount of a reasonable Bid) to the potential
detriment of the Contracting Agency;
All unit prices considered
reasonable and balanced.
2.c. The authorized Proposal Form furnished by the Contracting Agency is not used or is altered;
Proposal form submitted
with bid.
Signed by Whittney
Schulte.
2.d. The completed Proposal form contains any unauthorized additions, deletions, alternate Bids, or conditions;
No edits to proposal
conditions.
Bidder Assessment
CAG-24-001
Bid Opening: November 12, 2024
Bidder: Insituform Technologies, LLC
Renton Highlands Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Phase 3
2024 WSDOT Standard Specifications 1-02.13 Irregular Proposals
L&I Doing Business As (DBA): Insituform Technologies, LLC
City Special Provisions 1-02.13 Irregular Proposals
WA UBI: 601-880-220
License No.: INSITTL883CW
Entity Type: Corporation
Bidder Assessment-Renton Highlands Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 3 Page 1 of 3
AGENDA ITEM #6. h)
2.e. Receipt of Addenda is not acknowledged;
Not applicable, there was
no addenda, however form
was submitted and signed
by Whittney Schulte.
2.f.A member of a joint venture or partnership and the joint venture or partnership submit Proposals for the same project (in
such an instance, both Bids may be rejected); or
No evidence that members
of a joint venture or
partnership submitted
multiple proposals.
2.g. If the Proposal form entried are not made in ink.
Proposal form entries
made in ink.
Item Description Determination
1.A Bidder will be deemed not responsible and the proposal rejected if the bidder does not meet the responsibility criteria in
RCW 39.04.350.
Criteria Met
(Per Below)
(1)Before award of a public works contract, a bidder must meet the following responsibility criteria to be considered a
responsible bidder and qualified to be awarded a public works project. The bidder must:
Criteria Met
(Per Below)
YES
L&I Acct ID:
882,695-01
Account is CURRENT
(1)(b) Have a current state unified business identifier number;
WA UBI:
601-880-220
(1)(c)If applicable, have industrial insurance coverage for the bidder's employees working in Washington as required in
Title 51 RCW;
Meets current
requirements
Per L&I
(1)(d) Not be disqualified from bidding on any public works contract under RCW 39.06.010 or 39.12.065(3);
No debarments have been
issued against this
contractor
Per L&I.
(1)(e)
If bidding on a public works project subject to the apprenticeship utilization requirements in RCW 39.04.320, not have been
found out of compliance by the Washington state apprenticeship and training council for working apprentices out of ratio,
without appropriate supervision, or outside their approved work processes as outlined in their standards of apprenticeship
under chapter 49.04 RCW for the one-year period immediately preceding the date of the bid solicitation;
The project is not subject
to apprenticeship
utilization requirements as
the Engineer's Estimate
was below $2,000,000.00.
(1)(f)
Have received training on the requirements related to public works and prevailing wage under this chapter and
chapter 39.12 RCW. The bidder must designate a person or persons to be trained on these requirements. The training must
be provided by the department of labor and industries or by a training provider whose curriculum is approved by the
department. The department, in consultation with the prevailing wage advisory committee, must determine the length of
the training. Bidders that have completed three or more public works projects and have had a valid business license in
Washington for three or more years are exempt from this subsection. The department of labor and industries must keep
records of entities that have satisfied the training requirement or are exempt and make the records available on its web
site. Responsible parties may rely on the records made available by the department regarding satisfaction of the training
requirement or exemption; and
Exempt from this
requirement
Per L&I.
(1)(g)
Within the three-year period immediately preceding the date of the bid solicitation, not have been determined by a final
and binding citation and notice of assessment issued by the department of labor and industries or through a civil judgment
entered by a court of limited or general jurisdiction to have willfully violated, as defined in RCW 49.48.082, any provision of
chapter 49.46, 49.48, or 49.52 RCW.
No lawsuits against the
bond or savings accounts
during the previous 6 year
period, per L&I.
(2)
Before award of a public works contract, a bidder shall submit to the contracting agency a signed statement in accordance
with chapter 5.50 RCW verifying under penalty of perjury that the bidder is in compliance with the responsible bidder
criteria requirement of subsection (1)(g) of this section. A contracting agency may award a contract in reasonable reliance
upon such a sworn statement.
Submitted with bid.
Signed by Whittney
Schulte.
(1)(a) At the time of bid submittal, have a certificate of registration in compliance with chapter 18.27 RCW;
City Special Provisions 1-02.14 Disqualification of Bidder
RCW 39.04.350
Bidder Assessment-Renton Highlands Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 3 Page 2 of 3
AGENDA ITEM #6. h)
2. A bidder may be deemed not responsible and the proposal rejected if:
Criteria Met
(Per Below)
2.a. More than one proposal is submitted for the same project from a bidder under the same or different names;One proposal submitted.
2.b.Evidence of collusion exists with any other bidder or potential bidder. Participants in collusion will be restricted from
submitting further bids; No evidence of collusion.
2.c.
The bidder, in the opinion of the Contracting Agency, is not qualified for the Work or to the full extent of the bid, or to the
extent that the bid exceeds the authorized prequalification amount as may have been determined by a prequalification of
the bidder;
Bidder considered to be
qualified.
2.d.
An unsatisfactory performance record exists based on past or current Contracting Agency Work or for Work done for
others, as judged from the standpoint of conduct of the Work; workmanship; progress; affirmative action; equal
employment opportunity practices; or Disadvantaged Enterprise, Minority Enterprise, or Women’s Business Enterprise
utilization;
No evidence of
unsatisfactory
performance.
2.e.There is uncompleted Work (Contracting Agency or otherwise) which might hinder or prevent the prompt completion of
the Work bid upon;
No evidence of
uncompleted work.
2.f. The bidder failed to settle bills for labor or materials on past or current contracts;
No evidence of unsettled
bills.
2.g.The bidder has failed to complete a written public contract or has been convicted of a crime arising from a previous public
contract;
No evidence of failure to
complete a public contract.
2.h. The bidder is unable, financially or otherwise, to perform the Work;
No evidence of inability to
perform the Work.
2.i. A bidder is not authorized to do business in the State of Washington (not registered in accordance with RCW 18.27);
Meets current
requirements
Per L&I.
2.j. There are any other reasons deemed proper by the Contracting Agency.
No other reasons for
rejection.
3
In addition to the bidder responsibility criteria in subsection (1) of this section, the state or municipality may adopt
relevant supplemental criteria for determining bidder responsibility applicable to a particular project which the bidder
must meet.
Criteria Met
(Per Below)
a Supplemental criteria for determining bidder responsibility, including the basis for evaluation and the deadline for
appealing a determination that a bidder is not responsible, must be provided in the invitation to bid or bidding documents.
Suplemental bidding
criteria included in bid
documents
b
In a timely manner before the bid submittal deadline, a potential bidder may request that the state or municipality modify
the supplemental criteria. The state or municipality must evaluate the information submitted by the potential bidder and
respond before the bid submittal deadline. If the evaluation results in a change of the criteria, the state or municipality
must issue an addendum to the bidding documents identifying the new criteria.
No bidders requested for
this matter during bidding
period
c
If the bidder fails to supply information requested concerning responsibility within the time and manner specified in the bid
documents, the state or municipality may base its determination of responsibility upon any available information related to
the supplemental criteria or may find the bidder not responsible.
Not applicable
d
If the state or muncipality determines a bidder to be not responsible, the state or municipality must provide, in writing, the
reasons for the determination. The bidder may appeal the determination with the time period specified in the bidding
documents by presenting additional information to the state or municipality. The state or municipality must consider the
additional information before issuing its final determination. If the final determination affirms that the bidder is not
responsible, the state or municipality may not execute a contract with any other bidder until two business days after the
bidder determined to be not responsible has received the final determination.
Not applicable
Bidder Assessment-Renton Highlands Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation - Phase 3 Page 3 of 3
AGENDA ITEM #6. h)
CITYOF RENTON
BID TABULATION SHEET
Project:Renton Highlands Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Phase 3 Project -CAG-24-001
Due Date:November 12,2024
m—Bid TOtaI from
Riddpr Addpn ?rhpdulp
——————.lvr’h“.a.“.quy
Triple form Cert Bond Compl List Ack *lncludes Sales Tax
Inshufornw
580 Goddard Ave
1 Chester?eld
Mo X X X X X X $2,808,428.24
63005
Iron Horse,LLC.
PO.Box 1472
Fairview
OR
97024
$2,830,919.09
SAK Construction,LLC
864 Hoff Road
O'Fallon
.>>
MO X X
.
X X
>
X
>
X $2,929,375.53
63366
Engineer's Estimate:$1,940,000.00 (includes tax)
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
6
.
h
)
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING TWO
ADDENDA RELATING TO EQUITY AND IMPROVING HOUSING CHOICES TO THE
CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ACTION PLAN.
WHEREAS, the City of Renton Business Plan 2024-2029 states a goal to encourage and
partner in the development of quality housing choices for people of all ages and income levels;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Renton is subject to the planning requirements of the Growth
Management Act (Chapter 36.70A of the Revised Code of Washington) (“GMA”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 4449, the City of Renton adopted a Housing Action
Plan with goals to promote diverse neighborhoods, build sustainable and complete housing
ecosystems, promote more market-rate housing production, expand local housing opportunities
for low- and moderate-income households, and increase the supply of subsidized, income
qualified housing; and
WHEREAS, on October 5, 2020, the City of Renton adopted Ordinance 5983 which
authorized an additional sales and use tax for affordable housing, behavioral health, and housing
related services under RCW 82.14.530; and
WHEREAS, analysis and recommendations for allocations for funding using the tax
revenue over time has been compiled as a document titled Support for Ordinance 5983 Sales Tax
Funding; and
WHEREAS, housing policy recommendations for middle housing will allow more diverse
and affordable housing options for Renton’s residents and future households; and
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
RESOLUTION NO. _______
2
WHEREAS, pursuant to GMA, each city must use a racial equity analysis and establish
anti-displacement policies to ensure there will be no net displacement of very low, low, or
moderate-income households or individuals from racial, ethnic, and religious communities which
have been subject to discriminatory housing policies in the past; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 3, 2024 regarding
addenda to the Housing Action Plan, considered all relevant matters, and heard all parties in
support or opposition, and subsequently forwarded a recommendation to the City Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The City Council adopts the document Support for Ordinance 5983 Sales
Tax Funding, attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference, as an addendum to the
City of Renton Housing Action Plan.
SECTION II. The City Council adopts the document Comprehensive Plan and Policy
Review and Racial Equity Analysis, attached as Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference, as
an addendum to the City of Renton Housing Action Plan.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL the ______ day of _____________________, 2024.
______________________________
Jason A. Seth, City Clerk
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
RESOLUTION NO. _______
3
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this ______ day of _____________________, 2024.
______________________________
Armondo Pavone, Mayor
Approved as to form:
______________________________
Shane Moloney, City Attorney
CED:24RES027:11/13/24
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A
EXHIBIT A
Support for Ordinance 5983 Sales Tax
Funding
An Addendum to the Housing Action Plan
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
City of Renton
SUPPORT FOR ORDINANCE 5983
SALES TAX FUNDING
AN ADENDUM TO THE HOUSING ACTION PLAN
August 2021 Drafted
December 2024 Adopted
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 i ndividual 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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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.
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)
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 4
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.
Community Centers
▪ Renovation/development of the Sunset Neighborhood Center: $400,000 grant
▪ Family First Community Center: $4,000,000 in support
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 5
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 6
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 7
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 8
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 9
Exhibit 5. Location of Available Income-Restricted Housing, City of Renton.
Sources: City of Renton, 2020; BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 10
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 11
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 12
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 13
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 14
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 15
Exhibit 11. Aggregate Annual Housing Cost Burdens, City of Renton.
Sources: ACS PUMS, 2019; BERK, 2021.
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 16
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 17
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 18
Exhibit 13. Projected Housing Needs for the City of Renton, 2019–2040.
Source: EcoNorthwest, 2020.
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 19
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 20
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 21
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 22
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 23
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 24
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 25
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 26
▪ 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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 27
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 28
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 29
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 30
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 31
▪ 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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 32
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 33
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 34
▪ 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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 35
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 36
▪ 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). 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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 37
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.
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 38
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
affordable housing options in the community.
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 39
▪ 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:
Behavioral health services (including field response)
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
City of Renton | Ordinance 5983 Assessment 40
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 # 8. a)
RESOLUTION NO. _______
B
EXHIBIT B
Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review
& Racial Equity Analysis
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
1
Comprehensive Plan and Policy
Review & Racial Equity Analysis
An Addendum to the Housing Action Plan | Drafted March 2023 Adopted December 2024
Table of Contents
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................. 1
Table of Figures ..................................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4
State Laws and Requirements ............................................................................................................... 4
HB 1220 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Missing Middle Grant .............................................................................................................................................. 4
Relation to Other Plans ......................................................................................................................... 5
Vision 2050 ............................................................................................................................................................... 5
Countywide Planning Policies .................................................................................................................................. 5
Housing Action Plan .................................................................................................................................................. 5
Renton Comprehensive Plan .................................................................................................................................... 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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 25
Exhibit 12. Annexation History Map
Source: City of Renton, 2023
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
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 # 8. a)
City of Renton | Comprehensive Plan and Policy Review & Racial Equity Analysis 44
Exhibit 37. Displacement Risk Index
Sources: Census 2020, BERK 2023.
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
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
#
8
.
a
)
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 # 8. a)
1
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 6153
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, REVISING THE CITY’S
2015 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO COMPLY WITH MANDATED 2024 GROWTH
MANAGEMENT ACT REVIEW AND UPDATE, AND ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN TEXT, MAPS, AND DATA IN CONJUNCTION THEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Council has heretofore adopted and filed a Comprehensive Plan, and the
Council has implemented and amended and revised the Comprehensive Plan from time to time,
together with the adoption of various codes, reports and records; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has heretofore fully recommended to the Council,
from time to time, certain amendments and revisions to the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the current Comprehensive Plan was implemented pursuant to Ordinance
No. 5758 (adopted June 22, 2015) and most recently amended pursuant to Ordinance No. 6116
(adopted August 14, 2023); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held public hearings on this matter on May 1, 2024
and on July 3, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made certain findings and recommendations
to the Council; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, on July 24, 2024, the City notified the State of
Washington of its intent to adopt amendments to its development regulations; and
WHEREAS, the City conducted public notification and participation efforts required by
RCW 36.70A.130(2); and
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
ORDINANCE NO. 6153
2
WHEREAS, the Council has duly determined after due consideration of the evidence
before it that it is advisable and appropriate to amend and revise the City’s Comprehensive Plan
in compliance with Chapter 36.70A RCW; and
WHEREAS, such revision and implementation of elements for the Comprehensive Plan
being in the best interest for the public benefit;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I.The above findings and recitals are found to be true and correct in all
respects.
SECTION II. The Comprehensive Plan, attached hereto as Attachment A, is hereby
adopted in whole, and its elements and associated appendices replace all elements and
portions of the City’s 2015 Comprehensive Plan.
SECTION III. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map attached hereto as Attachment B
shall be the official Comprehensive Plan – Land Use Map, and the land use designations shown
on this map for the various properties located within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary of the
City of Renton are hereby the land use designations for those properties. Comprehensive
Planning – Land Use Map amendment ordinances adopted after this ordinance shall amend the
official Comprehensive Planning – Land Use Map.
SECTION IV. The Zoning Map attached hereto as Attachment C shall be the official
Zoning Map, and the zoning districts shown on this map for the various properties located
within the City limits of the City of Renton are hereby the zoning designations for those
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
ORDINANCE NO. 6153
3
properties. Rezone ordinances adopted after this ordinance shall amend the official Zoning
Map.
SECTION V. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the constitutionality of any other
section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance.
SECTION VI. The City Clerk shall publish a summary of this ordinance in the City’s official
newspaper. The summary shall consist of this ordinance’s title.
SECTION VII .This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on January 1, 2025.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL the _____ day of __________________, 2024.
Jason Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this _____ day of __________________, 2024.
Armondo Pavone, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Shane Moloney, City Attorney
Date of Publication: _______________
ORD-CED:24ORD022:12/04/2024
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
ORDINANCE NO. 6153
A
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
ORDINANCE NO. 6153
B
ATTACHMENT B
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
ORDINANCE NO. 6153
C
ATTACHMENT C
ZONING MAP
AGENDA ITEM # 8. a)
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING
SUBSECTIONS 4-2-010.C AND 4-2-010.D, SECTIONS 4-2-020 AND 4-2-110A, AND
SUBSECTION 4-2-115.B.1 TO CREATE A NEW RESIDENTIAL MULTI FAMILY TWO
(RMF-2) ZONE; AUTHORIZING CORRECTIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY,
AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the Council has heretofore adopted and filed a Comprehensive Plan and the
Council has implemented and amended the Comprehensive Plan from time to time, together
with the adoption of various codes, reports and records; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has heretofore fully recommended to the Council,
from time to time, certain amendments to the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held public hearings on this matter on May 1, 2024
and on July 3, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made certain findings and recommendations to
the Council; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, on July 24, 2024, the City notified the State of
Washington of its intent to adopt amendments to its development regulations; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to adopt amendments to the City’s code in order to implement
changes to the City’s Comprehensive Plan, adopted contemporaneously with this ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Subsections 4-2-010.C and 4-2-010.D of the Renton Municipal Code are
hereby amended as follows:
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
2
C. ZONING DISTRICTS:
The City is divided into the following types of zoning districts and the following
map symbols are established:
ZONE MAP SYMBOL
Resource Conservation (RC)
Residential-1 (R-1)
Residential-4 (R-4)
Residential-6 (R-6)
Residential-8 (R-8)
Residential Manufactured Home (RMH)
Residential-10 (R-10)
Residential-14 (R-14)
Residential Multi-Family (RMF)
Residential Multi-Family 2 (RMF-2)
Light Industrial (IL)
Medium Industrial (IM)
Heavy Industrial (IH)
Center Downtown (CD)
Center Village (CV)
Commercial Arterial (CA)
Commercial Neighborhood (CN)
Commercial Office (CO)
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
3
ZONE MAP SYMBOL
Commercial Office Residential (COR)
Urban Center-1 (UC-1)
Urban Center-2 (UC-2)
D. ZONES IMPLEMENTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan Designations are implemented by certain zones:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DESIGNATION IMPLEMENTING ZONES
Residential Low Density (RLD)
Resource Conservation (RC)
Residential-1 (R-1)
Residential-4 (R-4)
Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH)
Residential Medium Density
(RMD)
Residential-6 (R-6)
Residential-8 (R-8)
Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH)
Residential High Density (RHD)
Residential-10 (R-10)
Residential-14 (R-14)
Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH)
Residential Multi-Family (RMF)
Residential Multi-Family 2 (RMF-2)
Commercial Neighborhood (CN)
Commercial & Mixed Use (CMU)
Center Downtown (CD)
Center Village (CV)
Commercial Arterial (CA)
Commercial Office (CO)
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
4
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DESIGNATION IMPLEMENTING ZONES
Urban Center (UC-1, UC-2)
Commercial Office Residential
(COR) Commercial Office Residential (COR)
Employment Area (EA)
Commercial Arterial (CA)
Commercial Office (CO)
Light Industrial (IL)
Medium Industrial (IM)
Heavy Industrial (IH)
Resource Conservation (RC)
SECTION II. Section 4-2-020 of the Renton Municipal Code is hereby amended as
follows:
4-2-020 PURPOSE AND INTENT OF ZONING DISTRICTS:
A. GENERAL:
Approval of projects in the zones is contingent upon the determination that
the proposed developments are consistent with the purpose of the zone and the
purpose and intent of the land use designations and guiding policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element policies for each corresponding
zone classification and all the Elements of the Comprehensive Plan shall be used
together with the purpose statements for each zone and map designation set
forth in the following sections to guide interpretation and application of land use
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
5
regulations within the zones and designations and any changes to the range of
permitted uses within each zone through amendments to the code.
B. RESOURCE CONSERVATION ZONE (RC):
The Resource Conservation Zone (RC) is established to provide a very low-
density residential zone that endeavors to provide some residential use of lands
characterized by extensive critical areas or lands with agricultural uses. It is
intended to implement the Low Density Residential Comprehensive Plan
designation. This zone promotes uses that are compatible with the functions and
values of designated critical areas and allows for continued production of food
and agricultural products. No minimum density is required.
The Resource Conservation Zone is also intended to provide separation
between areas of more intense urban uses and critical lands or agricultural uses;
encourage or preserve very low-density residential uses; reduce the intensity of
uses in accordance with the extent of environmentally sensitive areas such as
floodplains, wetlands and streams, aquifers, wildlife habitat, steep slopes, and
other geologically hazardous areas; allow for small-scale farming to commence or
continue; and provide viable uses within urban separators.
C. RESIDENTIAL-1 (R-1):
The Residential-1 Zone (R-1) is established to provide and protect suitable
environments for residential development of lands characterized by pervasive
critical areas where limited residential development will not compromise critical
areas. It is intended to implement the Low Density Residential Comprehensive
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
6
Plan designation. The zone provides for suburban estate single family and
clustered single family residential dwellings, at a maximum density of one dwelling
unit per net acre, and allows for small scale farming associated with residential
use. 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.
It is further intended to protect critical areas, provide separation between
neighboring jurisdictions through designation of urban separators as adopted by
the Countywide Policies, and prohibit the development of incompatible uses that
may be detrimental to the residential or natural environment.
D. RESIDENTIAL-4 (R-4):
The Residential-4 Zone (R-4) is established to promote urban single family
residential neighborhoods serviceable by urban utilities and containing open
space amenities. It is intended to implement the Residential Low Density
Comprehensive Plan designation. The Residential-4 (R-4) allows a maximum
density of four (4) dwelling units per net acre. The R-4 designation serves as a
transition between rural designation zones and higher density residential zones.
It is intended as an intermediate lower density residential zone.
E. RESIDENTIAL-6 (R-6):
The Residential-6 Zone (R-6) is established for single family dwellings and is
intended to implement the Residential Medium Density Comprehensive Plan
designation. The R-6 zone allows a range of three (3) to six (6) dwelling units per
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
7
net acre. Development in the R-6 zone is intended to be single family residential
at moderate density.
F. RESIDENTIAL-8 (R-8):
The Residential-8 Zone (R-8) is established for single family residential
dwellings allowing a range of four (4) to eight (8) dwelling units per net acre. It is
intended to implement the Residential Medium Density Comprehensive Plan
designation. Development in the R-8 Zone is intended to create opportunities for
new single family residential neighborhoods and to facilitate high-quality infill
development that promotes reinvestment in existing single family neighborhoods.
It is intended to accommodate uses that are compatible with and support a high-
quality residential environment and add to a sense of community.
G. RESIDENTIAL MANUFACTURED HOME PARK (RMH):
The Residential Manufactured Home Park Zone (RMH) is established to
promote development that is single family in character and developed to offer a
choice in land tenancy. Standards provide for safe and high-quality manufactured
home neighborhoods. It is intended to implement the Residential Low Density
Comprehensive Plan designation. The RMH Zone is intended to protect
established manufactured home parks and to expand the variety of affordable
housing types available within the City.
H. RESIDENTIAL-10 (R-10):
The Residential-10 Zone (R-10) is established for high-density residential
development that will provide a mix of residential styles including small lot
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
8
detached dwellings or attached dwellings such as townhouses and small-scale
flats. Development promoted in the zone is intended to increase opportunities for
detached dwellings as a percent of the housing stock, as well as allow some small-
scale attached housing choices and to create high-quality infill development that
increases density while maintaining the single family character of the existing
neighborhood. Allowable base densities range from five (5) to ten (10) dwelling
units per net acre. The zone serves as a transition to higher density multi-family
zones.
I. RESIDENTIAL-14 (R-14):
The purpose of the Residential-14 Zone (R-14) is to encourage development,
and redevelopment, of residential neighborhoods that provide a mix of detached
and attached dwelling structures organized and designed to combine
characteristics of both typical single family and small-scale multi-family
developments. Densities range from seven (7) to fourteen (14) units per net acre
with opportunities for bonuses up to eighteen (18) dwelling units per net acre.
Structure size is intended to be limited in terms of bulk and scale so that the
various unit types allowed in the zone are compatible with one another and can
be integrated together into a quality neighborhood. Project features are
encouraged, such as yards for private use, common open spaces, and landscaped
areas that enhance a neighborhood and foster a sense of community. Civic and
limited commercial uses may be allowed when they support the purpose of the
designation.
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
9
J. RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY (RMF):
The Residential Multi-Family (RMF) Zone provides suitable environments for
multi-family dwellings. It is further intended to conditionally allow uses that are
compatible with and support a multi-family environment. The RMF allows for the
development of both infill parcels in existing multi-family districts with compatible
projects and other multi-family development. Densities range from ten (10) to
twenty (20) du/acre with opportunities for bonuses up to twenty-five (25)
dwelling units per net acre.
K. RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY 2 (RMF-2):
The Residential Multi-Family 2 (RMF-2) Zone provides suitable environments
for multi-family dwellings. It is further intended to conditionally allow uses that
are compatible with and support a multi-family environment. The RMF-2 allows
for the development of infill parcels in existing multi-family developments with
compatible projects and areas, as well as, with other multi-family development.
Densities range from twenty (20) to forty (40) dwelling units per net acre.
KL. COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ZONE (CN):
The purpose of the Commercial Neighborhood Zone (CN) is to provide for
small-scale convenience retail/commercial areas offering incidental retail and
service needs for the surrounding area. Uses serving a larger area may be
appropriate if they also serve the residents of the immediate area and are
compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. This designation is
the smallest and least intensive of the City’s commercial zones.
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
10
LM. CENTER VILLAGE ZONE (CV):
1. Purpose: The purpose of the Center Village Zone (CV) is to provide an
opportunity for concentrated mixed-use residential and commercial
redevelopment designed to urban rather than suburban development standards
that supports transit-oriented development and pedestrian activity. Use
allowances promote commercial and retail development opportunities for
residents to shop locally. Uses and standards allow complementary, high-density
residential development, and discourage garden-style, multi-family development.
2. Scale and Character: The Center Village Zone (CV) is intended to provide
suitable environments for district-scaled retail and commercial development
serving more than one neighborhood, but not providing City-wide services.
MN. COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL ZONE (CA):
The purpose of the Commercial Arterial Zone (CA) is to evolve from “strip
commercial” linear business districts to business areas characterized by enhanced
site planning and pedestrian orientation, incorporating efficient parking lot
design, coordinated access, amenities and boulevard treatment with greater
densities. The CA Zone provides for a wide variety of retail sales, services, and
other commercial activities along high-volume traffic corridors. Residential uses
may be integrated into the zone through mixed-use buildings. The zone includes
the designated Automall District.
NO. CENTER DOWNTOWN (CD):
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
11
The purpose of the Center Downtown Zone (CD) is to provide a mixed-use
urban commercial center serving a regional market as well as high-density
residential development. Uses include a wide variety of retail sales, services,
multi-family residential dwellings, and recreation and entertainment uses.
OP. COMMERCIAL OFFICE ZONE (CO):
The Commercial Office Zone (CO) is established to provide areas appropriate
for professional, administrative, and business offices and related uses, offering
high-quality and amenity work environments. In addition, a mix of limited retail
and service uses may be allowed to primarily support other uses within the zone,
subject to special conditions. Limited light industrial activities, which can
effectively blend in with an office environment, are allowed, as are medical
institutions and related uses.
PQ. COMMERCIAL OFFICE RESIDENTIAL ZONE (COR):
The purpose of the Commercial Office Residential Zone (COR) is to provide for
a mix of intensive office, hotel, convention center, and residential activity in a
high-quality, master-planned development that is integrated with the natural
environment. Commercial retail and service uses that are architecturally and
functionally integrated are permitted. Also, commercial uses that provide high
economic value may be allowed if designed with the scale and intensity envisioned
for the COR Zone. The scale and location of these sites will typically denote a
gateway into the City and should be designed accordingly.
QR. LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONE (IL):
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
12
The purpose of the Light Industrial Zone (IL) is to provide areas for low-
intensity manufacturing, industrial services, distribution, storage, and technical
schools. Uses allowed in this zone are generally contained within buildings.
Material and/or equipment used in production are not stored outside. Activities
in this zone do not generate external emissions such as smoke, odor, noise,
vibrations, or other nuisances outside the building. Compatible uses that directly
serve the needs of other uses in the zone are also allowed.
RS. MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL ZONE (IM):
The purpose of the Medium Industrial Zone (IM) is to provide areas for
medium-intensity industrial activities involving manufacturing, processing,
assembly, and warehousing. Uses in this zone may require some outdoor storage
and may create some external emissions of noise, odor, glare, vibration, etc., but
these are largely contained on site. Compatible uses that directly serve the needs
of other uses permitted within the district are also allowed zone-wide.
ST. HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONE (IH):
The purpose of the Heavy Industrial Zone (IH) is to provide areas for high-
intensity industrial activities involving heavy fabrication, processing of raw
materials, bulk handling and storage, construction, and heavy transportation.
Uses in this zone may require large outdoor areas in which to conduct operations.
Environmental impacts may be produced that affect off-site areas, requiring
isolation of the industrial activity from more sensitive land uses. Compatible uses
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
13
that directly serve the needs of other uses permitted within the district are also
allowed.
TU. URBAN CENTER-1 (UC-1):
The Urban Center-1 Zone (UC-1) is established to provide an area for
pedestrian-scale urban mixed-use development that supports the residential and
employment goals of Renton’s Urban Center. The UC-1 Zone is intended to attract
a wide range of office, technology, commercial, and residential uses. The overall
mix and intensity of uses within both zones will develop over time. Consequently,
decisions made in early phases of redevelopment will need to take into
consideration the potential for further infill and intensification of uses. The overall
mix and intensity of uses is intended to create an urban rather than suburban
character. The form of development is expected to use urban development
standards and therefore, setbacks, heights, landscaping, parking, and design
standards are to be urban in scale and configured in a layout utilizing the street
system to create a human-scale, pedestrian-oriented new center. Uses that
support urban center development are allowed. Development is expected to
include amenities such as gateways, water access, and open space. High-quality
development is anticipated, encompassing a mix of residential neighborhoods,
shopping, and employment districts and public facilities.
UV. URBAN CENTER-2 (UC-2):
The Urban Center-2 Zone (UC-2) is established to provide a similar built
environment as UC-1 and also supports the residential and employment goals of
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
14
Renton’s Urban Center, but to a lesser degree than UC-1 due to differing
characteristics of the geography, which limit the scale of commercial enterprise.
The overall mix and intensity of uses is intended to create an urban rather than
suburban character. The form of development is expected to use urban
development standards and therefore setbacks, heights, landscaping, parking,
and design standards are to be urban in scale and configured in a layout utilizing
the street system to create a human-scale, pedestrian-oriented new center. Uses
that support urban center development are allowed. Development is expected to
include amenities such as gateways, water access, and open space. High-quality
development is anticipated, encompassing a mix of residential neighborhoods,
shopping, employment districts, and public facilities. The designation is also
intended to allow continuation of airplane manufacturing and accessory airplane
manufacturing uses, as land area formerly occupied by those uses is transformed
to combinations of retail, service, office, residential, and civic uses.
SECTION III. Section 4-2-110A, Development Standards for Residential Zoning
Designations (Primary Structures), of the Renton Municipal Code is hereby amended as shown
on Attachment A.
SECTION IV. Subsection 4-2-115.B.1 of the Renton Municipal Code is hereby amended as
follows:
B. APPLICABILITY:
1. This Section shall apply to all new primary and attached dwelling units
in the following zones: Resource Conservation (RC), Residential-1 (R-1),
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
15
Residential-4 (R-4), Residential-6 (R-6), Residential-8 (R-8), Residential-10 (R-10),
and Residential-14 (R-14), and unit lot subdivisions within the RMF, RMF-2, and
CV zones. The standards of the Site Design subsection are required to be
addressed at the time of subdivision application. The standards of the Residential
Design subsection are required to be addressed at the time of application for
building permits. The standards of Residential Design are required to be addressed
for the building for which the building permit is being issued.
SECTION V. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk is authorized to direct
the codifier to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the corrections of
scriveners or clerical errors; references to other local, state, or federal laws, codes, rules, or
regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering and references. The City
Clerk is further authorized to direct the codifier to update any chapter, section, or subsection
titles in the Renton Municipal Code affected by this ordinance.
SECTION VI. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the constitutionality of any other
section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance.
SECTION VII. The City Clerk shall publish a summary of this ordinance in the City’s official
newspaper. The summary shall consist of this ordinance’s title.
SECTION VIII. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on January 1, 2025.
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
16
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL the _____ day of __________________, 2024.
Jason Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this _____ day of __________________, 2024.
Armando Pavone, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Shane Moloney, City Attorney
Date of Publication: _______________
ORD-CED:24ORD023:11/22/2024
AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
A-1
ATTACHMENT A
4-2-110A1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS (PRIMARY STRUCTURES)
RC R-1 R-4 R-6 R-8 R-10 R-14 RMF RMF-2
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
20
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
40
dwelling
units20
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
Townhouses: 1
dwelling
Other Attached
Dwellings: n/a
Minimum Lot Size2,
28, 31
10 acres 1 acre3, 32 9,000 sq.
ft.32, 34
7,000 sq.
ft.32, 34
5,000 sq.
ft.34
Detached
dwellings:
4,000 sq.
ft.
Attached
dwellings:
n/a
Detached
dwellings:
3,000 sq. ft.
Attached
dwellings: n/a
n/a
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
A-2
RC R-1 R-4 R-6 R-8 R-10 R-14 RMF RMF-2
Minimum Lot
Width31
150 ft. 100 ft.32 70 ft.32 60 ft.32 50 ft. 40 ft. 30 ft. Townhouses: 25 ft.
Other Attached
Dwellings: 50 ft.
Minimum Lot
Width31 (Corner
Lots)
175 ft. 110 ft. 80 ft. 70 ft. 60 ft. 50 ft. 40 ft. Townhouses: 30 ft.
Other Attached
Dwellings: 60 ft.
Minimum Lot
Depth31
300 ft. 200 ft.3, 32 100 ft.32 90 ft.32 80 ft. 70 ft. 60 ft. Townhouses: 50 ft.
Other Attached
Dwellings: 65 ft.
Minimum Front
Yard4, 5, 31
30 ft. 30 ft.6 30 ft.6, 33 25 ft.6 20 ft. except when all
vehicle access is taken
from an alley, then 15
ft.39
15 ft.11,
except when
all vehicle
access is
taken from an
alley, then 10
ft.39
Townhouses: 15 ft.11,
except when all
vehicle access is
taken from an alley,
then 10 ft.39
Other Attached
Dwellings: 20 ft.
Minimum Rear
Yard4, 22, 31
35 ft. 30 ft. 25 ft.33 25 ft. 25 ft.39 15 ft.21, 39 10 ft.21, 39 Townhouses: 10 ft.13,
39
Other Attached
Dwellings: 15 ft.39
Minimum Side
Yard4, 31
25 ft. 15 ft. Combined
20 ft. with
not less
Combined 15
ft. with not
less than 5 ft.
5 ft. Detached
Units: 4 ft.
Detached
Units: 4 ft.
5 ft. for unattached
side(s), 0 ft. for the
attached side(s).13
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
A-3
RC R-1 R-4 R-6 R-8 R-10 R-14 RMF RMF-2
than 7.5 ft.
on either
side.
on either
side.
Attached
Units: 4 ft.
for
unattached
side(s), 0
ft. for the
attached
side(s).23
Attached
Units: 4 ft. for
unattached
side(s), 0 ft.
for the
attached
side(s).23
Minimum
Secondary Front
Yard4, 5, 31 (applies
to Corner Lots)
30 ft. 30 ft.6 30 ft.6, 33 25 ft.6 15 ft.11 15 ft.11 15 ft.11 Townhouses: 15 ft.11
Other Attached
Dwellings: 20 ft.
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%
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
A-4
RC R-1 R-4 R-6 R-8 R-10 R-14 RMF RMF-2
Maximum Number
of Stories
3 2 3
Maximum Wall
Plate Height8, 9, 10,
12, 18, 19
32 ft. 24 ft. 24 ft.,
increase up to
32 ft. possible
subject to
administrative
conditional
use permit
approval.
Townhouses: 32 ft.
Other Attached
Dwellings: 32 ft.,
increase up to 42 ft.
possible subject to
administrative
conditional use
permit approval.
Maximum Number
of Units per
Building2
n/a No more
than 4
units per
building.
No more than
6 units per
building.
n/a
Minimum Freeway
Frontage Setback
10 ft. landscaped setback from the street property line.
Maximum Wireless
Communication
Facilities
Height (including
Amateur Radio
Antennas)
See RMC 4-4-140, Wireless Communication Facilities. Amateur radio antennas are allowed a maximum height of 6
feet without a Conditional Use Permit. Larger structures will have a maximum height determined by the Conditional
Use Permit process, RMC 4-9-030, Conditional Use Permits.
Design Standards See RMC 4-2-115, Residential Design and Open Space Standards.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
ORDINANCE NO. 6154
A-5
RC R-1 R-4 R-6 R-8 R-10 R-14 RMF RMF-2
Landscaping See RMC 4-4-070, Landscaping.
Exterior Lighting See RMC 4-4-075, Lighting, Exterior On-Site.
Screening See RMC 4-4-095, Screening and Storage Height/Location Limitations.
Exception for Pre-
Existing Legal Lots
See RMC 4-10-010, Nonconforming Lots.
1 Please see Section 4-2-110E, Conditions Associated With Development Standards Table For Residential Zoning Designations, for
explanation of table footnotes.
AG
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
8
.
b
)
