Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-25-2013 - Agenda Bill setting public meeting for 10% February 25,2013 Renton City Council Minutes Page 51 Councilmember Palmer remarked that the feedback from the community indicates to her that residents would rather the library be left alone than have it be refurbished as proposed by KCLS. She stated that it appears KCLS has not listened to citizen input and that she does not approve of the proposed plan. Ms. Palmer asked what the minimum amount of remodeling would entail to keep the library operational. She also stated that she has no problem letting the KCLS Board of Directors know that the proposed plan is unacceptable, and she would like to see another proposal. Councilmember Taylor remarked that the overwhelming majority of people who have spoken throughout the library design process are not happy with the proposal. He stated that the building needs to stay the same size. He also explained that when he voted to annex to KCLS it was because he recognized that the City could not provide the level of service the community needed for the next 25 years. Mr.Taylor stated that KCLS needs to present a proposal that justifies the reasons for scaling the building back. He remarked that he believes the building can be refurbished in its existing footprint and stay within budget; however, he would support an additional expenditure of funds if needed,on the basis that the community also supported the expenditure. Mayor Law remarked that Council's remarks regarding the library proposal would be forwarded to KCLS. Utility: Waterline Smart Meter Additionally, Mr. Corman remarked that he has a reverse osmosis filter installed Installation in his house that removes fluoride from the water. He stated that the filter is a perpetual use system,and the new smart meter alerted him in error to look for a water leak. Mr. Corman stated that he was impressed with the new meters because if he actually had a leak the new system would have recognized it. Councilmember Briere remarked that she has a new smart meter installed on her water system and she has not seen a decline in the bird or animal population at her home. CONSENT AGENDA Items listed on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Council: Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of 2/10/2013. Council concurs. 2/10/2013 CAG: 12-175, FBO Parking Lot City Clerk reported bid opening on 1/29/2013 for CAG-12-175, FBO Parking Lot Construction &C-Ramp Storm Construction &C-Ramp Storm Drainage Repair project; 10 bids; engineer's Drainage Repair, RL Alia estimate$360,420; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract Company to the low bidder, R.L.Alia Company, in the amount of$279,075. Council concur. Finance: 2013 Threshold for Administrative Services Department recommended adopting a resolution to set Sales Tax Credit, Benson Hill the threshold for state sales tax credit for 2013 at$3,300,000 related to the Annexation Benson Hill annexation. Council concur. (See page 54 for resolution.) Annexation: Parker, SE 124th Community and Economic Development Department submitted 10% Notice of St& 156th Ave SE Intent to annex petition for the proposed Parker Annexation and recommended a public meeting be set on 3/11/2013 to consider the petition; 20.5 acres located in the vicinity of SE 124th St. and 156th Ave.SE. Council Concur. CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL . d. Subject/Title: Meeting: Proposed Parker Annexation - 10% Notice of Regular Council - 25 Feb 2013 Intention to Commence Annexation Proceedings Petition Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Issue Paper Community and Economic Development Map 10% Petition Staff Contact: Angie Mathias, x6576 Recommended Action: Council concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $ Amount Budgeted: $ Revenue Generated: $ Total Project Budget: $ I City Share Total Project: $ SUMMARY OF ACTION: The petitioners submitted this petition to the City Clerk on January 16, 2013. The proposed 20.5- acre abuts the City at the northern and eastern portion of the current City limits. State law requires a public meeting with the proponents within 60-days of their submittal to consider their request. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set March 11, 2013 for a public meeting to consider the 10% Notice of Intention to Commence Annexation Proceedings petition for the proposed Parker Annexation. DEPARTMENT I cityof AND ECONOMIC Q- on MEMORANDUM DATE: February 18, 2013 TO: Randy Corman, Council President City Councilmembers VIA: Denis Law, Mayor FROM: Chip Vincent, Administrator Department of Community& Economic Development STAFF CONTACT: Angie Mathias, x6576 SUBJECT: Proposed Parker Annexation—10%Notice of Intent Petition ISSUE: The City is in receipt of a 10% Notice of Intent petition to annex a 20.5-acre area using the direct petition method; the proposed annexation is called Parker. State law requires that the Council hold a public meeting with the annexation proponents within 60 days of receipt of a 10% Notice of Intent petition. The purpose of the meeting is for Council to decide whether to accept or reject the proposal and whether to require the simultaneous adoption of City zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, if the proposed annexation is successful. RECOMMENDATION: On the basis of the following analysis, the Administration recommends that Council accept the 10% Notice of Intent petition. If Council concurs, the Administration recommends that it take the following actions(pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120): • Accept the 10% Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation petition; and • Authorize the circulation of a 60% Direct Petition of Annex for the 37.4-acre area; and • Require that property owners within the proposed annexation area accept City of Renton zoning that is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan land use designation. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The proposed 20.5-acre Parker Annexation is located at the southeastern portion of the City limits.The Parker Annexation Area is bordered by Renton City limits at the west, by the urban growth boundary at the west and south, and by Southeast 124th St at the south. 1. Location:The proposed 20.5-acre Parker Annexation is bordered by the existing City limits at its west. Proposed Parker Annexation 10%Notice of Intent Page 2 of 5 2. Assessed value:The 2012 assessed valuation of the subject annexation site is $11,860,000. 3. Natural features:The area that is a mixture of built single family residential and vacant land. The topography is level with only very small areas of grade change of small hills rising to five feet above the grade of the surrounding land. 4. Existing land uses: There are 42 single-family residences and vacant land. 5. Existing zoning: Existing King County zoning is R-4.This area was prezoned by the City of Renton as part of the East Renton Plateau pre-zoning. City of Renton Ordinance#5254 prezoned the area with R-4 zoning;this zoning will become effective upon annexation. 6. Comprehensive Plan: Renton's Comprehensive Plan designates the subject annexation site as Residential Low Density(RLD). 7. School District:The Parker Annexation area is in the Issaquah School District. 8. Public services:All responding City of Renton departments and divisions noted that the annexation represents a logical extension of their respective services and systems and presents no foreseeable problems. Specific comments follow: Water Utility. The subject site is located within Water District No. 90's water service area by agreement under the coordinated water system plan. A certificate of water availability from District 90 will be required prior to the issuance of development permits within the subject area, following annexation to the City. It is expected that developer extensions of District No. 90's water mains will be required to provide service for fire protection and domestic use within the annexation area. The proposed area will not generate need for additional City employees because it is within Water District No. 90. Wastewater Utility. The area is within the Renton wastewater service area and is currently served with sewer service by the City. The annexation does not present any problems for the utility. Parks. The Community Services department indicated that the annexation represents a logical extension of the services provided by their department. Staff noted that the area is currently underserved with Renton parks and recreation. Staff stated that the Community Planning area this annexation falls in has been identified as needing to acquire land for two neighborhood parks and one community park. However, King County's Coal Field Park is adjacent to the site. Police. The Police Department did not indicate any concerns regarding this proposed annexation. It is estimated that the area will generate an additional 39 calls for service annually. Fire. Renton Fire and Emergency Services currently provide fire and emergency services to the area under a contract with District#25. Staff did not indicate any concerns regarding this proposed annexation. Proposed Parker Annexation 10%Notice of Intent Page 3 of 5 Surface Water. The area is located in the May Creek drainage basin and any future development will be required to comply with the City's Surface Water Design Manual and the Flow Control Duration Matching Forested Site Conditions should be applied. Staff noted that the area contains very limited stormwater infrastructure, consisting of primarily ditches. There are no curb and gutters and some lawns encroach into the right of way. Several parcels contain standing water and are possible wetlands. Additionally, an unnamed stream that is a tributary to May Creek originates within this area. There are no records of drainage complaints with King County. If the area annexes, it will require maintenance from the City.The annexation is a logical extension of the services provided by the division. Transportation Systems. The Transportation Systems staff has no concerns regarding the proposed annexation. Staff indicated that additional Transportation Systems staff would not be required and that the annexation represents a logical extension of services. Staff indicated that dedication of right-of-way on Southeast 120th and Southeast 124th may be required if the streets were to be redeveloped in the future to current Renton standards. Also, the roadways in the area have not been constructed to include curb, gutter, and sidewalks, which is the current Renton development standard for roadways. The area does have street lighting, but it does not meet current Renton Standards. Energy costs associated with existing and new street lighting, existing and new traffic control signage, and pavement markings may be incurred by the City. Staff indicated that the City would assume ownership and responsibility of all existing streets in the area. Public Works Maintenance. The annexation does not present any problems for the Department and it represents a logical extension of their services. Staff noted that two years the area had some roads rebuilt and in some places the roads are cracking. Also,there are shoulders in the area that will need to be maintained. Building.The Building section did not indicate any concerns regarding the proposed annexation. Planning.The Planning section did not indicate any concerns regarding the proposed annexation. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION: 1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: Renton's Comprehensive Plan annexation policies support this proposed annexation.The subject site is within the City's Potential Annexation Area, is Proposed Parker Annexation 10%Notice of Intent Page 4 of 5 subject to development pressure that might benefit from City Development Standards, and is land that is available for urbanization under the King County Comprehensive Plan, zoning, and subdivision regulations (Policy LU-38). Additionally, as Policy LU-36 states, the City recognizes "that it has an inherent interest in future land use decisions affecting its Potential Annexation Area". 2. Consistency with the Boundary Review Board Objectives: (from RCW 36.93.180) a. Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities; The proposed annexation would cause no disruption to the larger community. b. Use of physical boundaries, including but not limited to bodies of water, highways, and land contours; The subject site is bounded on its western portion by existing City limits and uses streets or parcel lines for the other boundaries. c. Creation and preservation of logical service areas; Water and sewer service boundaries will not change as a result of this annexation.The Parker Annexation Area is in the Issaquah School District. The school district boundaries will not change, the area will remain in the Issaquah School District. Renton will take over police service for the 20.5-acres upon annexation;the King County Sheriff's Department currently provides police protection to the area. Renton Fire and Emergency Services currently provide service under contract to Fire District#25 which serves the area. Pursuant to state law, there will be no change in the garbage service provider for at least seven years. d. Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries; This annexation does not have irregular boundaries. e. Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cities and encouragement of incorporations of cities in excess of ten thousand population in heavily populated urban areas; Not applicable. No incorporations are proposed in this area. f. Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts; Not applicable.There are no inactive special purpose districts here. g. Adjustment of impractical boundaries; Not applicable. h. Incorporation as cities or towns or annexation to cities or towns of unincorporated areas which are urban in character; King County has designated this area for urban development because of its location within the Urban Growth Boundary. The County has also Proposed Parker Annexation 10%Notice of Intent Page 5 of 5 indicated that it wants to divest itself from providing urban services to these unincorporated urban areas by turning them over to cities as quickly as possible. Because the subject annexation site is within Renton's PAA and not in an area under consideration for incorporation, annexation is appropriate at this time. i. Protection of agricultural and rural lands which are designated for long term productive agricultural and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the county legislative authority. Not applicable. No portions of the proposed annexation are rural or designated for long term productive agricultural use in the King County or Renton Comprehensive Plans. 3. A fiscal analysis for the proposed annexation is attached.The fiscal impact analysis that is used for annexations considers costs on a per capita basis. The fiscal analysis indicates that the proposed annexation would have an initial net positive fiscal impact of$6,815 to the operating budget per year. Over a 10-year period and with additional construction of single family homes on the existing vacant lots, it is estimated that the fiscal impact would be $9,772 per year for the operating budget. For the capital and enterprise funds the annexation represents a balance of positive$4,743 currently and in ten years will be$6,303. CONCLUSION: The proposed Parker Annexation is consistent with relevant County and City annexation policies, as well as most Boundary Review Board objectives for annexation.The staff that reviewed the proposed annexation for each department did not identify any major impediments to the provision of City services to the area or indicate that they feel the annexation is untimely. PARKER ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALYSIS Housing Units Population Current 42 118 • Year 10 64 179 Assumption: 2.8 Persons per single family household • H'.ia?_:9"7 '!:� w. C-li i.SliiYzt{r irg- g Fia.tj.;-. y iu s r1 Total Revenues Existing Year 10 2011 Rate Existing`;"'j , OI,.iij{ Regular levy $33,588.35 $55,977.27 2.83207 Year 1015'i•`' 0.61,i$ ';r ! AIM Assumption: $11,860,000.00 Base year taxable value of area State Shared Revenues Per Capita Existing Year 10 Liquor tax $4.61 $542.14 $826.11 Liquor Board profits $7.44 $874.94 $1,333.25 Fuel Tax $12.73 $1,497.05 $2,281.22 Art St Fuel Tax $6.79 $798.50 $1,216.77 Criminal justice $2.19 $257.54 $392.45 Total $33.76 $3,970.18 $6,049.79 Miscellaneous Revenues Per Capita Existing Year 10 Sales Tax,CJ $19.84 $2,333.18 - $4,440.12 Utility tax $76.39 $8,983.93 $17,096.69 Fines&forfeits $13.96 $1,641.70 $2,501.63 Permit $15.35 $361.11 $550.26 Plan Review $9.24 $217.39 $331.26 Franchise Fees $13.86 $1,629.94 $3,101.82 Business Licences n/a n/a n/a Total $148.65 $15,167.24 $28,021.77 Assumptions: 20% Portion of per capita revenue anticipated from permits and plan review 4.8% Annual population/housing unit growth rate based on capacity for new housing In area 2.5% Annual inflation Page lof3 Operating Fund Costs PARKER ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALYSIS Per Capita Driver Per Capita Existing Year 10 Executive Communications(Print Shop) Population $1.57 $184.63 $376.83 Hearing Examiner New Development $1.67 $195.87 $399.76 Total Costs City Attorney Population $17.77 $2,089.75 $4,265.09 Existing $45,910.42 Court Services Population $15.34 $1,803.98 $3,681.85 Year 10 $80,276.34 Community and Econ Dev Econ Dev Commercial SqFt No commercial SF in area Planning Population $8.03 $188.87 $385.47 Dev.Services Population $23.21 $545.90 $1,114.16 Community Services Human Services Population $5.69 $669.14 $1,365.69 Special Events/Neigh. Population $2.41 $283.42 $578.44 Parks Planning,Nat Res. Population $1.92 $225.79 $460.83 Fire Comm Risk Reduction Population Provided as part of FD#40 Contract Total $77.61 I $6,187.35 I $12,628.11 Per Acre/Mile/Call for Service Per Acre/ Driver Mile/Call Existing Year 10 Community Services Parks Park Acreage $2,497.03 $0.00 $0.00 PBPW Street Maint Feet of Roadway $2.23 $6,966.52 $12,425.13 Transportation Systems Feet of Roadway $0.30 $1,230.67 $1,068.64 Police Patrol,Ops.,Investlg.,and Jail Calls for Service $268.10 $8,129.95 $16,592.87 Valley Comm Calls for Service $26.50 $1,046.22 $2,135.29 Fire Emergency Response Change in Contract $19,701.32 $30,021.07 Total n/a $37,074.69 $62,243.00 Per FTE Driver Existing Year 10 Community Services Facilities FTE's $1,362.05 $2,779.87 Finance&IS IS FTE's $750.53 $1,531.79 HR Admin FTE's $179.71 $366.79 Risk Reduction FTE's $356.10 $726.78 Total $2,648.38 $5,405.23 Net Operating Fiscal Impact Assumptions: Fire service provided under contract with FD#25 Existing $6,815.35 3.3% Annual Increase in costs Year 10 $9,772.49 0 Acres of parks in area 20% Portion of per capita costs anticipated from permits and plan review 3,124 Existing linear feet of roadway 3,124 Year 10 linear feet of roadway Page 2 of 3 PARKER ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALYSIS Capital and Enterprise Funds Real Estate Excise Tax Total Revenues Per Capita Existing Year 10 Existing $5,806.01 Revenue • $24.64 $579.53 $1,102.87 Year 10 $30,533.97 Public Works-Surface Water Per Housing Unit Existing Year 10 Rate Revenue $124.44 $5,226.48 $6,527.16 Maintenance and Utility Costs -$25.30 -$1,062.80 -$1,327.30 Balance $99.14 $4,163.68 $5,199.86 Public Works-Waste Water Per Housing Unit Existing Year 10 Total Costs Rate Revenue $286.56 $12,035.52 $22,903.95 Existing Wastewater Maint.and Utility Costs -$156.06 -$6,554.58 -$13,377.60 Year 10 $14,704.90 Balance, $130.50 n/a $9,526.35 Public Works-Water Per Housing Unit r Existing Year 10 Water Maint.and Utility Served by Water District#90 Assumptions: 20% Portion of Real Estate Excise Tax revenue anticipated from permits and plan review 3.3% Annual increase in costs 42 Existing Housing Units 64 Year 10 Housing Units Capital&Enterprise Balance 4.8% Annual population/housing unit growth rate based on capacity for new housing In area Existing $4,743.21 2.5% Annual inflation Year 10 ::::$6,302.73 Page 3 of 3 —.- H , g a , ii g,. ,,,,, , ,„ _,� ; a, ' ._ ,,,,,,,. ,, ..., ....„: ,. , t,.. y; .,..) �Q - -� w_ •iga ,< FT i r - :5 '',-.1N. \\S ) 111111kimi 6th hibillir No, _'....,'..':________m______-------li j,,a),iL.,,, ____.----1111 .., 1 ' >. , .. "`1 ° a C©aifre`Id''Par*c. - a'' , o i:R'ii73■■ �� r' _____ :ii;ii?i�_ Y a iisiigi�:■■ I J ,iieii;i � i ., ,iisii : ■ . � . I. . °, .Ism Mr ct imom ripip.. .. .}j„IIIIIIHINIP .1111101„ . _ I - - ,,,,.,-;I ‘IHUILCi4 -kr�I�� a °,, .6 J o a, ,�Ccdar Ri✓er to Lake Sarah�rel ►e � Qo - --- -O , ,7 : Q — v -) av , o -U Path:H:10EDtPlann:nglGIS\G1S projectslannexationstparker annexlMxdstparker annex vicinity B& W.mxd Date:09/19/2012 0 470 .,, -.- -` j Parker Annexation Feet �' �•-- � 1:3200 _ Vicinity Map Community&Economic Development ;�3 Parker Annexation Boundary C E.'Chip'Vincent Adriana Abramovich _ -M `-'• Administrotor/FlanningDirector GIS Analyst A' 1�,�City Limits 3r'o'w --��M��r R �`` I I Parcels