HomeMy WebLinkAboutRevisions to 4-31-19.E - Temporary Use Permits and 5-1-1.A - Fee (7/10/1995) November 13, 1995 *f.r+ Renton City Council Minutes — Page 430
Ordinance #4560 An ordinance and summary ordinance were read amending Chapter 31,
Building: Temporary Use Zoning Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations), and amending subsection 5-
Permit Ordinance 5-l.A of Chapter 1, Fee Schedule, of Title V (Finance and Business
Regulations) of City Code relating to the processing of temporary use permits,
allowing temporary uses as permitted secondary uses in certain zones, and
reducing the amount of the application fee for a temporary use permit.
MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,
COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AND SUMMARY ORDINANCE AS
PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: FIVE AYES (SCHLITZER, STREDICKE,
KEOLKER-WHEELER, NELSON, EDWARDS), TWO NAYS (TANNER,
CORMAN). CARRIED.
ADMINISTRATIVE Mayor Clymer congratulated Councilman and Mayor-elect Tanner on winning
REPORT the mayoral campaign for the 1996-1999 term, promising a smooth transition
Executive: Congratulations between administrations.
to Mayor-elect Tanner
AUDIENCE COMMENT Ed LaKous, 1633 S. Eagle Ridge Dr., Renton, 98055, took exception to
Citizen Comment: LaKous comments made by Castle Rock co-owner Michael Prineas in a local
- Castle Rock Restaurant newspaper article regarding the purported motivation behind resident
& Lounge complaints about this business. Emphasizing that residents are concerned only
about the noise that is generated by this establishment and its patrons, Mr.
LaKous added that Castle Rock's roof-top air conditioning unit has never
been the source of noise complaints.
ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,
COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:48 p.m.
•
MARILY J. TERSEN, CMC, City Clerk
Recorder. Brenda Fritsvold
11/13/95
CITY OF RENTON
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 8, 1995
TO: Mayor Earl Clymer, and
Members, Renton City Council
FROM: Marilyn Petersen, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Temporary Use Permit Ordinance
The Temporary Permit Ordinance, which was placed on first reading on 11/6/95, has
been amended per Council's request. A copy of page 7 is attached reflecting the change
to Section 12 regarding appeals.
The amended ordinance is scheduled for second reading and adoption on 11/13/95.
If additional information is needed regarding this matter, please feel free to call me at
X2502.
cc: Jay Covington
..•ORDINANCE NO. ...
Temporary Use Permit as approved. The amount of the security
will be determined by the Planning/Building/Public Works
Administrator or designee, but in no case shall it be less than
$1, 000 . 00 . The security may be used by the City to abate the use
and/or facilities .
12 . Appeals .
Within ten days of approval, denial, or revocation of a
Temporary Use Permit, the applicant or any other aggrieved party
may file an appeal to the Hearing Examiner. The conduct of such
appeal shall proceed pursuant to the Hearing Examiner' s
ordinance. Appeals of the Hearing Examiner' s decision will be
made to the City Council .
13 . Penalties .
Unless otherwise specified, penalties for any violations of
any of the provisions of this Code shall be in accord with
Chapter 33 of Title IV.
SECTION II . There is hereby created the following
subsections : 4-31-4 . 1 B.2 .f, 4-31-4 .2 .B.2 .g, 4-31-5 .B.2 . f, 4-31-
6 .B.2 . f, 4-31-7 .B. 2 .e, 4-31-8 .B.2 .d, 4-31-9 .B.5 .b, 4-31-
10 .1 .B.2 .q, 4-31-10 . 2 .B.2 .p, 4-31-10 .3 .B.2 .o, 4-31-10 .4 .B. 2 .1, 4-
31-10 . 5 .B.2 .g, 4-31-11 . 1 .B.2 . i, 4-31-11.2 .B.2 .j , 4-31-12 .B.2 .g,
4-31-13 .B.2 .d, 4-31-16 .B .2 .o and 4-31-25 . 1 .B. 2 .d of Chapter 31,
Zoning Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations) , of Ordinance No.
4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,
Washington, " which will read as follows :
Temporary Use, as defined in section 4-31-19 .E.
7
November 6. 1995 ..,., Renton City Council Minutes '•40+• Page 419
Rezone: Hillcrest An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of property located
Elementary School, 1800 at 1800 Index Ave. NE from P-1 (Public Use) to R-10 (Residential - 10 units
Index Ave NE per acre) (Hillcrest Elementary School, File No. LUA-95-097). MOVED BY
EDWARDS, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL REFER THE
ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/13/95.
CARRIED.
Rezone: North Highlands An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of property located
Neighborhood Park, 3000 at 3000 NE 16th St. from P-1 (Public Use) to R-10 (Residential - 10 units per
NE 16th St acre) (North Highlands Neighborhood Park, File No. LUA-95-092). MOVED
BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL REFER
THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/13/95.
CARRIED.
Rezone: Highlands An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of property located
Neighborhood Center, 810 at 810 Edmonds Ave. NE from P-1 (Public Use) to R-8 (Residential - 8 units
Edmonds Ave NE per acre) (Highlands Neighborhood Center, File No. LUA-95-096). MOVED
BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL REFER
THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/13/95.
CARRIED.
Rezone: Highlands Annex, An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of property located
Edmonds Ave NE & NE at northeast corner of Edmonds Ave. NE and NE 7th St. at 754 Edmonds Ave.
7th St NE from P-1 (Public Use) to R-8 (Residential - 8 units per acre) (Highlands
Annex, File No. LUA-95-134). MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY
NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND
FINAL READING ON 11/13/95. CARRIED.
Rezone: Highlands An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of property located
Elementary School, 2727 at 2727 NE 9th St. from P-1 (Public Use) to R-8 (Residential - 8 units per
NE 9th St acre) (Highlands Elementary School, File No. LUA-95-098). MOVED BY
EDWARDS, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THE
ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/13/95.
CARRIED.
Building: Temporary Use An ordinance and summary ordinance were read amending Chapter 31,
Permit Process Zoning Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations), and amending subsection 5-
5-1.A of Chapter 1, Fee Schedule, of Title IV (Finance and Business
Regulations) of City Code relating to the processing of temporary use permits,
allowing temporary uses as permitted secondary uses in certain zones, and
reducing the amount of the application fee for a temporary use permit.
MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THE
ORDINANCE AND SUMMARY ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL
READING ON 11/13/95. CARRIED.
The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading
(Councilmember Corman excused himself from participating in this matter due
to the potential for the appearance of conflict of interest):
Ordinance #4554 An ordinance was read annexing approximately 403 acres located east of the
Annexation: Burnstead, SE City limits and north and south of SE 128th Street (Burnstead Annexation;
128th St to 156th Ave SE File No. A-94-001). MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-
WHEELER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED.
ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. The publication of the ordinance
will be postponed pending settlement of the relevant lawsuit.
Councilman Corman returned to the Chambers.
November 6, 1995 "` Renton City Council Minutes Page 414
Planning & Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Stredicke presented a report
Committee regarding temporary use permits. The Committee reviewed the amended
Building: Temporary Use language to the temporary use permit ordinance. Those amendments are:
Permit Process 1) include a separate section on the appeal process so that appeals on decisions
to approve or deny the temporary use permit and on revocations will be made
to the Hearing Examiner, with appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to
be made to the City Council; and 2) require sites to be posted with a sign that
displays information about the proposed temporary use, with the date of the
decision and the appeal period clearly marked. The installation of the sign
will be the responsibility of the applicant and the sign shall be posted by the
time of the decision. The Committee recommended that these changes be
made to the ordinance and that the ordinance as amended be placed on the
agenda for first reading. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY
KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE
REPORT.*
Correspondence was read from Elizabeth J. Warman, Manager, Local
Government Relations for The Boeing Company, PO Box 3707, Seattle, 98124,
expressing Boeing's support of the proposed changes to the temporary use
permit ordinance.
Jana Huerter, Principal Planner, displayed a mock-up of the type of sign that
will be installed on all potential temporary use permit locations for public
information. Responding to Councilman Stredicke, Ms. Huerter explained that
after a decision was made to grant a permit, the sign would be posted and the
appeal period would begin.
Councilman Tanner expressed concern with the vague language contained in
section 7.b. of the ordinance, which states that "The Planning/Building/Public
Works Administrator or designee may approve a Temporary Use Permit for up
to one year for temporary sales or rental offices in subdivisions, multi-family
or non-residential projects, or other longer term uses." Mr. Tanner said
failing to specify these "other longer term uses" would inappropriately leave
such approvals up to the judgment of one staff member.
*Moved by Tanner, seconded by Corman, Council amend the committee
report to strike the words "or other longer term uses" from section 7.b. of the
temporary use permit ordinance.**
Ms. Huerter gave several examples of what might constitute a longer term use,
such as the temporary building erected by South End Auto Wrecking last year
following the fire that destroyed their permanent building. Other examples
would be office trailers in a zone that would otherwise not allow them, or a
temporary storage yard for a utility project. Councilman Tanner noted that if
these examples can be described verbally in this setting, they can also be set
out in writing in the ordinance.
Ms. Huerter added that language contained in paragraph 10 of the ordinance
provides that if a temporary use is determined at any time to be a nuisance,
the permit could be revoked.
Councilman Edwards opposed the amendment, saying that the ordinance
should have some flexibility and it is probably not possible to anticipate and
specify all the longer term temporary uses that would be appropriate. Council
President Schlitzer agreed, saying that the appeal process and the ability to
revoke permits, together constitute an adequate safety net for the protection
of adjacent areas. Mr. Tanner replied that having observed the City's appeal
process in action, he was not reassured by it.
November 6. 1995 vr.+ Renton City Council Minutes ..� Page 415
**Roll call on motion to amend the committee report: Three ayes (Tanner,
Stredicke, Corman); four nays (Schlitzer, Keolker-Wheeler, Nelson, Edwards).
Failed.
MAIN MOTION TO APPROVE THE COMMITTEE REPORT AS
PRESENTED CARRIED. (See page 419 for ordinance.)
Councilman Edwards asked that the ordinance be amended prior to second
and final reading per the committee report; specifically, that it state appeals
of Hearing Examiner decisions on temporary use permits will be made to the
City Council.
Citizen Comment: Evans - Ralph Evans, 3306 NE 11 th Pl., Renton, 98056, stated his support for
Referendum 48; Campaign Referendum 48 (aka Initiative 164, regarding property rights/takings), saying
Signs that government taking of private property rights must be limited. He
explained that many elderly people are concerned about increasing property
taxes, and yet they are now prohibited from logging, subdividing or otherwise
using land that was purchased by them as an investment or as a hedge against
inflation.
On another subject, Mr. Evans suggested that campaign workers make a
concerted effort following election day to pick up signs placed around the
City.
Citizen Comment: Gough Steve Gough, 16939 SE 149th, Renton, 98059, asked for a change in the City's
- Home Occupation home occupation ordinance so he can purchase a single family home in
Requirements Renton in which to operate his business.
Responding to Council inquiry, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
Gregg Zimmerman explained that Mr. Gough does not intend to live in the
home, but the City's ordinance clearly states that the property on which a
home occupation business is located must be the primary residence of the
business owner.
Citizen Comment: Buford Tammy Buford, 8535 S. 123rd Pl., Seattle, 98178, presented a petition with 99
et al - Taylor Ave signatures requesting that the City install a stop sign and a pedestrian
NW/Stevens Ave NW Stop crosswalk at Taylor Ave. NW and Stevens Ave. NW. Explaining that a two-
Sign Request year old died last week after being hit by a car while crossing this intersection
with her mother, Ms. Buford said residents have long been concerned with the
increasing traffic and high speeds in this area. The petition also asks that
King County install a stop sign and flashing lights on 87th Ave. S. north of S.
124th St. as well as a stop sign further north on 87th Ave. north of S. 118th
St., in addition to repainting the pedestrian crosswalks at these intersections.
MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,
COUNCIL REFER THIS MATTER TO THE TRANSPORTATION
COMMITTEE AND THE ADMINISTRATION. CARRIED.
Councilman Tanner asked that the Administration also direct the Police
Department to provide speeding patrol emphasis in this area.
Citizen Comment: Laura O'Donnell, 620 Stevens Ave. NW, Renton, 98055, concurred with Ms.
O'Donnell - Taylor Ave Bufurd regarding the volume and speed of cars in the area of Taylor and
NW/Stevens Ave NW Stop Stevens Ave. NW. Saying this is a joint problem of Renton and King County
Sign Request because Stevens Ave. NW turns into 87th Ave. S. just beyond Taylor Ave., she
encouraged both jurisdictions to work together to resolve this problem in the
interest of resident safety. Ms. O'Donnell noted that many residents must
APPROVED BY
CITY COUNCIL
Date l(- - ��
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT
NOVEMBER 6, 1995
TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
(Referred July 17, 1995)
The Planning and Development Committee reviewed the amended language to the
temporary use permit ordinance. Those amendments are: 1) include a separate
section on the appeal process so that appeals on decisions to approve or deny the
temporary use permit and on revocations will be made to the Hearing Examiner, with
appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to be made to the City Council, and 2)
require sites to be posted with a sign that displays information about the proposed
temporary use, with date of decision and appeal period clearly marked. The installation
of the sign will be the responsibility of the applicant and the sign shall be posted by the
time of the decision.
The Committee recommends that these changes be made to the ordinance and that
the ordinance as amended by placed on the agenda for first reading.
Richard Stredicke, hair
-eat
atrele.‘,". - tiu
Kathy K olker-Wheeler, Vice-Chair
R ndy Corma , ember
cc: Gregg Zimmerman
Jim Hanson
Jim Chandler
Laureen Nicolay
Jana Huerter
FROM :CORP GOVT AFFAIRS 206 277 4455 199E 1-06 16:37 #516 P.02/03
The Boeing Company 'ire
P.O.Box 3707
Seattle,WA 98124-2207
November 6, 1995
Earl Clymer, Mayor
City of Renton
Municipal Building
200 Mill Ave. South
BOE//VG Renton, WA 98055
Dear Mayor Clymer
Thank you for the opportunity to express our support of an amendment to
Subsection 4-31-19 E of Chapter 31, Zoning Code, of Title IV (Building
Regulation), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General
Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington."
Based on our preliminary review of the amendment and our discussions
with your department last week we would like to offer support of the
proposed amendment, specifically the following portions:
4-31-19.E: Temporary Use.
1. Purpose.
A Temporary Use Permit allows a use or structure on a short term basis.
Such uses or structures may be allowed subject to modified development
standards which would not be appropriate for permanent uses in zoning
designation.
2. Permitted Temporary Uses.
c. Contractor's office, storage yard, and equipment parking and servicing
on or near the site or in the vicinity of an active construction project.
Adoption of this ordinance would benefit The Boeing Company; whereas
without this proposed ordinance, Boeing would not be allowed to have
temporary buildings in commercial business office zones.
FROM :CORP GOUT RFFRIRS 206 277 4455 199E -06 16:37 #516 P.O3/O3
Please contact me at 544-0182 if you have any questions about these
comments. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Y�
Elizabeth J. Warman, Manager
Local Government Relations
Puget Sound
cc: City of Renton Council Members
Jana Heurter
"November 6, 1995 `""` Renton City Council Minutes Page 413
disturbance. Mr. Zimmerman agreed to check with the consultant on this
issue.
AUDIENCE COMMENT Chuck Rogert, 1633 S. Eagle Ridge Dr., Renton, 98056, noted that Castle
Citizen Comment: Rogert Rock has been in business for five months now, and consequently the well-
- Castle Rock Restaurant being of nearby residents is in danger as they continue to lose sleep. Saying
& Lounge that an apparent gun shot was fired on October 28th, Mr. Rogert emphasized
the gravity of this situation given its occurrence adjacent to residential homes.
He felt that Castle Rock does not belong in its current location and said this
business is obviously different from the previous Elks use as no Elks event or
gathering ever prompted the kind of disturbance that occurred on October
28th.
Citizen Comment: LaKous Ed LaKous, 1633 S. Eagle Ridge Dr., Renton, 98056, aired a videotape of
- Castle Rock Restaurant Castle Rock parking lot activities he filmed from his balcony about three
& Lounge weeks ago. The tape illustrated the loud, piercing noise of a car alarm that
sounded for several minutes. Mr. LaKous noted that even though Castle Rock
management recently installed signs in its parking lot warning patrons not to
play car radios, park illegally, or allow car alarms to sound, these actions are
continuing.
Citizen Comment: Russell Chuck Russell, PO Box 59433, Renton, 98058, noted that according to the
- Castle Rock Restaurant noise report prepared for the City, Eagle Ridge residents have been subjected
& Lounge to loud sounds of patrons yelling and of car stereos, alarms and horns
sounding, among other noises. He felt that Castle Rock management was
showing extreme disrespect for the City and Eagle Ridge residents alike.
Responding to Mr. Russell, Mr. Zimmerman said to the City's knowledge,
Castle Rock has not yet responded to the demand that it either submit a plan
for replacing vegetation that was removed without a permit, or obtain the
required permit.
Citizen Comment: Malcolm Thomson, 20300 - 131st P1. SE, Kent, 98058, vice president for
Thomson - '95 Council Local 21-R, thanked the Council and mayoral candidates for meeting with the
and Mayoral Candidates union to share their views. He looked forward to working with the Council
and the Administration in the new year.
Citizen Comment: Richter Marjorie Richter, 300 Meadow Ave. N., Renton, 98055, entered a letter into
- Temporary Use Permit the record from herself and Versie Vaupel, PO Box 755, Renton, 98057,
Ordinance regarding the proposed changes to the temporary use permit ordinance. The
letter said some limitations or restrictions are needed regarding the types of
uses that can locate on vacant lots next to residential housing. It suggested
that uses with significant impacts be differentiated from smaller uses, and that
the larger uses be required to pay more than a $100 fee for a temporary use
permit. The letter also said that: time periods for most temporary uses are
too extensive; temporary parking lots should not be allowed to impact
residences or small businesses; and the Hearing Examiner should be
responsible for decisions on uses having larger impacts so the public would be
assured adequate notice.
MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL SUSPEND
THE REGULAR ORDER OF BUSINESS AND ADVANCE TO THE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT ON THIS
ISSUE. CARRIED.
I/- 6 - es
To: Renton City Council 11/6/95
From: Marjorie J. Richter and Versie Vaupel
Re: Temporary Use Permit Ordinance
One of our chief criticisms of the Temporary Use Permit Ordinance was that there are
seemingly no restrictions as to what can be put on vacant lots next to or adjacent to
single family housing or family housing of any type. If the Council members had ever
been subjected to some of the noisy, dirty, polluting uses that we have in our area, you
would quickly change the proposed ordinance. We are aware that right now you are
not threatened by empty lots near you; some of you live on isolated lots or areas, but
who knows, that may not be forever so especially if you intend to grow old and need
flat areas that later have empty lots near you.
At the very least, there should be limits on what kinds of temporary uses can be next to
or adjacent to residences. That is one of the reasons we have been urging that uses
with significant impacts be separated from the insignificant or smaller uses. Likewise,
we have been asking that the $100 fee not be used for all permits--for instance, a
Christmas tree sale yard versus a large staging area with large dirt piles, rocks, tall
cranes, cars, buses, trucks, bulldozers, loaders, tankers or other impacting uses. Also,
$100 won't even cover staff time for issuing the permit, nor would it even be close to
covering cleanup if the temporary user left town overnight without adequate damage
deposit.
Time limits on temporary uses are too long in most cases, depending on locations, and
certainly temporary parking lots should not be allowed where residences and small
businesses have to look at or be impacted by their looks, traffic, noise, fumes, etc.
We have also felt that the Hearing Examiner should be making decisions on larger,
impacting uses, where the public would be assured of adequate public notice and/or
hearings. Surely one staff member should not be the one to take that responsibility.
We think Council members need to keep in mind what they want their community and
town to look like--other than a ratty bunch of supposedly temporary uses around town.
As we said, the Council members' residences may be protected now but maybe not
forever as well as your offspring. Think of the future and of other people.
I wish we had some kinder words to say about the ordinance, but obviously the staff
and attorney who put this ordinance together has never experienced the messes we have
had to put up with over the years. We and others have worked hard on our community
to keep it clean and orderly; one would think we would be commended and not
condemned to more gross uses.
Marjo ' J. Richt Versie Vaupel
300 Meadow Avenue N, Renton P. O. Box 755, Renton 98057
CITY OF RENTON
Planning / Building / Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 02, 1995
TO: Richard Stredicke, Chair
Planning & Development Committee
VIA: Mayor Clymer CITY OF RENTON
FROM: Gregg A. Zimmerman, P/B/PW Administrator
CONTACT Jana Huerter/Development Services
SUBJECT: Temporary Use Permit
At the July 17th Council meeting the Council referred the matter of the Temporary Use Permit back to
the Planning and Development Committee for further consideration. Based on the discussions from the
Council meeting, staff has prepared three scenarios for administering the Temporary Use Permit. One
scenario is to amend the draft ordinance with additional language to clarify the appeal process within the
Revocation section and to provide language that allows the Council to intercede in the appeal process for
either the decision to approve or deny the permit or on appeal of the revocation decision. The second
scenario would restructure the ordinance as it's drafted, to require approval, appeal and/or revocation of
any temporary use permit through the City Council. And the third scenario would amend the draft
ordinance so that the City Council decides on the revocations.
The following outlines the three scenarios:
Scenario #1 -Amend Ordinance.
Process: The approval of temporary use permits would be handled by the P/B/PW Administrator or
designee. The entire approval process will take approximately two weeks which would include a 10 day
appeal period (more time may be necessary for contentious projects). The ordinance would give the
administrator, or designee, the power to revoke the permit upon 10 days written notice or immediately in
the event an emergency exists. Appeals of the decision to allow or deny a temporary use permit would
go to the Hearing Examiner.
Per a request by the City Council, language will be added to clarify the revocation process allowing
anyone the opportunity to appeal a revocation decision. An appeal on a revocation decision would be
heard by the Hearing Examiner.
Another proposed amendment would be to give the City Council the ability to hear appeals of either the
decision to approve or deny the temporary use permits or the revocation decisions. The ordinance would
allow the City Council to circumvent the Hearing Examiner and hear the appeals directly. With this as an
option, the City Council could decide whether an appeal warrants more immediate attention rather than
going through the normal appeal process beginning with the Hearing Examiner.
TO: Planning & Developme 'ommittee
' RE: Temporary Use Permit y"" —
Page-2-
Scenario #2 -Revised Ordinance -Authorized and Administered by the City Council
Process: Approvals, appeals and revocations of the temporary use permits would be handled entirely by
the City Council. The approval process alone would typically take 8-10 weeks to process depending on
the Council's meeting schedule. An appeal on the decision to approve or deny a temporary use permit
would be made to the Superior Court. The revocation process could take 7-9 weeks to process due to
the procedures necessary for Council Action (see attached schedule).
Scenario #3 -Revised Ordinance -City Council Decides On Revocation of Permits
Process: The administration of the temporary use permits would remain as drafted in the proposed
ordinance, however, the authority to decide on a revocation of a permit would be made by the City
Council. This process could take 2-3 months rather than the 10 days as described in the draft ordinance.
Also, appeals of the revocation action would have to be made to the court rather than the Hearing
Examiner. This will add a substantial amount of time and cost to those appealing revocation decisions.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends Scenario #1 which provides the City Council with the opportunity to become involved
at an earlier stage, yet keeps the general process at an administrative level.
TUPMM.DOC
SCENARIO #2
APPROVAL, APPEAL, AND REVOCATION PROCESS
8-10 WEEKS
STEP# PROCESS # OF WEEKS
1 Submit application to P/B/PW Department 1
2 Prepare agenda bill 1
3 Schedule agenda bill for council meeting 1
4 Refer from Council to Committee 1
5 Schedule on Committee agenda and send 2-4
out notifications to parties of record
6 Refer out of Committee 1
7 Report to Council for action 1
TOTAL 8-10
SCENARIO #3
REVOCATION PROCESS
7-9 WEEKS
STEP# PROCESS # OF WEEKS
1 Submit application to City Clerk 1
2 Schedule on Council agenda 1
3 Refer to Council Committee 1
4 Schedule on Committee Agenda and send 2-4
out notifications to parties of record
5 Discuss at Committee meeting 1
6 Report out of Committee to Council and 1
render a decision
TOTAL 7-9 WEEKS
July 24. 1995 .,.,.Renton City Council Minutes r..0 Pane 300
said refuse and debris in the City's gutters reflect a lack of civic pride in the
community. He also commented on the danger of sidewalk and curb
disrepair, citing safety concerns. Regarding Tonkins Park, Mr. Doyle said the
drinking fountain does not work and the park's landscaping has eroded to the
point of embarrassment. He urged Council to attend to this matter
immediately. Mr. Doyle concluded that the downtown property recently
• purchased by the City from Good Chevrolet should be developed into a multi-
level parking garage with ground-level retail shopping and restaurants.
Councilmember Nelson explained that the stage under construction at Tonkins
Park is being accomplished with donations, and the person in charge is
volunteering his time. Progress is being made, albeit slowly, and when the
project is completed, it will be beautiful.
Councilman Tanner clarified for Mr. Doyle that none of the buildings owned
by Good Chevrolet were sold to the City.
Citizen Comment: Beverly Franklin, PO Box 685, Renton, 98057, commented on the proposed
Franklin - Temporary Use temporary use permit ordinance, describing problems experienced with truck
Permit Ordinance sales, rentals and parking lots, among other uses, and emphasizing that these
illegal uses are occurring in her single family neighborhood. She was
concerned that the ordinance does not mention setback requirements or
specify what type of structures could be built, and felt that, overall, the
ordinance language is too vague. She encouraged Council to strive to make
this permitting process neighborhood-friendly, and at the least include an
opportunity to revocate any nuisance permit.
Councilman Stredicke announced that the Planning & Development Committee
will meet to discuss this subject on August 2nd.
Citizen Comment: Halinen David Halinen, 10500 NE 8th St., Suite 1900, Bellevue, 98004, submitted a
- NE 4th/Union Ave NE letter regarding the Ribera-Balko Family Limited Partnership's ten-acre parcel
Site Plan (Bakke), R-88- on the south side of NE 4th St. that was the subject of an application for a
107 rezone and site plan approval in 1988 (File No. R-88-107). Noting that this
property was never developed, the letter requested that Council vacate the
rezone as well as the corresponding site plan approval, and release the
restrictive covenant recorded in conjunction therewith. MOVED BY
CORMAN, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL REFER THIS
CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the
listing.
CAG: 95-072, 1995 Steel City Clerk reported bid opening on 7/19/95 for CAG-95-072, 1995 Steel
Water Main Replacement Water Main Replacement project; four bids; engineer's estimate $337,745.22;
Project, Debco Const. and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder,
Debco Construction, Inc., in the total amount of $298,157.54. Council concur.
Court Case: CRT-95-006, Court Case in an undetermined amount filed by Michael R. Caryl, 720 Olive
Lu v. Renton Way, Seattle, 98101, on behalf of Young and Tommy Lu, regarding alleged
personal injuries received by Young Lu at Renton's Liberty Park on 7/24/92
(CRT-95-006). Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Services.
Annexation: Holman, SE Planning & Technical Services Division requested a public hearing be set for
2nd PI/Heather Downs 8/14/95 on the Holman 60% annexation petition and concurrent zoning to
R-8; the annexation area is comprised of three parcels located along SE 2nd
P1. in the Heather Downs neighborhood. Council concur.
7_ qs_
Here are some major points you would hopefully consider before adopting the final
version that is before the Council tonight.
1. Surely there is no reason why the lesser uses shouldn't be segregated from
larger or grosser uses.
2. Surely you should have no resistance to charging lesser permit fees for the
smaller uses and more for the larger uses. The proposed fee structure wouldn't even
pay for staff time. Again, we would have taxpayers subsidizing commercial uses.
3. Surely you wouldn't want to live next door or across the alley or across the
street from such uses as parking lots full of cars, buses, trucks, trailers, vans, bull-
dozers, scrapers, steamrollers, cranes, frontend loaders, tankers or other such vehicles
- and equipment. This use could last up to two years, and as happened in the past,
special uses have continued on and on without city oversight or enforcement.
4. Surely you should have no resistance to allowing the Hearing Examiner to make
decisions on the larger projects instead of the development staff where there is a much
less public process.
5. Surely you wouldn't want a sole staff member (sub-paragraph f) to be author-
ized to add possibly all kinds of temporary uses as one person sees fit.
6. Surely you wouldn't want to pass this ordinance without establishing and spell-
ing out the review and appeal process and without expanding the notification process to
the public, not just to those immediately adjacent to the project.
7. Surely you wouldn't want the permit fee waived for large uses for "public
service activities and non-profit organizations," since neither you nor the public know
the definition or interpretation of what "public service" activities are.
8. Surely you aren't naive enough to think that he abatement or enforcement
process if needed would be covered by the mere $100 fee, especially remembering that
only one hour of city attorney's time costs. more than that $100 fee. Thus, surely you
should realize that larger uses require a mandatory bond or large security bond.
Please reconsider the ordinance and consider the residential viewpoint not just the
industrial and commercial users.
46C) —cam
Versie Vaupel
j'ECElVED
�L! 1 7
,A-'ON C �"Y COU 1995iVC,
July 17. 1995 ✓''Renton City Council Minutes Paae 291
Resolution #3138 A resolution was read setting 8/21/95 as a hearing date for vacating a portion
Vacation: Maplewood PI of Maplewood Pl. SE from SR-169 to SE 6th St. (Humble/VAC-95-004).
SE (Humble/VAC-95-004) MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE
RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
Resolution #3139 A resolution was read setting 8/21/95 as a hearing date for vacating a portion
Vacation: Lake Ave S of Lake Ave S. from S. 2nd St. to S. 3rd St. (Tonkin, Safeway et al./VAC-95-
(Tonkin, Safeway et. 001). MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL
al/VAC-95-001) ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
Resolution #3140 A resolution was read adopting trench restoration and street overlay
Transportation: Trench requirements. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY NELSON,
Restoration and Street COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
Overlay Standards
The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the
Council meeting of 07/24/95 for second reading:
Building: Temporary Use An ordinance and summary ordinance were read amending Chapter 31,
Permit Ordinance Zoning Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations) and amending subsection 5-
5-1.A of Chapter 1, Fee Schedule, of Title V (Finance and Business
Regulations) of City Code relating to the processing of temporary use permits,
allowing temporary uses as permitted secondary uses in certain zones, and
decreasing the amount of the application fee for a temporary permit.
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE,
COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL
READING ON 07/24/95.
Noting that last week, Council had directed that language be added to the
ordinance allowing for a temporary use permit to be revoked with cause, Mr.
Edwards expressed his dissatisfaction with the new language. Although it
would allow revocation, such action would be at the discretion of the
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator and completely removed from
Council's purview.
MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL TABLE
ACTION ON THIS ITEM FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED.*
Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler cautioned against politicizing this process,
saying that as an administrative process it should be up to the Administration
to revoke a permit if there is non-compliance with the conditions.
Councilman Corman suggested that, in addition to giving the party whose
permit may be revoked an opportunity to appeal this decision to the Hearing
Examiner, the ordinance also provide an appeal opportunity to a party whose
request that a permit be revoked was denied.
Mayor Clymer agreed with Mrs. Keolker-Wheeler that the question is one of
administrative duties vs. the Council's policy-making function.
Councilman Edwards explained his concern that although such permits can be
construed as land use decisions, under the current drafting of the ordinance
Council would have no authority to revoke them.
*MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL
REMOVE THIS ITEM FROM THE TABLE. CARRIED.
July 17. 1995 Renton City Council Minutes Page 292
MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL REFER
THE PROPOSED TEMPORARY USE PERMIT ORDINANCE TO THE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
Building: Adoption of An ordinance and summary ordinance were read amending portions of
1994 Uniform Codes Chapter 5 (Dangerous Building Code), Chapter 21 (Smoke Detectors), Chapter
(Building/Housing/Mecha 24, Uniform Building Code, Chapter 26, Uniform Housing Code, and Chapter
nical) 27, Uniform Mechanical Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations) of City
Code by adopting the 1994 editions of the Uniform Building Code, Uniform
Plumbing Code, Uniform Housing Code, and Uniform Mechanical Code by
reference. MOVED BY SCHLITZER, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-
WHEELER, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND
FINAL READING ON 07/24/95. CARRIED.
Fire: 1994 Uniform Fire An ordinance and summary ordinance were read amending Chapter 1,
Code Adoption Uniform Fire Code, of Title VII (Fire Regulations) of City Code relating to
adoption of the 1994 Uniform Fire Code by reference and amendments
thereto. MOVED BY TANNER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL
REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON
07/24/95. CARRIED.
The following ordinances were presented for first reading and advanced to
second and final reading:
Comprehensive Plan: 1995 An ordinance was read amending the land use designation of two parcels of
Amendments (Lake Wash land (1700 Lake Wash. Blvd. and SW Grady Way) in the Comprehensive Plan.
Blvd/Grady Way) (Requested Comprehensive Plan change which precedes rezone action
implemented by City Ord. Nos. 4543 and 4544). MOVED BY STREDICKE,
SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE
TO SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED.
Ordinance #4542 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was
Comprehensive Plan: 1995 MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER,
Amendments (Lake Wash COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL:
Blvd/Grady Way) SIX AYES (SCHLITZER, CORMAN, EDWARDS, NELSON, KEOLKER-
WHEELER, TANNER); ONE NAY (STREDICKE). CARRIED.
Rezone: 1700 Lake An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of property located
Washington Blvd at approximately 1700 Lake Wash. Blvd. N. from R-8 (Residential/8 dwelling
(Buck/Evans, LUA-95- units per acre) to RM-I (Residential Multifamily Infill) (Buck/Evans Rezone;
048) File No. LUA-95-048). MOVED BY SCHLITZER. SECONDED BY
EDWARDS, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE TO SECOND AND
FINAL READING. CARRIED.
Ordinance #4543 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was
Rezone: 1700 Lake MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL ADOPT
Washington Blvd THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES.
(Buck/Evans, LUA-95- CARRIED.
048)
Rezone: SW Grady Way An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of property at SW
between Seneca/Raymond Grady Way and Raymond Ave. from MIP (Medium/Industrial Park) to CA
Ayes (Penta (Commercial Arterial) (Penta Group/Renton West, Inc.; File No. LUA-95-
Group/Renton West, 051). MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON,
LUA-95-051) COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE TO SECOND AND FINAL
READING. CARRIED.
•
TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
The Temporary Use Permit is intended to provide a simple, less time consuming process for
temporary uses such as Christmas tree lots, construction and real estate trailers, etc. The
permits will be reviewed and decided upon administratively replacing the current process which
requires a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. As drafted, the ordinance sets criteria
for approval that considers the public health and safety. Additional conditions may be imposed
in order to ensure land use compatibility and to reduce impacts on adjacent properties.
The Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends Council approve the proposed
ordinance for temporary uses. In addition, Staff recommends that Council repeal Section 4-31-
19E of the Municipal Code which currently addresses temporary uses, amend Section 5-1-1.A,
Fee Schedule, to reflect an application fee of $100.00 replacing the current fee of$1,000.00;
and amend the Zoning Code to list Temporary Uses under the Secondary Uses section of
each of the following zones: 4-31-4-1.B.2.f; 4-31-4-2.6.2.g; 4-31-5.B.2.f; 4-31-6.B.2.f; 4-31-
7.B.2.e; 4-31-8.B.2.d; 4-31-9.B.5.b; 4-31-10.1.B.2.q; 4-31-10.2.B.2.p; 4-31-10.3.B.2.o; 4-
31-10.4.B.2.1; 4-31-10.5.6.2.g; 4-31-11.1.B.2.h; 4-31-11.2.B.2.j; 4-31-12.B.2.g; 4-31-
13.B.2.d; 4-31-16.B.2.o; and 4-31-25.1.B.2.d. The new language shall allow Temporary Uses
as secondary use subject to the provisions of the Temporary Use Ordinance, Section 4-31-19E
of the Renton Municipal Code.
Noy
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING CHAPTER 31, ZONING CODE, OF TITLE IV (BUILDING
REGULATIONS) , AND AMENDING SUBSECTION 5-5-1.A OF
CHAPTER 1, FEE SCHEDULE, OF TITLE V (FINANCE AND
BUSINESS REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED
"CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON,
WASHINGTON" RELATING TO THE PROCESSING OF TEMPORARY USE
PERMITS, ALLOWING TEMPORARY USES AS PERMITTED SECONDARY
USES IN CERTAIN ZONES, AND DECREASING THE AMOUNT OF THE
APPLICATION FEE FOR A TEMPORARY PERMIT.
The following is a summary of this ordinance:
SECTION I. This ordinance establishes the purpose for
temporary use permits, defines the uses permitted by a temporary
use permit, establishes the requirements for an application and
the application process for a temporary use permit, and
establishes the decision criteria in granting a temporary use
permit. The ordinance also authorizes the imposition of
conditions on approval and establishes a time limitation for the
permit, removal of the use, and abatement if necessary. The
ordinance also adds temporary uses as secondary uses in a number
of City zones . Finally, the ordinance establishes the fee for a
temporary permit at $100 . 00 .
SECTION II. A full text of this ordinance will be mailed,
without charge, upon request to the City Clerk.
Date of Publication:
ORD.450 : 4/17/95 :as .
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING CHAPTER 31, ZONING CODE, OF TITLE IV (BUILDING
REGULATIONS) , AND AMENDING SUBSECTION 5-5-1.A OF
CHAPTER 1, FEE SCHEDULE, OF TITLE V (FINANCE AND
BUSINESS REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED
"CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON,
WASHINGTON" RELATING TO THE PROCESSING OF TEMPORARY USE
PERMITS, ALLOWING TEMPORARY USES AS PERMITTED SECONDARY
USES IN CERTAIN ZONES, AND DECREASING THE AMOUNT OF THE
APPLICATION FEE FOR A TEMPORARY PERMIT.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Subsection 4-31-19 .E of Chapter 31, Zoning
Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations) , of Ordinance No. 4260
entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,
Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows :
4-31-19.E: Temporary Use.
1 . Purpose.
A Temporary Use Permit allows a use or structure on a short-
term basis . Such uses or structures may be allowed subject to
modified development standards which would not be appropriate for
permanent uses in the zoning designation.
2 . Permitted Temporary Uses .
a. Occupancy of a temporary structure (existing home,
mobile home or travel trailer with adequate water and
sewer/septic service) on the same lot while a residential
building is being constructed or while a damaged residential
building is being repaired, and when a valid residential building
permit is in force. The permit may be granted for up to 180
'ORDINANCE NO. �•+
days, or upon expiration of the building permit, whichever first
occurs.
b. Model homes and trailers used for the purpose of
real estate sales and/or rental information, located within the
subdivision or residential development to which they pertain.
c. Contractor ' s office, storage yard, and equipment
parking and servicing on or near the site or in the vicinity of
an active construction project.
d. Circuses, carnivals, fairs, or similar transient
amusement or recreational activities .
e. Temporary parking lots/areas .
f. The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
or designee may authorize additional temporary uses not listed in
this subsection, when it is found that the proposed uses are in
keeping with the intent and purpose of this section.
3. Application Requirements .
Application requirements are specified by the
Planning/Building/Public Works Department in the document
entitled: "Submittal Requirements for Temporary Use Permit
Application. " Temporary Use Permit applications on private
property shall include a letter from the owner of the subject
property granting permission for the temporary usg.ge on the
property. The Administrator may waive specific application
requirements determined to be unnecessary for review of an
application. The Administrator may waive the permit application
fee for public service activities and non-profit organizations .
2
ORDINANCE NO. 101100
4 . Application Process.
The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee
shall, in consultation with appropriate city departments, review
and decide upon each application for a Temporary Use Permit. The
Administrator or designee may approve, modify, or condition an
application for a Temporary Use Permit. Within ten ( 10) days of
approval or denial of a temporary use permit, the applicant, or
other aggrieved party, may file an appeal to the Hearing
Examiner.
5. Decision Criteria.
The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee
may approve, modify, or condition an application for a Temporary
Use Permit, based on consideration of the following factors:
a. The Temporary Use will not be materially
detrimental to the public heath, safety, or welfare, nor
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of the
Temporary Use;
b. Adequate parking facilities and vehicle ingress
and egress are provided to serve the Temporary Use and any
existing uses on the site;
c. Hours of operation of the Temporary Use are
specified, and would not adversely impact surrounding uses;
d. The Temporary Use will not cause nuisance factors
such as noise, light, or glare which adversely impacts
surrounding uses;
e. If applicable, the applicant has obtained the
required right-of way use permit;
3
ORDINANCE NO. "r
f. The Temporary Permit may initiate permits and
inspections from both Fire Prevention and/or Development
Services Division to insure that the temporary use is in
compliance with Fire/Building codes .
6 . Conditions of Approval.
a. The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
or designee may establish conditions as may be deemed necessary
to ensure land use compatibility and to minimize potential
impacts on nearby uses . These include but are not limited to,
requiring that notice be given to adjacent property owners prior
to approval, time and frequency of operation, temporary
arrangements for parking and traffic circulation, requirement for
screening or enclosure, and guarantees for site restoration and
cleanup following temporary uses .
b. Each site occupied by a temporary use shall have
access to or provide for restroom facilities (may be a temporary
facility) , electrical hookups, and garbage disposal .
7 . Time Limitation.
a. Except as specified below in subsection B, a
Temporary Use Permit is valid for up to 90 calendar days from the
effective date of the permit, unless the Planning/Building/Public
Works Administrator or designee establishes a shorter time frame.
b. The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
or designee may approve a Temporary Use Permit for up to one year
for temporary sales or rental offices in subdivisions,
multifamily or non-residential projects or other longer term
uses .
4
ikime ORDINANCE NO. ►
c. A maximum of one, ones year extension may be
granted for uses referred to in "b" above.
8 . Removal of Temporary Use.
Each site occupied by a temporary use shall be left free of
debris, litter, or other evidence of the temporary use upon
completion of removal of the use.
9 . Abatement of Temporary Use.
Prior to the approval of a Temporary Use Permit, the
applicant shall submit to the Planning/Building/Public Works
Administrator or designee, an irrevocable, signed and notarized
statement granting the City permission to summarily abate the
Temporary Use, and all physical evidence of that use, if it has
not been removed as required by the terms of the Permit. The
statement shall also indicate that the applicant will reimburse
the City for any expenses incurred in abating a Temporary Use
under the authority of this section.
10. Security.
The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee
may require security in conformance with Chapter 12, section 9-
12-8,V, 3 to assure compliance with the provisions of the
Temporary Use Permit as approved. The amount of the security
will be determined by the Planning/Building/Public Works
Administrator or designee, but in no case shall it be less than
$1, 000.00. The security may be used by the City to abate the use
and/or facilities .
5
„,,ORDINANCE NO.
11 . Penalties .
Unless otherwise specified, penalties for any violations of
any of the provisions of this Code shall be in accord with
Chapter 33 of Title IV.
SECTION II. There is hereby created the following
subsections : 4-31-4 . 1 B.2 .f, 4-31-4 .2 .B.2 .g, 4-31-5 .B. 2 .f, 4-31-
6 .B.2 .f, 4-31-7 .B. 2 . e, 4-31-8 .B. 2 .d, 4-31-9 .B.5 .b, 4-31-
10 . 1 .B.2 .q, 4-31-10 .2 .B. 2 .p, 4-31-10 . 3 .B.2 .o, 4-31-10 .4 .B. 2 . 1, 4-
31-10 .5 .B.2 .g, 4-31-11 . 1 .B.2 . i, 4-31-11 . 2 .B. 2 . j , 4-31-12 .B.2 .g,
4-31-13 .B.2 .d, 4-31-16 .B.2 .o and 4-31-25 . 1 .B.2 .d of Chapter 31,
Zoning Code, of Title IV (Building Regulations) , of Ordinance No.
4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,
Washington, ” which will read as follows :
Temporary Use, as defined in section •4-31-19 .E.
SECTION III . Subsection 5-1-1 .A.2 .b of Chapter 1, Fee
Schedule, of Title V (Finance and Business Regulations) , of
Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the
City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows :
5-1-1.A.2.b: Temporary Permit $100 . 00 .
SECTION IV. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its
passage, approval, and thirty days after its publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of ,
1995 .
Marilyn J. Petersen, City Clerk
6
ORDINANCE NO. '+ '
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this ;day of
1995.
Earl Clymer, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
ORD.448:5/10/95:as .
7
July 10, 1995 ,,r,:Renton City Council Minutes Page 274
Audience comment was invited.
Versie Vaupel, P.O. Box 755, Renton, 98057, said the increase in maximum
density for the R-8 zone from 8.0 to 9.7 units per acre should not apply to
infill lots, which would impact already established neighborhoods, but instead
should apply only to new development. She suggested that if one-half acre
lots are to be restricted to four units or less, this specification be clearly put
forth in the ordinance language.
There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY NELSON,
SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
CARRIED. (Mr. Kattermann noted that this subject matter will remain in
Planning & Development Committee for development of the ordinance.)
Building: Temporary Use This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published
Permit Ordinance in accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Clymer opened the public
hearing to consider revisions to Renton City Code Section 4-31-19.E regarding
temporary use permits, and to Section 5-1-1.A revising the temporary use
permit application fee.
Jana Huerter, Land Use Review Supervisor, explained that temporary use
permits are meant for uses that are short-term in nature. Staff has proposed
that these permits be reviewed and decided administratively rather than go
before the Hearing Examiner for a public hearing and subsequent approval or
disapproval. This change is proposed to streamline the process and the timing
of permit approval.
Responding to Councilman Tanner, Ms. Huerter said the process would allow
for administrative permit extensions of up to one year for temporary sales or
rental offices in subdivisions, multi-family or non-residential projects, or
other longer-term uses.
Audience comment was invited.
Bob Sterbank, 1325 Fourth Ave., Suite 1500, Seattle, 98101, requested that
Council postpone first reading of the temporary use permit ordinance until all
Councilmembers are present. He explained several concerns regarding the
proposed changes, primarily that they might provide a special permit
procedure that would be used by Bryant Motors. If this is not Council's
intent, he asked that it amend paragraph E on page 2 of the ordinance to
restrict temporary parking lots and areas to only those temporary uses
identified in previous sections A through D. He further suggested adding a
paragraph that would exclude authorization of the expansion of existing
nonconforming uses.
Continuing, Mr. Sterbank urged Council to consider the potential impacts on
residential areas if temporary use permits are authorized for 180 days and
later extended for one year. He was concerned that although the ordinance
language allows provision of notice to interested parties, it does not require
this be given. Noting that the ordinance would permit modification of
development standards, he questioned which standards could be modified and
to what extent. He said the impacts of waiving application requirements
cannot yet be known, emphasizing that in any case, SEPA compliance
requirements must not be waived. Mr. Sterbank concluded that although
temporary uses such as Christmas tree lot sales would be appropriate for
administrative approval, other more long-term uses (e.g., occupancy of
temporary structures) should continue to go before the Hearing Examiner.
July 10, 1995 Renton City Council Minutes ,.,s Page 275
Versie Vaupel, PO Box 755, Renton, 98057, said the public should not have to
absorb the cost of staff time relating to permits for non-profit groups and
organizations, especially those that are religious in nature. She felt that the
proposed public notification to only adjacent property owners was too limited
and should be expanded to within 300 feet of the proposed use. She
concurred with Mr. Sterbank's suggestion that the ordinance distinguish
between smaller-scale temporary uses and larger ones, with the fee reduction
from $1,000 to $100 not applying to the larger uses.
Sandy Webb, 430 Mill Ave. S., Renton, 98055, noted his agreement with the
July 6, 1995 letter to Council from Mr. Sterbank regarding SEPA threshold
and environmental determinations. Saying that the City's concurrent
scheduling of appeal and comment periods for environmental decisions negates
the purpose of the SEPA process, Mr. Webb found the Environmental Review
Committee's (ERC) recent correspondence to Council on this issue troubling.
He reiterated his earlier suggestion that the City allow for one appeal after the
final wording of an ordinance is available rather than when it is still in draft
form. Further, several related or similar ordinances could be packaged
•
together with only one appeal fee required.
King Parker, 4601 NE 24th St., Renton, 98056, urged Council to consider the
needs and interests of the entire community. He supported the proposed
temporary use permitting process and said it would enhance flexibility and
streamline the process while making it more sensitive to the needs of residents
and businesses.
Denny Dochnahl, 2006 Redmond Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, agreed that the
temporary use permit process should be streamlined as it seemed to him that
many temporary uses do not get permits. He felt that the changes would help
in situations where the normal zoning would not allow a certain desired use.
Carl Magnuson, 3400 E. Valley Rd., Renton, 98057, owner of South End Auto
Wrecking, said the proposed changes to the temporary use permit process were
positive and made good business sense.
Wayne Jones, PO Box 146, Renton, 98055, said King County has an ordinance
for temporary uses similar to that being discussed this evening. Noting, for
example, that municipal jobs awarded via a formal bidding process often must
begin work within 30 days, he supported the proposed changes as a way to
secure quick permit approval.
There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY SCHLITZER,
SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
CARRIED.
Councilman Tanner indicated he would support a temporary use permit
ordinance for genuine temporary uses if the legislation were so written that it
could not be subverted and applied to other than temporary uses.
Responding to Councilman Edwards, Ms. Huerter said the proposed ordinance
allows for an appeal to be filed with the Hearing Examiner within ten days of
permit approval or disapproval. Noting it might not be apparent that a permit
has been granted in the initial ten-day period, Mr. Edwards asked if an
aggrieved party would have any recourse after ten days. Lawrence J. Warren,
City Attorney, said language could be added to the ordinance that would allow
the City to revoke a permit for cause (for example, should it prove to be a
nuisance).
July 10, 1995 Renton City Council Minutes Page 276
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS,
COUNCIL POSTPONE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE UNTIL
7/17/95 TO ALLOW FOR INCLUSION OF LANGUAGE REGARDING
REVOCATION OF A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT FOR CAUSE.
CARRIED.
AUDIENCE COMMENT Charles Doyle, 501 S. 5th St., Renton, 98055, declared a potential for
Citizen Comment: Doyle - accidents at the Shattuck St. tunnel location, where two-way traffic is
Shattuck St Tunnel restricted to a one-lane tunnel. Saying he has witnessed several driver
altercations at this location, Mr. Doyle urged Council to address this issue by
either widening the tunnel to two lanes or by posting signs encouraging
caution and courtesy.
Citizen Comment: Webb - Sandy Webb, 430 Mill Ave. S., Renton, 98055, clarified that no one voicing
Various Issues concerns earlier this evening regarding the proposed changes to the temporary
use permit process opposes such permits. On another subject, Mr. Webb
commented on the City's declaration of budget woes and the need for long-
term service cuts, noting it plans to spend $11,000 to survey residents on
which cuts should be made. He felt that this survey should have preceded
various City expenditures relating to the golf course, the recent downtown
property purchase and other programs. Mr. Webb also said people should be
free to distribute literature that is deemed to be in the public interest in the
City's parks, and further suggested that the City hold a candidates forum at
the Senior Center for the benefit of non-incumbent candidates who are
prohibited from campaigning on the premises of the Senior Center and Houser
Terrace.
Citizen Comment: Jim Moncrief, 248 Garden Ave. N., Renton, 98055, said as he had predicted,
Moncrief - City Finances the City's expenditures are growing faster than its revenues. He urged
Council to determine what projects can be put on hold, saying some may be
unnecessary, and cautioned against having to raise utility rates for Renton
residents in the event of a water shortage, given that the City has agreed to
sell water to other jurisdictions in emergency situations. Mr. Moncrief
concluded that local newspapers are failing in their duty to watchdog
government operations.
Citizen Comment: Bob Sterbank, 1325 Fourth Ave., Suite 1500, Seattle, 98101, reiterated that the
Sterbank - Temporary Use City should adopt a temporary use permit ordinance that is clean and not
Permit Ordinance vague, and that excludes parking for existing uses. He said the City could
prevent some appeals of permits by eliminating potential problems in the
drafting of the ordinance's language, and agreed with Mrs. Vaupel that
adequate notification of temporary use permit applications should be given to
properties within 300 feet of the proposed use. Regarding the process of ERC
SEPA determination and Council consideration of proposed legislation, Mr.
Sterbank suggested that the City direct comment and appeal periods to run
separately. This would allow the ERC or Council to take public comment and
perhaps modify the legislation in response prior to the commencement of the
appeal period.
Citizen Comment: Richter Marjorie Richter, 300 Meadow Ave. N., Renton, 98055, cited problems with
- N 3rd St Sewer Project the construction of the N. 3rd St. sewer project, including that the contractor
has repeatedly started work as early as 6:00 a.m. in violation of explicit City
rules prohibiting construction noise until 7:00. Thanking various City staff
members for their efforts to resolve these problems, Mrs. Richter suggested
that residents in the area might be willing to authorize construction until 6:00
p.m. if they could be assured this would expedite completion of the project.
'Na, LAW OFFICES OF `✓
HELSELL, FETTERMAN, MARTIN, TODD & HOKANSON
1500 PUGET SOUND PLAZA
1325 FOURTH AVENUE
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101-2509
P.O. BOX 21846
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98111-3846
12061 292-1144
FAX (206) 340-0902 CITY OF RENTON
BOB C. STERBANK JUL 0 7 1995
July 6, 1995 REutiVED
L:ITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Sent via FAX to 235-2513
Marilyn Peterson, Clerk
Renton City Council
200 Mill Avenue S.
Renton,Washington 98055
Re: Response to Renton Environmental Review Committee letter dated June 16,
1995
Dear Ms. Peterson:
Please circulate copies of the enclosed letter to each individual Councilmember in advance of
the July 10, 1995, Committee of the Whole meeting, so that they will have an opportunity to review it
prior to the meeting. Please also place it on the agenda for the July 10 City Council meeting. Thank
you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
HELSELL,FETTERMAN,MARTIN,
TODD&HOKANSON
Bob C. Sterbank
BCS:rp
enc
cc: Versie and Warren Vaupel
Marjorie Richter
NRKNDF
G:\LAND USE\DATA\NRKNDFIERCLTR.ENC
rr+ LAW OFFICES OF `✓
HELSELL, FETTERMAN, MARTIN, TODD & HOKANSON
1500 PUGET SOUND PLAZA
1325 FOURTH AVENUE
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101-2509
P.O. BOX 21846
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 9 8111-3 84 6
(2061 292-1144
FAX (206) 340-0902
BOB C. STERBANK
July 6, 1995
City Councilmembers
Renton City Council
200 Mill Avenue S.
Renton, Washington 98055
Re: Appeal and Comment Periods for SEPA Threshold Environmental
Determinations
Dear Councilmembers:
We have received a copy of the June 16, 1995, letter to you from the Renton
Environmental Review Committee, which letter addresses Renton's SEPA process and its
application to two SEPA appeals recently filed by our clients, the Vaupels, Marjorie
Richter, and the North Renton-Kennydale Neighborhood Defense Fund ("NRKNDF").
Because we are aware that the letter has precipitated a discussion among the Council
Committee of the Whole about Renton's SEPA appeal and comment periods generally, we
write to respond to the ERC's June 16 letter.
The June 16 letter appears to have two main points: (1) the ERC believes that
"policy" and "procedural" ordinances have"little or no environmental consequences"; and
(2)the ERC dislikes a SEPA process that allows citizen comments to result in changes to
a proposed ordinance to avoid environmental impacts. Both of these points are unfounded
and, indeed, reflect a fundamental disagreement by the ERC with the mandate for SEPA
established under state law.
First, the SEPA Rules adopted by the Washington Department of Ecology
expressly contemplate that "policy" and "procedural" ordinances can in fact have
significant, adverse environmental impacts, even when they are general in nature. As the
SEPA Handbook published by the Department of Ecology explains:
The environmental review conducted nonproject actions, such as
comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances, is probably the most important
review which can be done under SEPA. This is the point where decisions
w.r
City Councilmembers
June 6, 1995
page 2
are made on the types of activities which will be allowed in particular areas.
It is important to consider the environmental impacts when making these
decisions.
When reviewing nonproject actions, the responsible official must evaluate
the impacts of the future activities which will be allowed in a particular
area. This review should include potential impacts to the physical setting,
utilities, human health, etc. which could be associated with future
development.
SEPA Handbook(1993 ed.) at F-2 (emphasis added).
Therefore, the SEPA Rules expressly define "an action" that is subject to SEPA,
and that may have a significant, adverse environmental impact, as including:
(b) New or revised agency rules, regulations, plans, policies, or
procedures; and
(c) Legislative proposals.
(2) Actions fall within one of two categories:
***
(b) Non project actions. Non-project actions involve decisions on
policies, plans, or programs.
(i) The adoption of amendment of legislation, ordinances, rules, or
regulations that contain standards controlling use or modification of the
environment;
(ii) The adoption or amendment of comprehensive land use plans or
zoning ordinances.
WAC 197-11-704(1)(b) and (c), (2)(b)(i) and (ii) (emphasis added).' And, because
ordinances (whether"policy" or "procedural") can have adverse impacts, SEPA review is
See also WAC 197-11-060(4)(d):
A proposal's effects include direct and indirect impacts caused by the proposal. Impacts
include those effects resulting from growth caused by a proposal,as well as the
likelihood that the present proposal will serve as a precedent for future actions. For
City Councilmembers
June 6, 1995
page 3
required for all such proposed "actions," which include the City of Renton's recently
proposed Master Use Permit Ordinance and Temporary Use Permit Ordinance. WAC
197-11-784 ("proposal" means proposed action); WAC 197-11-310(1) (SEPA threshold
determination required for any proposal meeting definition of action that is not
categorically exempt).
Thus, the SEPA process has been explicitly mandated to address exactly the types
of ordinances under consideration by the City of Renton. The ERC, which is charged by
law with application of the SEPA Rules, may disagree with this mandate, but the City is
not legally entitled to ignore it.
The ERC's second point, that substantive modification of a proposed ordinance or
extension of a SEPA appeal period is inappropriate because it will allegedly "curtail public
debate" in front of the City Council, is also based on a fundamental misunderstanding of
the SEPA process. When a citizen is dissatisfied with a threshold environmental
determination issued by the ERC for a City of Renton proposal, he or she has two choices.
The citizen can approach the Renton City Council, the City's decision-making body that
takes"action" subject to SEPA, and request the Council change the proposal by amending
its language or deleting certain portions. SEPA expressly permits the Council (as the
"applicant") to modify its proposal in response to comments to avoid environmental
impacts:
Agencies may clarify or change features of their own proposal, and may
specify mitigation measures in their DNSs, as a result of comments by
other agencies or the public or as a result of additional agency planning.
WAC 197-11-350(5) (emphasis added).
Alternatively, a citizen can comment on the threshold determination to the ERC
(and request addition of mitigating conditions or preparation of an EIS) if a comment
period is available, or appeal the threshold determination to the Hearing Examiner. If the
citizen appears before the Renton City Council, his or her comments will be a matter of
public record, as will any discussion before the Council itself. Likewise, if the citizen
approaches the ERC, his or her written comments will also be part of the public record,
and if the ERC takes any action (such as modifying or reversing the threshold
determination), the ERC's action will be subject to comment and/or appeal. Ultimately,
example,adoption of a zoning ordinance will encourage or tend to cause particular types
of projects or extension of sewer lines would tend to encourage development in
previously unsewered areas.
(Emphasis added).
City Councilmembers
June 6, 1995
page 4
the ERC's determination will come before the Council, along with the substantive
proposal itself, and the Council's decision whether to adopt the proposal consistent with
the ERC's recommendation, or take some other action (which may require yet further
environmental review by the ERC) will also be part of the public process, and subject to
public debate. In either case, opportunity for public debate is provided and, ultimately, for
Council consideration of the results of such debate.
Here, our clients have exercised both of these options. They have commented
directly to the City Council and requested the Council change its proposal. See letter
dated May 8, 1995, from Bob C. Sterbank to Renton City Councilmembers (commenting
on proposed Master Site Plan Ordinance and requesting changes to proposed ordinance
language); letter dated June 12, 1995, from Bob C. Sterbank to Lawrence J. Warren
(requesting amendments to proposed Temporary Use Permit Ordinance; letter cc'd to
Councilmembers). These written comments were placed on the agenda for Council
meetings, read during the Council meetings, and were the subject of discussion at those
meetings by our clients and the Council. Our clients also filed appeals of the DNSs issued
for both proposed ordinances. After they appealed the Master Site Plan Ordinance, the
ERC issued a revised MDNS, which contained conditions which addressed some of our
clients' concerns. As a result, they will now be withdrawing their SEPA appeal of that
proposed ordinance.
The point of all of this is that, contrary to the ERC's letter, this process has
fostered public debate, not curtailed it. The fact that the City Council requested that the
ERC extend the appeal period so that this debate could occur is laudable; rather than
having the process become bogged down in a time-consuming, expensive, quasi-judicial
process before the Hearing Examiner, the Council requested that the ERC provide the
Councilmembers' constituents sufficient time to voice their concerns. Indeed, in one
instance, the ERC itself modified its SEPA determination to address some of those
concerns, and the ERC's actions resolved a SEPA appeal! There is no shortage of public
debate -- before the Council and otherwise --in the City's SEPA process.
The only defects (if any exist) in the SEPA process are that the Council apparently
does not exercise authority to extend (or suspend) the deadline for appealing a SEPA
determination while it considers whether to modify a proposal, but relies on the ERC to
do so. At the same time, the ERC has recently dispensed with its standard practice of
providing a fifteen-day comment period on a DNS prior to commencement of the appeal
period and has instead run the comment and appeal periods concurrently, forcing a party
to appeal rather than comment and wait to see if the comment concern is resolved before
the appeal deadline. If the Council is to take any action on this matter, it should adopt an
ordinance that: (1) allows the Council to extend the SEPA appeal period for City
proposals on the Council's own motion, and (2) requires a fifteen day comment period on
City Councilmembers
June 6, 1995
page 5
every Determination of Nonsignificance prior to commencement of the appeal period.
Such a course would help reduce appeal burdens on all parties, including the City, and
better enable the City to be responsive to its citizens' concerns while still achieving the
City's goals in enacting particular ordinances.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments. I plan to attend the
Committee of the Whole meeting scheduled for Monday, July 10, 1995, to make a short
presentation and to answer any questions Councilmembers might have.
Sincerely,
HELSELL,FETTERMAN,MARTIN,
TODD&HOKANSON
. K. �.
Bob C. Sterbank
BCS:rp
cc: North Renton/Kennydale Neighborhood Defense Fund
Versie and Warren Vaupel
Marjorie Richter
G:\LAND USE\DATA\NRKNDF\LTR-RE.ERC
,r✓
o cn a�, o '�I�'`� w
v ? cn
c. a —I cc) O 1 a CD
Cl) a m � o —.. cnw CD
a o co cD cD = cn D-p cn
CD
c ' o c s-v -° = s
a w CDs.
� �� m � mw
a 3 a a (l) (D . � ° � CD
yi%.... uai > > °ca � nmm °mom
O•• � G'F 0 N � m °� o � 5mfD 'ri
"Pt
y �i�.O� 0 j 0 FITm ow0
�iN m 0 cr
i cis' w �' n• a -. � �`� m �_ o m �-
-. .w c 0
N't r. . ,z.r o w m � o � � �� oci � to rn
'•9 a�`a'-ate 0 rt, a 3 cn �' w c ' ° `� r ni C
•P,-+ S;:•' y CD w in
w w v, 6p y w r o
�• ?�► s (n b s0 CD cwn w �' � x' m
,N.. _�� m cD D- (� o Cr a w w ri N. o
�M���� a w � -� m a� ? n aim o n
-«
o I,. = w a < 7`< - o > TI
a ct
O i ' rn cn (� x ai lD 3 to
j w - � rD o rD w � o a� aD) m Z a co
r
cn �. �? n o H. m., �• o w m ° a : D m m. —
cn - °: s2 cn 5 -o = •
� m w co n
(� (� , i-� C co
C M CO cQ = CD cr) a CJ
w w m snn� _ aw N —
� m �� a o_ w _Tj � c 0
w C k `< (- ---—6 p > CD 7 a cn
?c p � `< � C7c— 13 o � a' Z
co m� wo6om
a a r, " � Z c0 � �mN•
\ `\ CD cn y _. o•.<•
Q " o
pa
cn c `� `� w
2 \ 3 CT�Zp ° N ' _ (D o
o
t tJl
,
S •.91m g 1i3E
�t 3
`1 7�SF C 'l''-,..
9:1.fl! !i
IL _ .c 1, §6
cos
,i E.•2. ,. , 4-0•-•`
S -
Nor 7
a,i sr""w -, -' r ry'" 4a" - r s. ''• `.' °U- "+4 'u i } ' •.. '
-,, -, }3^¢ °4 . fi \ 'P ..` Tet 11k -'T.,3+,,hF .?4_'^a 5$,'�. `x,E 3.- .. w. 'PL151..e,70,,, x. °Tt[."�' -TMz'h•.'?t� r TP'-,'.•r *s..-' '':�'.. ":'. . e _» .,. 'E,u; .t_.s v -J-S,.t_ ;'..D r .#'r. '. ,_�,w.viu*.
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 10th day of
July, 1995, at 7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the
second floor Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue
South, Renton, 98055, to consider the following:
Revisions to Renton City Code Section 4-31-19.E regarding temporary use permits,
and to Section 5-1-1.A revising the temporary use permit application fee.
All interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing and present written or oral
comments regarding the proposal. Call 235-2501 for additional information.
7, a
40,
Marilyn J. '•den, CMC
City Clerk
Published: Valley Daily News
June 3Q 1995
Account No. 50640
June 19s1995 :enton City Council Minutes Now' Page 254
Planning & Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Stredicke presented a report
Committee recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the
Planning: Wetland proposed amendment to the Wetlands Delineation Ordinance, Section 4-32-
Delineation Manual 3.C.1, to reference the 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual and to delete the
Reference Change reference to the 1989 manual. The Committee further recommended that the
ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY
STREDICKE, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL CONCUR
IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See later this page for
ordinance.)
Noting that currently, King County's county-wide policies require
jurisdictions to use the 1989 manual, Councilman Edwards requested that the
Administration send a letter to the Growth Management Planning Council
asking that the reference change to the 1987 manual be accommodated.
Building: Temporary Use Planning and Development Committee Chair Stredicke presented a report
Permit Process recommending that a public hearing be scheduled for July 10, 1995 regarding
the proposed revisions to City Code Section 4-31-19.E regarding temporary
uses, and to Section 5-1-1.A, revising the application fee. MOVED BY
STREDICKE, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL CONCUR
IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Building: Planning and Development Committee Chair Stredicke presented a report
Minimum/Maximum recommending that a public hearing be scheduled for July 10, 1995, to review
Densities in Residential amendments to minimum and maximum densities in the residential zones.
Zones MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR
IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Public Safety Committee Public Safety Committee Chair Tanner presented a report recommending
Fire: Pumper Truck concurrence in the purchase of one fire department pumper truck with the
Purchase and Purchase option to purchase a second fire department pumper truck, subject to approval
Option by the Finance Committee. MOVED BY TANNER, SECONDED BY
STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.
CARRIED.
ORDINANCES AND The following resolutions were presented for reading and adoption:
RESOLUTIONS
Resolution #3131 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an
Parks: Black River interlocal cooperative agreement with the State of Washington entitled "WWRP
Riparian Forest Project Agreement, Habitat Conservation Account, Black River Riparian
Acquisition, IAC Grant Forest" to accept $228,350 in grant funds. MOVED BY NELSON,
Funds SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE
RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
Resolution #3132 A resolution was read authorizing application to the Interagency Committee
Parks: Springbrook Trail for Outdoor Recreation for $126,720 in funding assistance and identifying the
IAC Grant Funds source of matching funds for an outdoor recreation project as provided by the
Marine Recreation Land Act (Springbrook Trail). MOVED BY NELSON,
SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE
RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
The following ordinance was presented for first reading and referred to the
Council meeting of 6/26/95 for second and final reading:
Planning: Wetland An ordinance was read amending Subsection 4-32-3.C.1 of Chapter 32,
Delineation Manual Wetlands Management, of Title IV (Building Regulations) of City Code by
Reference Change adopting the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
APPROVED BY
CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Date 4',fq--/�
COMMITTEE REPORT
JUNE 19, 1995
•
REVISION TO SECTION 4-31-19.E OF CITY CODE REGARDING
TEMPORARY USE AND TO SECTION 5-1-1 .A REVISING THE APPLICATION
FEE
(Referred February 13, 1995)
The Planning and Development Committee recommends that a public
hearing regarding this proposed revision be scheduled for July 10, 1995.
Richard Stredicke, Chair
4411 (AINeat
Kathy :siker-Wheeler, Vice-Chair
andy Corman, Member
cc: Gregg Zimmerman
Jim Hanson
Jana Huerter
Mike Kattermann
June 1,2, 1995 Winton City Council Minutes Page 240
Rezone: Andrew Deak Hearing Examiner recommended rezone of the Andrew Deak Medical Clinic
Medical Clinic Building, Building, 4509 Talbot Rd. S., from Public Use (P-1) to Commercial Office
4509 Talbot Rd S (CO), File No. LUA-95-031. Council concur. (See page 243 for ordinance.)
Rezone: Shegrud Home Hearing Examiner recommended rezone of the Shegrud Home Site, 4518
Site, 4518 Talbot Rd S Talbot Rd. S., from Public Use (P-1) to Commercial Office (CO), File No.
LUA-95-031. Council concur. (See page 243 for ordinance.)
Rezone: Swanson Law Hearing Examiner recommended rezone of the Swanson Law Office Building,
Office Building, 4512 4512 Talbot Rd. S., from Public Use (P-1) to Commercial Office (CO), File
Talbot Rd S No. LUA-95-031. Council concur. (See page 243 for ordinance.)
Planning: Publicly-Owned Planning and Technical Services Division submitted recommendation that
Property Rezones, Various rezones of 37 publicly-owned properties be processed through the regular
Hearing Examiner process rather than be heard by the City Council. Council
concur.
CAG: 95-, Rolling Hills Water Utility Division submitted proposed consultant agreement with RH2
Reservoir and Pump Engineering in the amount of $299,889.00 for engineering services for the
Station, RH2 Engineering Rolling Hills,Reservoir and Pump Station project. Refer to Utilities
Committee.
Utility: Emergency Sale of Water Utility Division requested approval of a revised agreement for the
Water to Kent, CAG-95- emergency sale of water to the City of Kent. Refer to Utilities Committee.
MOVED BY SCHLITZER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from Rick Hlavka, 402 S. Tobin St., Renton, 98055,
Citizen Comment: Hlavka regarding continued safety problems relating to the operation of Puget Sound
- Puget Sound Helicopters Helicopters at Renton Municipal Airport. MOVED BY EDWARDS,
SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION) COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
Citizen Comment: Correspondence was read from Bob Sterbank, Helsell Fetterman et al, 1325
• Sterbank - Temporary Use Fourth Ave., Seattle, 98101, (representing the Vaupels, Richters and the North
Permit Changes Renton/Kennydale Neighborhood Defense Fund) regarding the proposed
temporary use permit ordinance.
Citizen Comment: Stoloff Correspondence was read from Judith Stoloff, 2235 Fairview E. Slip #6,
- Zero Lot Line Seattle, 98102, supporting zero lot line provisions in residential zones.
Provisions MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS
CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
OLD BUSINESS Council President Schlitzer presented a Committee of the Whole report
Committee of the Whole regarding the Council process for handling land use appeals. The Committee
Council: Land Use Appeal expressed a desire to strike a balance between ensuring that the public has an
Process appropriate method of airing their opinions and concerns in an appeal process
while assuring that the process itself is not violated by comments received by
the Council at inappropriate times.
1. The Committee recommended that land use appeals continue to be
referred to the Planning and Development Committee. The Chair of the
Committee, either alone or through the Committee, will determine
whether to hear the appeal or refer it to the Committee of the Whole.
Such determination will be based on consideration by the Chair and/or
SENT BY:SEATTLE ; 6-12-95 ; 2:30PM ; HELSELL, FETTERMAN- 206 235 2513;+P 2/ 4
r ' ;`„ LAW OFFICES OF C(Q "Q" — 69"qr9rt9tirE
HELSELL, FETTERMAN, MARTIN, TODD & HOKANSON 4.- /)-
ISOO PUGET SOUND PLAZA
i325 FOURTH AVENUE
SFATTLE, WASHINGTON G8101-2509
P.O. BOX 21646
SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 9 8111-3 8 4 6
1204H 292-1144
FAX Rots) 340.0902
BOB C. STERBANK
June 12, 1995
= RENTON
Sent via FAX to 235-2513
19
Marilyn Peterson
Renton City Clerk
CLERKS OFFICE
City of Renton
200 Mill Avenue South
Renton, Washington 98055
Re: Proposed Temporary Use Permit Ordinance
Dear Ms. Peterson:
Please find enclosed a copy of our letter of this date to City Attorney Lawrence J.
Warren, which is "cc'd" to the Councilmembers. We would appreciate it if you would
arrange for copies to be delivered to Councilmembers in their packets for tonight's City
Council meeting.
Thank you for your assistance in the above.
Sincerely,
HELSELL,FETTERMAN,MARTIN,
TODD&HOKANSON
,(33-6 C
Bob C. Sterbank
BCS:rp XR. ,/h.•c-.cam,✓
enc
cc: Lawrence J. Warren w/enc
•Vaupels w/enc
Richters w/enc
NRKNDF wienc
G:\LAND_USE\DATAW kKNDF\TEMP-USE.ENC
y, LAW OFFICES OF
y
HELSELL, FETTERMAN, MARTIN, TODD & HOKANSON
1500 PUGET SOUND PLAZA
1325 FOURTH AVENUE
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101-2509
P.O. BOX 21846
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98111-3846
12061 292-1144
FAX (206) 340-0902
BOB C. STERBANK
June 12, 1995
Sent via FAX to 255-5474
Lawrence J. Warren
Warren, Kellogg, Barber, Dean& Fontes, P.S
P.O. Box 626
100 South Second Street
Renton, Washington 98057
Re: Proposed Temporary Use Permit Ordinance
Dear Mr. Warren:
As I mentioned during our telephone conversation on Friday, June 9, 1995, our
clients (the Vaupels, Richters, and the North Renton-Kennydale Neighborhood Defense
Fund) are concerned that City staff are quietly proposing new ordinances that would be
utilized in the future by Bryant Motors to authorize uses/activities currently prohibited by
the Renton City Code. This concern is, in part, what motivated their appeal of the DNS
for the Master Site Plan Ordinance. It also forms part of their concern over the new,
proposed Temporary Use Permit Ordinance.
In our conversation, you stated that the City has no intention of creating loopholes
in its Code for future exploitation by Bryant Motors. If that is the case, the City should
amend the language of the proposed Temporary Use Permit Ordinance to eliminate the
substantial loopholes currently present. We request the following provisions, with
additions shown by underscoring:
4-31-19.E. Temporary Use.
1. Purpose.
A Temporary Use Permit allows a use or structure on a short-term
basis. Such uses or structures may be allowed subject to modified
development standards which would not be appropriate for permanent uses
in the zoning designation. Temporary Use Permits are not intended to (and
shall not be granted to) authorize the expansion of existing nonconforming
uses, nor permit existing, legally established, non-transient commercial uses
to initiate or maintain uses or activities otherwise not permitted by the
applicable Comprehensive Plan and zoning designation.
Lawrence J. Warren
June 12, 1995
page 2
2. Permitted Temporary Uses.
***
e. Temporary parking lots/areas, but only for uses stated in
Sections 2.a through 2.d above.
There are many other problems with the ordinance as drafted; we have addressed
only the most substantial of them here.' In light of your statement that the City is not
attempting to create a new type of permit approval for Bryant Motors or sneak it past the
Council, we assume that these loopholes are simply the result of sloppy draftsmanship.
Nevertheless, they pose a potential problem, and our clients are sufficiently concerned that
they will appeal the DNS granted for the Temporary Use Permit Ordinance, and take other
steps necessary to challenge it, if the ordinance is not modified to make clear its
inapplicability to businesses such as Bryant Motors. We would appreciate it if you would
discuss the proposed changes described above with City Council at its meeting tonight,
June 12, 1995, to avoid the necessity for yet another appeal. We appreciate your
cooperation and assistance in this regard.
Sincerely,
HELSELL, FETTERMAN, MARTIN,
TODD&HOKANSON
Y
Bob C. Sterbank
BCS:rp
cc: Vaupels
Richters
NRKNDF
Renton Councilmembers
G:\LAND USEIDATA\NRKNDFITEMP-USE.ORD
These include problems of vagueness(no explanation of what development standards may be
modified for a temporary use, and no specification of what"adequate parking"for a temporary use is);
inconsistency(4-31-19.E.2.a states permit term is 180 days; .7.a and.b reference 90 days and one year,
respectively),and lack of public notice(.6.a allows but does not require provision of public notice to
adjacent property owners,even while 4-31-19.E.4 states that an aggrieved party may appeal within ten
days of the permit even though no notice of permit approval is required).
SENT BY:SEATTLE ; 6-12-95 ; 2:30PM ; HELSELL, FETTERMAN-, 206 235 2513;# 1/ 4
•
Nome
LAW OFFICES
R IC HAKIO 5. WHITE HELSELL, FETTERMAN. MARTIN, TODD Be HOKANSON PATRICIA E.ANO ER ON
GAr;v I'.LINDEN 1500 PUGET SOUND PLAZA r'OLI Y K.RECKER
.IOHN E.[DEFIED CO!s I W.LAMI•'t'1..1,1
PHILLIP D•NOBLE 1325 FOURTH AVENUE 0. JEFFRfV CARL
DAVID F.JURCA DAVID T.CLIIY1r)N
LI L.t1 WHITSON NCOTT E.COLLINS
SEATTLE.WASHINGTON 96101-Z509
JOHN G.EJI.GCMAHN JENNIFER:i.UIVINF
H,SSOH LANDSMAN JACKI L.KIRKLIN
DANFERU w HENKE P.O. BOX z1A46 JONAIIIAN P. MEIff
KAREN J.VANDFlLAAN TON MONTGOMERV
PAULINE v.SMETKA SEATTLE, WASNINGTON 981 1 1-384S LAURA F PASIK
DAVID GROG:
SUSAN L.PETER'SON
LIPI11:E H.BENSON (2o6) 292.11d4 FRIK D.PRICE
KAGAN L. POWERS STEVLN J.9AMARIO
B RADLEY n,9AG SH AW GRADLEY S.CHAMPION
FAX(206)3.40.0902 p LnARf)F.SP DONE
ANDnFW J.KINSTLER
FREDRIcH D. HUEBNER ,,,, WILLIAM R.SPURR
MARK F.RISING ROR C.STERBANK
NEVIN L.'n'l OOK BELLEVUE OFFICE
MARK C.DEAN of r:r1UNI:I:L
LLFWELYN G.PRITC HARD aa33 SKYLINE TOWER LINDA J.COCHRAN
C. JAMt7 FRUSH IQeOC N.L.4TH STREET RUra,G 1 OF C:KFCI
;TERRY E.THONN CRAIG R.DDDEL
ROHER f 17,OfLLAT LY BELLEVUE.WASHINGTON 98004-5641 PE I CH J.EGLICr:
DIRK A.BAKTRALM 12061 292.1144 WILLIAM A. HLL.LLL
DEBORAH I„MARTIN HU SELL V. HOKANSON
WATSON B.BLAIN THOMAS W. HLIBER
LINDA 0,WALTON IIAROLD n.n00KS
r.FORGE A.NICOUO III PLEASE REPLY To SEATTLE OFFICE I MN B.SOUIRES
f IIIN ADMINISTRATOR LAND USE ANALYST
.IACOUELINE K BOETTCHER JANE S.KIKER
RETIRED
PAUL FETTERMANFAX COMMUNICATION COVER SHEET
TI-I t�MAS`ODDD
TO: Renton City Council, c/o City Clerk
ADDRESSEE'S FIRM NAME:
FAX PHONE NUMBER: 235-2513
OFFICE PHONE NUMBER:
CTTY: Renton _ STATE: WA
SENDER: Bob C. Sterbank
TOTAL PAGES SENT: 4 (including cover sheet)
TRANSMISSION DATE: June 12, 1995
•
HFMTH FILE NAME: Vaupel FILE NO. : 94-0293
In case of any difficulty in reception, please call 206-292-1144 as
soon as possible and notify the Fax Operator.
CONTENTS: Letter to Clerk Marilyn Peterson and letter to City
Attorney Warren
This message is Intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is transmitted and may contain
information that is privileged, confidential and R.IOIHpt from disclo.Ilrn under applicable laws, if the reader of
this communication is not the 1ftr:nded recipient., you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying or Ulin communication in Strictly prohibilotl. If you have received this communication in error.', please
notify us immediately by telephone and rl::turn the oriainai communication to Vs aL the address above via the U.B.
Postal Servit:“. We will reimburse you for the moiling cu5t9. Thank you.
c:wlo UTA NLA.L 1//1rAY.m
June 12, 1995 iorietenton City Council Minutes `,No` Page 238
Citizen Comment: Richter Marjorie Richter, 300 Meadow Ave. N., Renton, 98055, submitted pictures
- Temporary Use Permit, illustrating her concerns with temporary use permits in the City.
Ordinance
Citizen Comment: Vaupel Versie Vaupel, P.O. Box 755, Renton, 98057, stated that the appeal period
- Temporary Use Permit expires tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. on the Determination of Non-Significance
Ordinance (DNS - (DNS) issued by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on the proposed
Environmental changes to temporary use permits. Explaining that the changes would transfer
Determination) approvals of temporary use permits from the Hearing Examiner to staff, Mrs.
Vaupel was concerned that the ordinance as drafted does not set out an appeal
process or provide for specific public notification of temporary use permit
applications. She asked that the appeal period be extended as she felt it was
not appropriate for a DNS to have been issued prior to Council consideration
of the proposed changes.
Responding to Council inquiry, Planning & Technical Services Director Mike
Kattermann explained that the ERC issues a determination on the possible
environmental impacts of ordinances before Council takes final action on their
adoption.
Councilman Tanner said after reviewing the pictures submitted by Mrs.
Richter, it was difficult for him to accept a DNS finding from the ERC on
this matter. He and Councilman Corman supported extending the appeal
period as requested.
Mr. Kattermann replied that only the ERC has the authority to extend the
appeal period, although Council can certainly ask that it do so.
Councilman Corman noted that under the current process, an ordinance could
be amended or modified by Council after the environmental determination has
been made on the original language. Executive Assistant Covington agreed
that the environmental impact of proposed legislation is analyzed first in order
to facilitate Council information and deliberation on any expected impacts. If
the language in the ordinance is changed significantly, the environmental
analysis is redone.
Councilman Corman suggested that the appeal period on environmental
determinations remain open until after Council holds first reading of
ordinances. Councilman Edwards, however, felt it was important to have
closure on the environmental impact question before proceeding to a public
hearing and the adoption of legislation.
Saying it is specific projects that will create impacts, not this ordinance itself,
Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler suggested that Council hold a policy
workshop on the subject of coordinating State SEPA requirements with the
City's process for adopting ordinances.
For the record, Councilman Stredicke noted that the matter of changes to the
temporary use permit ordinance was discussed in the Planning and
Development Committee on 4/05/95 (having been referred via the Council's
consent agenda of 2/13/95).
Councilman Tanner objected to issuing an environmental determination on an
ordinance that is not in its final form.
MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL
REFER THE SUBJECT OF ORDINANCE CONSIDERATION AND
ADOPTION, PARTICULARLY HOW THIS IS COORDINATED WITH THE
A
June 12, 1995 Benton City Council Minutes ,ft.rr Page 239
ISSUANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION, TO THE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. CARRIED.
MOVED BY SCHLITZER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL
REQUEST THE ADMINISTRATION TO CONVENE A SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) ON 6/13/95
FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXTENDING THE APPEAL PERIOD ON THE
DNS ISSUED ON THE TEMPORARY USE PERMIT ORDINANCE.
CARRIED.
CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the
listing.
CAG: 95-048, Nelson P1 City Clerk reported bid opening on 6/06/95 for CAG-95-048, Nelson Pl.
NW/Rainier Ave N Storm NW/Rainier Ave. N Storm System Replacement project; five bids; engineer's
System Replacement, West estimate $117,094.04; and submitted staff recommendation to award the
Coast Const. contract to the low bidder, West Coast Construction Co., Inc., in the amount
of $125,642.38. Council concur.
Parks: Springbrook Trail Community Services Department requested authorization to submit an
IAC Grant Funds application to the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation for
$126,720.00 in grant funds to acquire two parcels totalling 23.78 acres
(Springbrook Trail). Refer to Community Services Committee.
Planning: Wetland Development Services Division submitted proposed revision to City Code to
Delineation Manual reference the 1987 Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation
Reference Change Manual, instead of the 1989 manual, at the recommendation of the
Department of Ecology. Refer to Planning & Development Committee.
Fire: Pumper Truck Fire Department requested approval of a $250,000 expenditure for the
Purchase and Purchase acquisition of one pumper truck and the option to purchase another. Refer to
Option Public Safety Committee.
Rezone: Seventh-Day Hearing Examiner recommended rezone of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church
Adventist Church, 1031 property, 1031 Monroe Ave. NE, from Public Use (P-1) to Residential (R-8),
Monroe Ave NE File No. LUA-95-031. Council concur. (See page 242 for ordinance.)
Rezone: Traditional Hearing Examiner recommended rezone of the Traditional Family Health Care
Family Health Care, 920 property, 920 N. 1st St., from Public Use (P-1) to Residential (R-10), File No.
N 1st St LUA-95-031. Council concur. (See page 242 for ordinance.)
Rezone: Dentistry Hearing Examiner recommended rezone of the Dentistry Professional Building
Professional Building, 113 property, 113 Pelly Ave. N., from Public Use (P-1) to Residential (R-10), File
Pelly Ave N No. LUA-95-031. Council concur. (See page 243 for ordinance.)
Rezone: Kennydale Hearing Examiner recommended rezone of the Kennydale Memorial Hall
Memorial Hall, 2424 NE property, 2424 NE 27th St., from Public Use (P-1) to Residential (R-8), File
27th St No. LUA-95-031. Council concur. (See page 243 for ordinance.)
Rezone: Calvary Baptist Hearing Examiner recommended rezone of the Calvary Baptist Church
Church, 1032 Edmonds property, 1032 Edmonds Ave. NE, from Public Use (P-1) to Residential
Ave NE Suburban (RM-C), File No. LUA-95-031. Council concur. (See page 243 for
ordinance.)
Rezone: Puget Power Hearing Examiner recommended rezone of the Puget Power Transmission
Transmission Corridor, Corridor, Edmonds Ave. NE/NE Sunset Blvd., from Public Use (P-1) to
Edmonds Ave NE/NE Resource Conseration (RC), File No. LUA-95-031. Council concur. (See
Sunset Blvd page 243 for ordinance.)
February 13. 1995 Renton City Council Minutes Page 57
Citizen Comment Hoshide Lloyd Hoshide, 833 Kirkland Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, commented on staffs
- Comprehensive Plan acknowledgment of three inconsistencies contained in the Comprehensive Plan
Inconsistencies and questioned whether one of these is in the area of NE 10th St. and
Kirkland Ave. NE. Mr. Kattermann offered to research this and provide a
response.
Citizen Comment Bryant Bill Bryant, 1300 Bronson Way N., Renton, 98055, expressed strong
- Bryant Motors displeasure that he had not been allowed to address the subject of his
Comprehensive Plan property's Comprehensive Plan designation tonight before Council took action
Designation to change it from EAC to SF/4, although the proponents of this change had
been allowed to discuss it at some length. Mr. Bryant said considering how
much money has been spent by him and others on this matter, it was not fair
of Council to have denied him a chance to present his side of the issue.
Council President Schlitzer clarified that the matter before Council this
evening was not a question of what the Comprehensive Plan designation on
this property should be. Rather, it was a matter of correcting an
inconsistency between a Council-voted rezone and an accompanying land use
designation, with Council simply following through on a previous action.
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS,
COUNCIL DIRECT THE ADMINISTRATION TO REVIEW THE THREE
INCONSISTENCIES CONTAINED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND
DETERMINE WHETHER THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN
HELD AND/OR DUE PROCESS FOLLOWED FOR THESE BEFORE THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS ADOPTED ON 2/20/95. CARRIED.
Citizen Comment: Vaupel Versie Vaupel, P.O. Box 755, Renton, 98057, commented on changes made to
- Comprehensive Plan the proposed neighborhood conservation suffix from the Draft Supplemental
Neighborhood Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) and the final SEIS. Saying she had
Conservation Suffix tentatively endorsed this concept on the condition that it apply to only
residential uses, she explained that staff has recently suggested language to
allow this suffix in Convenience Commercial or other designations. Mrs.
Vaupel was concerned with this proposed change, emphasizing that the effects
of the proposed suffix on residential areas remain undetermined.
Responding to Council inquiry, Mr. Kattermann advised that the public
review period on the final SEIS expires on February 17, 1995.
CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the
listing. At Council request, items 5.a. and 5.c. were removed for separate
consideration.
Parks: Library Automation Community Services Department requested approval of proposed contract in
System, Ameritech the amount of $260,000 with Ameritech Library Services for hardware and
Library Services software for a Dynix integrated turn-key library automation system. Refer to
Community Services Committee.
Building: Temporary Use Development Services Division requested revision of City Code to permit
Permit Process temporary uses through an administrative process, and to lower the application
fee from $1,000.00 to $100.00. Refer to Planning and Development
Committee.
Legal: Employee/ Legal Department submitted proposed ordinance creating a uniform right to
Volunteer Defense and defense and indemnity for past or present officers, employees or volunteers,
Indemnity Rights in accordance with RCW 4.96.041. Refer to Finance Committee.
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
Al#: ,5'. d,.
Submitting Data: For Agenda of: February 13, 1995
Dept/Div/Board Planning/Building/Public Works
Staff Contact Jana Huerter,Land Use Review Supervisor,x2518 Agenda Status
Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing
Revision to Section 4-31-19E of City Code regarding Temporary Use Correspondence
and to Section 5-1-1.A revising the application fee Ordinance
Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: New Business
Issue Paper Study Sessions
Draft Ordinance Information
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Refer to Planning and Development Committee Legal Dept X
Finance Dept
Other
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required N/A Transfer/Amendment N/A
Amount Budgeted N/A Revenue Generated N/A
Summary of Action:
Presently, there is just one inflexible process for permitting temporary uses. Development Services staff has prepared
a proposed ordinance to address temporary uses through an administrative process. Before drafting the final
ordinance staff would like to present the proposal to the Planning and Development Committee for review and
comments.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that Council approve the proposed ordinance for temporary uses once the draft ordinance is
reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning and Development Committee. Additionally, staff
recommends that Council repeal Section 4-31-19E of the Municipal Code which currently addresses temporary uses
and amend Section 5-1-1.A to reflect an application fee of$100.00 replacing the present fee of$1,000.00; and amend
the Zoning Code to list Temporary Uses under the Secondary Uses section, of each of the following zones: 4-31-4-
1.B.2.f; 4-31-4-2.6.2.g; 4-31-5.B.2.f; 4-31-6.B.2.f; 4-31-7-B.2.e; 4-31-8.B.2.d; 4-31-9-B.5.b; 4-31-10.1.B.2.q; 4-31-
10.2.B.2.p; 4-31-10.3.B.2.o; 4-31-10.4.B.2.1; 4-31-10.5.B.2.g; 4-31-11.1.B.2.h; 4-31-11.2.B.2.j; 4-31-12.B.2.g; 4-31-
13.6.2.d; 4-31-16.6.2.o; and 4-31-25.1.B.2.d.
AGNBILL.DOC
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 24, 1995
To: City Council
Via: Mayor Clymer
From: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator G'
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Staff Contact: Jim Hanson, Director
Development Services Division
Subject: ISSUE PAPER FOR TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
ISSUE:
•
Presently, the City has only one process for permitting temporary uses. This process takes
approximately three months and involves a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. Most types of
temporary permits involve uses such as construction trailers, Christmas tree lots, etc. which do not have
the flexibility or time to go through such a process. They have either been allowed without any review or
have been denied since there was no time to go through the process. To address this issue staff has
drafted an ordinance which would permit temporary uses through an administrative process. The
proposed process will set conditions for approval that will take into consideration public health and safety
issues. The decision to approve or deny the temporary use will take approximately two to three weeks
depending on whether public notice is required.
RECOMMENDATION:
• The Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends that Council approve the proposed
ordinance for temporary uses. In addition, staff recommends that Council repeal Section 4-31-19E
of the Municipal Code which currently addresses temporary uses, amend Section 5-1-1.A, Fee
Schedule, to reflect an application fee of $100.00 replacing the current fee of$1,000.00, and amend
the Zoning Code to list Temporary Uses under the Secondary Uses section, of each of the following
zones: 4-31-4-1.B.2.f; 4-31-4-2.B.2.g; 4-31-5.B.2.f; 4-31-6.B.2.f; 4-31-7.B.2.e; 4-31-8.B.2.d; 4-31-
9.B.5.b; 4-31-10.1.-B.2.q; 4-31-10.2.B.2.p; 4-31-10.3.B.2.o; 4-31-10.4.B.2.I; 4-31-10.5.B.2.g; 4-31-
11.1.B.2.h; 4-31-11.2.B.2.j; 4-31-12.B.2.g; 4-31-13.B.2.d; 4-31-16.B.2.o; and 4-31-25.1.B.2.d. ,The
new language shall allow Temporary Uses as a secondary use subject to the provisions of the
Temporary Use Ordinance, Section 4-31-19E of the Renton Municipal Code.
ISSUMM.DOC
TEMPORARY USE ORDINANCE
Purpose
A Temporary Use Permit is a mechanism by which the City may permit a use to locate within the City on
an interim basis without requiring full compliance with the regulations of the zoning designation.
Authorization
The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee shall, in consultation with appropriate city
departments, review and decide upon each application for a Temporary Use Permit.
Submittal Requirements
Submittal requirements shall be as set forth by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department in the
document entitled: "Submittal requirements for Temporary Use Permit Application".
Decision Criteria
The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee may approve or modify an application for
a Temporary Use Permit if he finds that:
1) The Temporary Use will not be materially detrimental to the public heath, safety, or welfare, nor
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of the Temporary Use, and,
2) Adequate parking, as determined by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee is
provided to serve the Temporary Use and any existing uses on the site, and
3) Hours of operation of the Temporary Use are specified, and
4) The Temporary Use will not cause noise, light, or glare which adversely impacts surrounding uses,
and
5) If applicable, the applicant has obtained the required right-of way use permit.
6) If applicable, the Temporary Permit will initiate permits and inspections from both Fire Prevention
and/or Development Services Division to insure that the temporary use is in compliance with
Fire/Building codes.
General Conditions
A) Each site occupied by a temporary use must provide or have available sufficient parking and
vehicular maneuvering area for customers. Such parking need not comply with Chapter 14, section 4-
14-1 of the Parking and Loading Ordinance.
B) Each site occupied by a temporary use shall be left free of debris, litter, or other evidence of the
temporary use upon completion of removal of the use.
C) The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee may establish such additional
conditions as may be deemed necessary to ensure land use compatibility and to minimize potential
impacts on nearby uses. These include but are not limited to, requiring that notice be given to adjacent
property owners prior to approval, time and frequency of operation, temporary arrangements for parking
Allowed Temporary Uses
a) Retail sales and/or exhibits of arts and crafts.
b) Retail sales such as Christmas trees, agricultural or horticultural products, firewood, fireworks,
seafood, etc.
c) Mobile services such as veterinary services for purposes of giving shots, home owner hazardous
waste recycling events.
d) Group retail sales/events such as swap meets, flea markets, parking lot sales, Saturday Market,
auctions, etc.
f) Occupancy of a temporary structure (existing home, mobile home or travel trailer with adequate water
and sewer/septic service) on the same lot while a residential building is being constructed or while a
damaged residential building is being repaired.
g) Model homes and trailers used for the purpose of real estate sales and/or rental information, located
within the subdivision or residential development to which they pertain.
h) Contractor's office, storage yard, and equipment parking and servicing on or near the site or in the
vicinity of an active construction project.
i) Circuses, carnivals, fairs, or similar transient amusement or recreational activities.
j) Temporary parking lots/areas.
k) The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee may authorize additional temporary
uses not listed in this subsection, when it is found that the proposed uses are in keeping with the intent
and purpose of this section.
Time Limitation
A) Except as specified below in subsection B, a Temporary Use Permit is valid for up to 90 calendar
days from the effective date of the permit, unless the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or
designee establishes a shorter time frame.
B) The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee may approve a Temporary Use Permit
for up to one year for temporary sales or rental offices in subdivisions, multifamily or non-residential
projects or other longer term uses.
C) A property owner or other holder of a Temporary Use Permit may not file an application for a
successive Temporary Use Permit for 30 days following the expiration of an approved permit applying to
that property and/or use.
Abatement of Temporary Use
Prior to the approval of a Temporary Use Permit, the applicant shall submit to the
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee, an irrevocable, signed and notarized
statement granting the City permission to summarily abate the Temporary Use, and all physical evidence
of that use, if it has not been removed as required by the terms of the Permit. The statement shall also
indicate that the applicant will reimburse the City for any expenses incurred in abating a Temporary Use
under the authority of this Section.
Assurance Device
The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or designee may require security in conformance with
Chapter 12, section 9-12-8,V,3 to assure compliance with the provisions of the Temporary Use Permit as
approved. The amount of the security will be determined by the Planning/Building/Public Works
Administrator or designee, but in no case shall it be less than $1,000.00.
Penalties
Unless otherwise specified, penalties for any violations of any of the provisions of this Code shall be in
accord with Chapter 33 of Title IV.(Ord. 4351, 5-4-92)
Appeals
Within 10 days of approval or denial of a temporary use permit, the applicant, or other aggrieved party,
may file an appeal to the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4404, 6-7-93)