HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda
AGENDA
Planning & Development Committee Regular Meeting
5:00 PM - Monday, January 28, 2019
Council Conference Room, 7th Floor, City Hall – 1055 S. Grady Way
1. Recreation Uses in the UC Zone
a) AB - 2304 Community & Economic Development Department recommends establishing a
work program to consider allowing outdoor recreation as part of mixed use projects in
the Urban Center (UC) zone.
b) Staff Report
2. 2019 CED Work Program
a) Docket
3. Shoreline Master Plan Update
a) Presentation
4. Startup425 Interlocal Agreement
a) AB - 2302 Community & Economic Development Department recommends approval of an
interlocal agreement between the cities of Bellevue, Issaquah, Kirkland, Redmond, and
Renton that formalizes the cooperative effort to support a robust entrepreneur and small
business ecosystem on the Eastside, known as Startup 425, in the amount of $15,000
annually for 2019 and 2020.
b) Presentation
5. Emerging Issues in CED
a) Growth Management Act Info
AB - 2304
City Council Regular Meeting - 14 Jan 2019
SUBJECT/TITLE: Clarifying Recreational Uses as part of Mixed Use in the UC Zone
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Planning Commission and Planning & Development Committee
DEPARTMENT: Community & Economic Development Department
STAFF CONTACT: Chip Vincent, CED Administrator
EXT.: 6588
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
N/A
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Currently, in the Urban Center (UC) zone City Code allows indoor recreation provided it is a component of a
mixed use project. However, it does not allow outdoor recreation even if it were part of a mixed use project.
The Administration is recommending that a work program to consider allowing outdoor recreation as part of
mixed use projects be initiated.
EXHIBITS:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Refer to the Planning Commission and Planning & Development Committee for review. Following this review,
the Planning Commission will present recommendations to Council.
AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
H:\CED\Planning\Title IV\Other Title IV Code Amendments\Outdoor Recreation - Mixed Use Page 1 of 4
CITY OF RENTON
Community and Economic Development Department
Outdoor Recreation
Staff: Clark H. Close
Date: January 28, 2019
Applicant or Requestor: Planning Division
General Description: The City of Renton Planning Division made this docket item request. This docket
item proposes to amend the Zoning Use Table, Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-2-060 Zoning Use Table –
Uses Allowed in Zoning Designations, to permit outdoor recreational facilities in the Urban Center (UC)
zone as a component of a mixed use project. Currently, RMC allows new indoor recreation and existing
indoor recreational facilities in the Urban Center (UC) zone provided the development is architecturally
and functionally integrated into the overall shopping center or mixed use development1. However, it does
not allow outdoor recreation even if it were part of a mixed use project in the UC zone.
Currently, the City of Renton code only permits these uses outright in the industrial zoning designations2
(Light Industrial (IL), Medium Industrial (IM) and Heavy Industrial (IH)) and via a Hearing Examiner
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the Commercial Office (CO) zoning designation2 and Commercial Arterial
(CA) zoning designation3.
Background
The UC zone currently makes up 57 of the roughly 26,407 City parcels (0.2%) and totals approximately
2.3 percent of the area located inside Renton City Limits. The handful of parcels that are zoned UC are
located in and around The Landing in Renton. An outdoor recreational facility is defined by RMC 4-11-
180 as a place designed and equipped for the conduct of sports and leisure-time activities with little or
no enclosed space. Examples of an outdoor recreational facility include: private (commercial or private
1 Specified use(s) are permitted provided all of the following conditions are met:
a. All development shall be architecturally and functionally integrated into the overall shopping center or mixed
use development. Buildings shall be mixed use except for retail buildings with more than seventy five thousand
(75,000) square feet, structured parking, and a maximum building footprint of sixty five thousand (65,000) square
feet, or structures smaller than five thousand (5,000) square feet. Single-use retail buildings are not allowed east of
Lake Washington Boulevard North; and
b. In the UC Zone, buildings adjacent to pedestrian-oriented streets, as designated via Master Plan or a similar
document approved by the City, shall have ground-floor commercial uses. Where required, commercial space shall
be provided on the ground floor at thirty feet (30') in depth along any street frontage. Averaging the minimum
depth may be permitted through the site plan review process, provided no portion of the depth is reduced to less
than twenty feet (20'). All commercial space on the ground floor shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of
fifteen feet (15'); and
c. Buildings oriented along Park Avenue shall have one or more pedestrian entries on Park Avenue.
2 In the Employment Area (EA) land use designation west of Rainier Avenue South/ SR-167. See RMC 4-2-080.A.29
for more information.
3 Not permitted within the Commercial and Mixed Use land use designation along NE Sunset Blvd, NE 4th St, or S
Puget Dr.
AGENDA ITEM #1. b)
H:\CED\Planning\Title IV\Other Title IV Code Amendments\Outdoor Recreation - Mixed Use Page 2 of 4
club) outdoor tennis courts, private outdoor swimming pools, batting cages, amusement parks,
miniature golf courses, golf driving ranges, and playgrounds. Whereas, an indoor recreational facility is
defined by RMC 4-11-180 as a place designed and equipped for the conduct of sports and leisure-time
activities within an enclosed space. Examples include gymnasiums, amusement arcades, health and
fitness clubs, indoor tennis and racquetball courts, bowling alleys, and indoor swimming pools.
In terms of use, an outdoor recreational facility would be most similar to a permitted indoor recreational
facility with an associated mixed use component. Similarly, an outdoor recreational facility would have
analogous or potentially fewer impacts than an indoor sports arenas4 or outdoor sports arenas5. Sports
arenas require a Hearing Examiner CUP in the UC zone provided the uses are not within one thousand
feet (1,000') of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. The potential impacts of the
proposed outdoor recreational facility in the UC zone could be regulated through similar land use
permits and processes, including a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit, Master Plan Review, Site
Plan Review, and Building Permit Review.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the docket request to complete a code amendment to add outdoor
recreational facilities to the UC zoning designation using a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use permit and
provided the outdoor recreation use is part of a mixed use development. Adopt an ordinance amending
Title IV Development Regulations applicable to sections of RMC 4-2-060J Zoning Use Table – Uses Allowed
in Zoning Designations, Entertainment and Recreation and RMC 4-2-080.A.82 Conditions Associated with
Zoning Use Tables. The changes would be reflected as follows:
RMC 4-2-060 Zoning Use Table – Uses Allowed in Zoning Designations:
USES: INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS
IL IM IH CN CV CA CD CO COR UC
J. ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION
Entertainment
Sports arenas, auditoriums,
exhibition halls, indoor
P29 P29 P29 P20 P H18
Sports arenas, auditoriums,
exhibition halls, outdoor
P29 P29 P29 AD20 H18
Recreation
Recreational facilities, indoor,
existing
P29 P29 P29 P P P P54 P21 P82
4 A large enclosed facility used for professional, semi-professional spectator sports, arena concerts, expositions,
and other large-scale public gatherings. This definition includes stadiums, concert halls, auditoriums, exhibition
halls, and accessory eating and drinking establishments.
5 A large outdoor facility used for professional, semi-professional spectator sports, arena concerts, and other large-
scale public gatherings. This definition includes but is not limited to stadiums, concert arenas, and accessory eating
and drinking establishments.
AGENDA ITEM #1. b)
H:\CED\Planning\Title IV\Other Title IV Code Amendments\Outdoor Recreation - Mixed Use Page 3 of 4
USES: INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS
IL IM IH CN CV CA CD CO COR UC
Recreational facilities, indoor,
new
P29 P4 P P P92 P12 P21 P82
Recreational facilities,
outdoor
P29 P29 P29 H20 H29 H82
RMC 4-2-080 CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH ZONING USE TABLES:
82. Specified use(s) are permitted providedshall meet all of the following conditions are met:
a. All development shall be architecturally and functionally integrated into the overall shopping
center or mixed use development. Buildings shall be mixed use except for retail buildings with more
than seventy five thousand (75,000) square feet, structured parking, and a maximum building
footprint of sixty five thousand (65,000) square feet, or structures smaller than five thousand (5,000)
square feet. Single-use retail buildings are not allowed east of Lake Washington Boulevard North; and
b. In the UC Zone, buildings adjacent to pedestrian-oriented streets, as designated via Master Plan
or a similar document approved by the City, shall have ground-floor commercial uses. Where required,
commercial space shall be provided on the ground floor at thirty feet (30') in depth along any street
frontage. Averaging the minimum depth may be permitted through the site plan review process,
provided no portion of the depth is reduced to less than twenty feet (20'). All commercial space on
the ground floor shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of fifteen feet (15'); and
c. Buildings oriented along Park Avenue shall have one or more pedestrian entries on Park Avenue.
Impact Analysis
Effect on rate of growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the Plan
Allowing outdoor recreation as proposed would enable another form or type of recreational uses (i.e. an
outdoor recreational facility) that would be similar to other recreational uses that have already been
permitted as a mixed use project. Similar allowed uses include new or existing indoor recreation as part
of a mixed use project or indoor or outdoor sports arenas via a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use
Permit. There is no anticipated effect on the rate of growth, development, and conversion of land
envisioned in the Plan.
The intensity of outdoor recreation uses can vary from project to project and are largely dependent
upon the exact use that develops in a location. For example, an outdoor tennis court or golf driving
range would be significantly less intense than an amusement park. Conditions and restrictions are also
proposed that are intended to integrate the outdoor recreational facility with the mixed use
development that would otherwise be not be permitted as a standalone project.
Effect on the City’s capacity to provide adequate public facilities
Not applicable. There are no anticipated effects on the City’s capacity to provide adequate public
facilities created by the proposed changes.
Effect on the rate of population and employment growth
AGENDA ITEM #1. b)
H:\CED\Planning\Title IV\Other Title IV Code Amendments\Outdoor Recreation - Mixed Use Page 4 of 4
There are no anticipated effects on the rate of population and employment growth created by the
proposed changes. Permitting outdoor recreational facilities in the UC zone may reduce the amount of
land available for attached dwellings, office use and/or other certain types of retail, services, and
entertainment and recreation within the UC zoned parcels in the City. Permitting outdoor recreational
facility uses on UC zone properties would be consistent with many other recreation and entertainment
uses already permitted within this zone.
Whether Plan objectives are being met as specified or remain valid and desirable
Objectives of the Plan would remain valid and desirable. The UC zone implements the Commercial
Mixed Use (CMU) land use designation. The Comprehensive Plan policy of the UC zone is as follows:
“zone lands that are located within Renton’s Designated Regional Growth Center, if there is a potential
for the creation of dense employment, destination retail, recreation, or public gathering space with the
Urban Center (UC) zone. The Urban Center zoned areas have large parcels of land with the potential for
large scale redevelopment opportunities that will create a mixed-use retail, employment, and residential
center.” The addition of outdoor recreation to the UC zone would support the objective of this land use
designation.
Effect on general land values or housing costs
The addition of outdoor recreational uses to the UC zone may have an effect on land values. It is
anticipated that land will be developed to the highest and best use. In some areas of the City,
standalone outdoor recreational uses would not be the highest and best use for the site. However, as
part of a mixed use project, the recreational use could serve as an amenity and may add value to the
greater development itself. It is not anticipated that the addition of this use would decrease property
values, but may increase, as it would provide greater flexibility in development options.
Whether capital improvements or expenditures are being made or completed as expected
Not applicable. There are no anticipated effects on capital improvements or expenditures created by the
proposed changes.
Consistency with GMA, the Plan, and Countywide Planning Policies
The proposed amendments are consistent with GMA, the Plan, and Countywide Policies.
Effect on critical areas and natural resource lands
There are no anticipated effects on critical areas and natural resource lands. If there are such impacts
with outdoor recreational facility uses, an environmental evaluation would be part of a project's review.
AGENDA ITEM #1. b)
C:\Users\jmedzegian\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\VTHK7GXA\2019 Long Range Planning 01.25.2019.doc
LONG RANGE PLANNING WORK PROGRAM updated 01/25/19
LONG RANGE PLANNING 2018 COMPLETED WORK
TITLE IV DOCKET ITEMS
Text Amendment Exemptions
Allow non-substantive text amendments to the code to be processed as code interpretations.
Commercial Variances
Review and consider expanding the list of development standards from which a Variance may grant relief for residential, commercial, or industrial
uses (e.g., Variances for commercial and industrial uses are only applicable to screening standards of roof-top equipment).
Street Names
Consider revisions to the Code to allow for changing the way street names are assigned. Specifically, allowing new streets to be named in honor of
people who have contributed to community in meaningful ways.
Amend the Waived Fees Minimum Unit Count
Amend waived fees to allow a minimum of ten units on CV land for the owner-occupied housing incentive only (not the rental housing incentive), IF
100% of the units are affordable to households at or below 80% of median income and the units will be developed and held in perpetuity as
affordable homeownership with a community land trust by a non-profit organization.
Our current Waived Fees code (RMC 4-1-210) require a minimum of 30 units on CV land to be eligible for incentive. However, given the limited
amount of public funding currently available for affordable homeownership development, Housing CLT needs the Waived Fees in order for the project
to be viable.
Multi-Family Tax Exemption
Comprehensive review of the multi-family tax exemption rules, including geographic limits and qualifications for affordable housing.
Parking Standards
Review parking standards for mf development based on number of complaints received to date from residents. Review applicability of parking
standards, specifically when new stalls are required upon a building expansion/addition.
Mobile Food Vendors
Allow mobile food vendors as permitted uses with conditions in the IL, IM, IH, CV, and CD zones. Remove requirement for a TUP for mobile food
vendors in these zones. Allow Tier 1 TUP for vendors in CN, CO, COR, and UC rather that Tier 2. Require Tier 1 for other mobile vendors (such as t-shirt
stands) within IL, IM, IH, CV, CN, CO, COR, and UC. Consider amendments that may be needed to implement recommendations in the Civic Core Plan.
Service and Social Organizations Definitions
Review Service and Social Organizations definitions and zones allowed to ensure it meets current needs. They are allowed in all zones except R-1, is
this appropriate and/or desired especially when the service functions more like medical office, commercial use, etc. Also, in 4-2-060G Community
Facilities and Public Facilities are sub-headers within the section, but there is not clarity in how this is applied in practice.
Submittal Standards
Update submittal requirements. There are many requirements that are no longer necessary given electronic plan review. Also, update for what we
are really using and need to review the submittals.
Townhouse Review
Consider identifying townhouses as a distinct (from single family and attached mixed use) use in the use table and determine what zones to allow in. AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
LONG RANGE PLANNING WORK PROGRAM Page 2 of 7
Should they be allowed in residential zones such as R-8, especially when there are significant environmental constraints? This will also require a close
look at all of Title IV for the use of attached and detached to determine where townhouses will fall and amend the code.
Windows Transparency in Downtown
As identified in the Civic Core Plan, develop code requirements to ensure transparency of windows on ground floors of downtown businesses for
safety and security, as well as, creating a welcoming, vibrant pedestrian/commercial environment.
Threshold Analysis and Minimum Density for the COR Zone
Conduct a threshold analysis to establish standards for commercial uses, office uses and residential uses to establish minimum standards for those
uses in the Commercial Office Residential (COR) zone. Evaluate minimum density in combination with a threshold analysis.
Short-term Rentals
Consider adopting code to regulate and mitigate the impacts short term rentals (AirBNB, VRBO) have on neighborhoods.
Short Plat/Formal Plat Streamline Process
Create common review timelines, submittal requirements, completion requirements, and expiration periods for both formal and short plats.
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE INTERPRETATIONS
CI-147, Reconsideration Requests for Shoreline Permits
CI-146, Rear Yard Setbacks for ADUs
CI-145, Clear Vision Area
CI-144, Site Plan Review for Medical Institutions, Assisted Living and convalescent Care in low density residential zones (RC – R-8)
CI-143, Noise Level Regulations: Designation of Zones Areas
CI-142, Residential Design: Scale, Bulk, and Character
CI-141, Nonconforming Uses; Manufactured Home Parks and Detached Dwellings
CI-140, Retroactive Application of ULS Code
CI-139, Definition of Big Box Retail
CI-138, Residential Design: Materials and Color
CI-137, Comprehensive Land Use Map
CI-136, Denial of Temporary Use Permits
CI-135, Time Limits for Approved Planned Urban Developments Not Associated with a Subdivision
CI-134, Unit Lot Subdivisions in the CV Zone #2
CI-133, Storm Drainage Facility Perimeter Landscaping
CI-131, Minimum Density Requirement for Assisted Living Facilities in the CO zone
CI-130, Fire Impact Fees for Non-profit Organizations
CI-129, Residential Outdoor Storage
CI-128, Security Devices for Landscaping Maintenance
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
R-14 to Center Village Rezone
Edits to the Capital Facilities Levels of Service Table AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
LONG RANGE PLANNING WORK PROGRAM Page 3 of 7
Correction to Discrepancy on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
LONG RANGE PLANNING CURRENT WORK
TITLE IV DOCKET CARRYOVERS & INITIATED WORK (ONGOING)
Maintaining Health Standards for Housing
Consider implementing a proactive rental housing inspection program by requiring landlords to maintain a City business license. Such a requirement
would work to ensure that rental housing in Renton meets the eight principles of healthy housing: moisture free, adequately ventilated, contaminant
free, free of pests, clean, well-maintained, free of injury hazards, and thermally controlled.
Steep Slopes & Channel Migration Zones
• Review steep slope rules based on information from PW study regarding potential land slide areas within the City.
• Review King County information and data related channel migration zones.
• Also, review the work that King County has done regarding Cedar River Channel Migration Zones and consider amendments to Critical Area
Regulations.
Landscaping, Trees and Shrubbery
Community Services has requested new and revised standards pertaining to trees located with public right-of-ways and other public land (e.g.,
spacing standards, approved species, maintenance techniques, processes for planting, trimming, and removing trees, etc.). Reevaluate the City’s tree
retention standards and consider requirements for tree tracts.
Group Homes
Amend Renton Municipal Code to update definitions for Group Homes, Adult Family Homes, and Congregate Residences as needed to be compliant
with federal and state law. Revise the Zoning Use Table to allow Group Homes in residential zones consistent with federal and state law. Review the
Zoning Land Use Table to consider those zones that are appropriate for Group Homes, Adult Family Homes, and Congregate Residences.
Shoreline Master Program Review
A periodic review of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP), as required by the Washington State Shoreline Management Act. Conducting a periodic
review ensures that Renton’s SMP is an effective and up-to-date document.
Outdoor Recreation in the UC Zone
Consider allowing outdoor recreational facilities in the Urban Center (UC) zone as a component of mixed use projects.
CITY CENTER COMMUNITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
1.1.1 Update existing design standards for the City Center to ensure new development will fulfill the vision
3.1.1 Complete a conceptual plan for the civic node
6.11.1 Establish priority bicycle improvements consistent with the Trails and Bicycle Master Plan within City Center subarea
Completed Work Items AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
LONG RANGE PLANNING WORK PROGRAM Page 4 of 7
6.1.1 Conduct a detailed design study for Park Avenue North
2.1.7 Determine necessary utilities and infrastructure to support the regional employment center and City Center as a whole
2.1.2 Continue to improve incentives to encourage investment and employment in City Center
1.1.6 Create a building improvement program for buildings within City Center
BENSON HILL COMMUNITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
1.2.1 Landscape the corner of SE 168th Street and 116th Avenue SE to create a more inviting entry to the Cascade Village area.
2.1.1 Improve 116th Avenue SE to provide a walkable, bikeable, and environmentally- friendly way to connect to destinations.
2.3.3 Continue improving the pedestrian environment around the Benson Shopping Center.
3.1.3 Redesign the Cascade Park entry to allow parking adjacent to the park and to increase “eyes on the park.”
5.3.1 Apply design guidelines to Cascade Village and Benson Plaza shopping areas.
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TITLE IV DOCKET REQUESTS
Requestor/Assigned
to Date Via Description Technical/Policy
Vanessa & Leslie 6.20.17 Email Review vesting regulations per new case law based on Potala Village vs. the City
of Kirkland Supreme Court decision, specifically shoreline permits.
Vanessa 6.20.17 Email Review all sections of the code to determine if a modification is the appropriate
means to vary from the code section. Provide clarity in the code as to what can
be modified and what requires a variance. For example, can a new public road
be modified via the modification process outside the PUD?
*Specific review of the modification criteria used for Design Districts. There is 11
evaluation criteria and it seems to conflict with the intent of the code design
where the standards doesn’t have to be met if the intent and the guidelines are
complied with. See the beginning of the code section 4-3-100
Chip 08.05.10 Email Outdoor storage
The code is ambiguous regarding what is considered outside storage and where it
is or is not appropriate. Additionally, regulations for “Bulk Storage Facilities”
constitute a large portion of our code, yet have not been needed in 2 decades.
Should we consider streamlining if not eliminating these storage-related
regulations?
P
Chip 09.14.15 Verbal Sign Code
Review/update the sign code and its consistency with the new Supreme Court
Ongoing and Carryover Work Items
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
LONG RANGE PLANNING WORK PROGRAM Page 5 of 7
decision regarding content
Paul 10.22.15 Email Zoning Map Interpretation Provisions
RMC 4-2-030, Zoning Map Interpretation, provides the means to determine
boundaries of zones where the delineation is unclear. The Section is in need of
edits due to unclear language, and references to practices that are not followed
(e.g., relying on the legal description of a rezone ordinance, even though legal
descriptions are no longer provided in most rezone ordinances).
Jennifer 09.01.16 Verbal Landscape Modifications
RMC4-4-070.R requires a variance to deviate from the provisions of the
Landscaping Regulations. A modification process should also be available for
minor departures from Code.
Jennifer 09.01.16 Verbal Noise Variance Process
Code sections 4-9-250.B and 8-7-8.C contain conflicting process and procedures,
specifically those for variances and noise variances. The code sections should be
reviewed and streamlined.
Kinley Deller, King
County DNR (via
Craig B)
01.10.18 Email Construction & Demolition Materials Diversion
King County has adopted construction and waste diversion regulations (i.e.,
which materials may be transported to a dump vs. which materials are required
to be recycled); however, their regulations are only in effect within incorporated
areas once the materials leave the jobsite (i.e., once on a public road regardless
of jurisdiction). King County has requested cities adopt their diversion
regulations so there is consistency and more recyclable materials are
transported to the appropriate facility.
Vanessa 10.03.16 Email • Amend SEPA Authority to reference 4 members, instead of 3.
• Add ERC’s role to NEPA.
• Update SEPA regulations to be consistent with newly adopted state laws
including public notice requirements to eliminate the publication
requirement.
Angie
01.18.18 Email Impact Fees for Daycares
Evaluate possibility of scaled or tiered approach that categorizes daycares based
on number of children serving
Vanessa 09.07.16 Email RMC 4-8-070, Review Authority.
Binding Site Plan is not listed under any of the approving authorities. They can be
either administrative or Hearing Examiner
Mayor Law 03.02.18 Healthcare Support for Senior Living Facilities
Consider requiring senior housing to staff with triage personnel to identify if 911
calls are necessary and provide treatment in lieu of hospitalization. Review fee
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
LONG RANGE PLANNING WORK PROGRAM Page 6 of 7
structure including fire emergency response impact fees to ensure adequate fee
structure for senior housing is developed.
Vanessa 01.25.19 Email Site Plan Review
Update criteria for site plan review modification. The criteria does not address
building design or the design district criteria. This can result in a project receiving
site plan review approval with a particular design and a complete new building
and site plan can be submitted without the requirement to go through the public
comment process.
Vanessa 01.25.19 Design Requirements for Assisted Living and Convalescent Care Facilities
Located in Residential Zones
As the code is drafted both of these uses can be placed in low density residential
zones with bonus density, however these uses do not have any requirement to
comply with residential design standards and/or commercial design standards to
help these large scale facilities fit into the small scale residential character of low
density residential zones.
Kris
Rocale/Vanessa
07.10.15
01.27.15
Email
Email
Update Stream Classification System
• Stream reclassification for Maplewood Creek Subarea stream based on
biological assessments.
• Copperwood Preliminary Plat resulted in a reclassification of a stream
that needs to be adopted as a part of the Stream Classification Map.
Elizabeth 05.02.13 Email • Remapping of contiguous open space corridor T
Jerry
Vanessa
10.18.13
01.25.19
Email
Email
• Reclass a stream from Class 4 to Class 3 for the Roman Short Plat
• Based on recommendations from the Muckleshoot Tribe’s Northwest
Indian Fisheries Commission, review the City’s stream classification
against the State and WDFW, ensure consistency between our
classification and the states.
Private Party Initiated Requests
Bonaventure
Renton
6.8.17 Amend code to address residential density calculations as they pertain to senior
housing projects that include assisted living facilities. (See attached letter)
Plan/Policy Development
Angie 09.01.16 Verbal Comprehensive Plan Policy Review
• Review the Comprehensive Plan for policies that have measureable
outcomes.
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
LONG RANGE PLANNING WORK PROGRAM Page 7 of 7
• Review with Council planned changes in anticipation of King County
policy changes.
Chip 01.25.19 Verbal Arts and Culture Master Plan
Review and update the Arts and Culture Master Plan.
Administrative Code Interpretations (to be created)
Chip 07.01.15 Verbal Map PUDs
Rocale 07.24.14 Email Relocate Arterial Street Plan map (and potentially other street standards) to the
complete street section of the code.
Chip 09.14.15 Verbal Vesting
Review vesting ordinance based on Potala Village vs. the City of Kirkland
Supreme Court decision, specifically shoreline permits.
Vanessa 01.25.19 Email Temporary Use Permit Criteria for Wireless Facilities
Update TUPs to have specific criteria for wireless facilities. Lessons learned from
a recent appeal.
Rocale 10.20.15 Email Eliminate reference to Comprehensive Plan’s Community Design Element in RMC
4-9-250D. Modification Procedures
Laureen 06.21.16 Email Footnote #4 misapplied to “recreational facilities, indoor new” in the CN zone
Stacy 08.31.16 Email Correct reference to effective date of final plan in PUD Regulations extensions.
Vanessa 08.22.12 Email RMC 4-8-080 refers to subsection H, which has been repealed. Possible
housekeeping item
*Reviewed by Angie 2.6.2018, may be resolved - need to verify with Vanessa
T
Submittal Standards Code Interpretations (to be created)
Rocale 01.20.10 Email Add Design Checklist to the Submittal Requirements if located in a design district T
Chip 02.11.10 Email Remove submittal standards from code and establish as a handout and post on
the web in order to keep current and provide reasonable public access. T
Rocale 05.25.11 Email Submittal Checklists reference the older manual for the Drainage Report
requirements. It should be changed from 1990 to 2009.
Stacy 07.22.11 Email Remove the requirements from home occupations that the applicant is
responsible for providing current mailing labels.
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
PERIODIC REVIEW OF RENTON’S
SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM
Planning & Development Committee
January 28, 2019
AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
PERIODIC REVIEW
•Shoreline Master Program
(SMP) adopted in 2011 as
required by state law
•Periodic Review required
every 8 years (due in June
of 2019)
•Periodic Review helps the
SMP keep current with
changes is state and local
law and changes in local
conditions AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
•Housekeeping changes
from Ecology Periodic
Review Checklist
•Shoreline Environment
Designation change at
Barbee Mill
•Adoption by reference of
Critical Areas regulations
•Amendments to improve
clarity, consistency, and
administration.
PROPOSED CHANGES
AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
•Adjust cost threshold of a substantial development permit to
$7,047, and replacement docks to $20,000.
•Redefine “development” so it does not include dismantling
structures.
•Clarify exceptions to local review for shoreline permitting.
•Exempt projects that retrofit structures for ADA accessibility.
•Add a 90-day review timeline for review of WA DOT projects.
•Adopt by reference the federal wetland delineation manual.
•Allow existing residential structures within the shoreline to be
classified as conforming.
•Allow wetland mitigation banks as an impact mitigation option.
HOUSEKEEPING CHANGES –ECOLOGY CHECKLIST
AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
•2011 change in land use and zoning designation for Barbee Mill
•Shoreline Residential is suitable for current and future land use
•Meets state and local criteria for a re-designation
ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATION –BARBEE MILL
AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
•Two standards currently in
place
•New critical areas
regulations adopted in
2015
•Adopt by critical areas
regulations by reference
•Applies shoreline rules and
processes to critical areas
review
•Clarifies which shoreline
uses are allowed in critical
areas and their buffers
CRITICAL AREA REGS. IN SMP
AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
CLARITY, CONSISTENCY, AND ADMINISTRATION
•Clarify the application of rules
for existing single-family
development
–Application of modified buffers
and setbacks to all single-family
–Keeps sliding scale buffer
approach based on lot depth,
but adds a category above 130’
–Adds a common line setback
approach
–More residential properties will
conform and fewer will need to
meet non-conforming
requirements
–Simplifies non-conforming
requirements AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
CLARITY, CONSISTENCY, AND ADMINISTRATION
•Tree Protection and
Vegetation Conservation
–Closes loophole and
applies citywide
standards to
properties
–SMP rules still apply
to the buffer area
–Requires a routine
vegetation
management permit if
no other permit is
required AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
CLARITY, CONSISTENCY, AND ADMINISTRATION
•Amendments to the
Development
Standards Table
–Does not change
standards
–Changes how
setbacks and buffers
are measured
–Clarifying language
in the notes to avoid
potential conflicts AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
CHANGES REQUESTED BY PROPERTY OWNERS
TENTATIVELY AGREED TO BY DOE:
FENCES PERPENDICULAR TO WATER :may
extend no closer than 5’ from water.
FENCES PARALLEL TO WATER: no closer than
edge of buffer and no taller than 4’.
REQUESTED BY RESIDENTS:
FENCES PERPENDICULAR TO WATER : may
extend to the water’s edge.
FENCES PARALLEL TO WATER: may extend
no closer than 5’ from water.AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
PROCESS
•Completed a public participation plan in
Summer 2018
•30-day Public comment period starting
September 28 –but voluntarily extended to
December 7
•Joint hearing by Ecology and Planning
Commission -October 17
•Two workshops held with affected property
owners -November 15 and 29
•Planning Commission recommendation
•Submittal in Ecology (30 days to review)
•Once approved by Ecology, the Planning and
Development Committee will receive
another briefing on any required changes. AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
1.Planning Commission Deliberations and Recommendation:
February 5, 2019
2.Submit drafted SMP to the Department of Ecology:
30-day review
3.Review any changes required by DOE with Planning &
Development Committee:
Adoption before June 2019
NEXT STEPS
AGENDA ITEM #3. a)
AB - 2302
City Council Regular Meeting - 14 Jan 2019
SUBJECT/TITLE: Interlocal Agreement to Support Regional Economic Development
(Startup425)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Planning & Development Committee
DEPARTMENT: Community & Economic Development Department
STAFF CONTACT: Cliff Long, Economic Development Director
EXT.: 6591
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
$30,000
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
In 2017, the cities of Bellevue, Issaquah, Kirkland, Redmond, and Renton, embarked on an experiment to
support the creation and expansion of new businesses on the Eastside. Their collective interest in supporting
startups and small businesses reflects their desire to support economic empowerment for individuals and
generate strong economic impacts that support the broader community.
In diverse ways (Comprehensive Plans, Economic Development Strategies, etc.), the partner cities share a
common goal to support the growth of local small businesses as a means to advance job creation and create
new opportunities for residents. Developing and maintaining a resilient startup ecosystem is a long-term
economic development strategy that helps add jobs and additional tax revenue to City budgets, which in turn
supports robust service delivery to residents, visitors, and businesses.
The program currently functions at a subsistence level as an informal partnership between five distinct
municipal entities. Bellevue acts as the Administrative Partner, and supplements funding and staffing with
support from the current Port of Seattle Economic Development Grant.
The Partners have expressed an interest in developing additional programming, doing more in-depth
community engagement, and long-term strategic planning. These functions require additional staff bandwidth.
Further, future success is dependent on the continued support of the Cities’ leadership and economic
development programs, which currently have an unwritten cooperative agreement.
An interlocal agreement will formalize the relationship between the partner cities and further the goals of
Startup 425, benefit the general public served by the cities, and enable the cities to provide financial support
toward those ends.
EXHIBITS:
A. Issue Paper
B. Resolution Authorizing Startup 425 ILA
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Council: (1) approve the interlocal agreement between the cities of Bellevue,
Issaquah, Kirkland, Redmond and Renton that will formalize the cooperative effort to support a robust
AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
entrepreneur and small business ecosystem on the Eastside; and (2) authorize the Mayor to execute said
agreement in the same form and commit $15,000 annually for 2019 and 2020 to fund Startup 425
management and day-to-day operations.
AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 2, 2019
TO: Don Persson, Council President
Members of Renton City Council
VIA: Denis Law, Mayor
FROM: C. E. “Chip” Vincent, CED Administrator
STAFF CONTACT: Cliff Long, Economic Development Director
SUBJECT: Startup 425 Interlocal Agreement to Support Regional
Economic Development
ISSUE:
Should the City Council approve the adoption of an interlocal agreement between the City
of Renton and the cities of Bellevue, Issaquah, Kirkland and Redmond to establish a
cooperative effort to support regional economic development and authorize the Mayor to
execute the agreement?
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Council: (1) approve the interlocal agreement between the
cities of Bellevue, Issaquah, Kirkland, Redmond and Renton that will formalize the
cooperative effort to support a robust entrepreneur and small business ecosystem on the
Eastside; and (2) authorize the Mayor to execute said agreement in the same form.
BACKGROUND:
In 2017, the cities of Bellevue, Issaquah, Kirkland, Redmond, and Renton (the “Partners”),
embarked on an experiment to support the creation and expansion of new businesses on
the Eastside. Their collective interest in supporting startups and small businesses reflects
their desire to support economic empowerment for individuals and generate strong
economic impacts that support the broader community.
In diverse ways (Comprehensive Plans, Economic Development Strategies, etc.), the
Partners share a common goal to support the growth of local small businesses as a means
to advance job creation and create new opportunities for residents. Developing and
maintaining a resilient startup ecosystem is a long-term economic development strategy
that helps add jobs and additional tax revenue to City budgets, which in turn supports
robust service delivery to residents, visitors, and businesses.
AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
Don Persson, Council President
Page 2 of 3
January 2, 2019
Additionally, the last two economic cycles have shown an acceleration of “creative
destruction” where outmoded business models are disrupted by firms that are on the
leading edge of innovation. Once iconic companies like Washington Mutual, Blockbuster
Video, Borders Bookstores, RadioShack, and Xerox have ceased operations. At the same
time, copious amounts of new commercial space continue to go up across the Eastside.
Startup 425 can support the long-term health of the cities’ economies by cultivating the
next generation of office and retail tenants to step in as job creators as legacy businesses
are disrupted.
Based on conceptual discussions, the Partners have expressed a common interest to grow
the Startup 425 program into a self-sustaining, deep-engagement program. That type of
well-rounded program would support economic development broadly across the Eastside,
and specifically add capacity to support small, local businesses at a time when many are
under stress due to structural changes in the economy. Additional staff capacity and
expertise are necessary to achieve the partners’ goals. Below is a status check on current
operations, as well as options and recommendations for how to develop a long-term plan.
Current Status
1 FTE Manager at 1/4 time
1 FTE Analyst at 1/4 time
An average of 10 hours per quarter of staff time per partner city
The program currently functions at a subsistence level as an informal partnership between
five distinct municipal entities. Bellevue acts as the Administrative Partner, and
supplements funding and staffing with support from the current Port of Seattle Economic
Development Grant.
Current staffing levels provide sufficient bandwidth to sustain the 425 Foundations series,
maintain the program website, produce infrequent one-time workshops, and convene
quarterly group meetings. The current level of programming is low value-add and not a
significant revenue source.
The Partners have expressed an interest in developing additional programming, doing
more in-depth community engagement, and long-term strategic planning. These functions
require additional staff bandwidth. Further, future success is dependent on the continued
support of the Cities’ leadership and economic development programs, which currently
have an unwritten cooperative agreement.
Conceptual End State
Through various discussions and meetings, the Partners have articulated a desire for
Startup 425 to evolve into a self-sustaining program with the following characteristics:
1. Dedicated staff (2+)
2. Formal written agreement among the partners
3. Financially sustainable
AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
Don Persson, Council President
Page 3 of 3
January 2, 2019
a. Not more than 50% grant funded
b. Secured and dedicated revenue streams
c. Minimal municipal funds
4. Incorporated or transferred to another non-profit that is separate from the
municipalities.
With a right-sized level of support, Startup 425 can complete research on best practices
across the country, develop a long-term operations model, and development products and
partnerships that generate revenue to support a self-sustaining program. Formalizing the
relationship by an interlocal agreement will support the goals of Startup 425 and enable
the Partners to provide financial support toward those ends.
CONCLUSION:
As outlined in the 2019-2024 Business Plan, the City of Renton is dedicated to promoting
economic vitality and strategically positioning Renton for the future. The City’s goals to
recruit and retain businesses to ensure a dynamic, diversified employment base and to
nurture entrepreneurship and foster successful partnerships with businesses and
community leaders are reflected in the mission of the Startup 425 program. The program
lowers the barriers to entry for non-traditional and first-time founders; keeping the
business ecosystem on the Eastside diverse, encouraging spontaneous collaboration, and
providing pathways to prosperity for the whole community.
City Staff does not possess the hands-on experience and strong community connections
necessary to deeply understand the problems affecting the Eastside’s small business
community. Many of the questions facing Startup 425—like funding model, customer base,
and program niche—are best left to experts, who deeply understand the small business
process, existing service providers, and community needs. The interlocal agreement
provides access to tools and resources that experienced workers, students, and
entrepreneurs need that is beyond the current capacity of City Staff.
AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
CITYOFRENTON,WASHINGTONRESOLUTIONNO._
__
__
_ARESOLUTIONOFTHECITYOFRENTON,WASHINGTON,AUTHORIZINGTHEMAYORANDCITYCLERKTOENTERINTOANINTERLOCALAGREEMENTWITHTHECITIESOFBELLEVUE,ISSAQUAH,KIRKLAND,ANDREDMONDENTITLED“INTERLOCALAGREEMENTESTABLISHINGACOOPERATIVEEFFORTTOSUPPORTREGIONALECONOMICDEVELOPMENT(Startup425).”WHEREAS,theCityofRenton(the“City”)andtheCitiesofBellevue,Issaquah,Kirkland,andRedmond(collectivelythe“Parties”)areauthorized,pursuanttochapter39.34RCW,theInterlocalCooperationAct,toenterintoaninterlocalgovernmentcooperativeagreement;andWHEREAS,usingsuchquantifiablemetricsasnewbusinessformation,startupdensityandventurecapitalinvestment,ithasbeenshownthePartiesconsistentlyrankamongthehighestinstartupactivitywithintheirboundariesnationwide;andWHEREAS,inrecognitionofthatfact,thePartiescreatedaninformalprogramknownasStartup425,whoseoperationsandofferingsaredesignedtosupportstartupsandearly-stagecompanieswithinthejurisdictionsoftheParties;andWHEREAS,thePartieshavedeterminedthatformalizingtheirrelationshipbyaninterlocalagreementwillfurtherthegoalsofStartup425,benefitthegeneralpublicservedbytheParties,andenablethePartiestoprovidefinancialsupporttowardthoseends;NOW,THEREFORE,THECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFRENTON,WASHINGTON,DORESOLVEASFOLLOWS:SECTIONI.TheMayorandCityClerkareherebyauthorizedtoenterintoaninterlocalagreementwiththeCitiesofBellevue,Issaquah,Kirkland,andRedmondentitledInterlocalAgreementEstablishingaCooperativeEfforttoSupportRegionalEconomicDevelopment1AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO.(Startup425),inaformthatisthesameorsubstantiallysimilartotheversionattachedheretoasExhibit“A”andincorporatedbythisreference.PASSEDBYTHECITYCOUNCILthis_
__
_
__dayof___
__
_
_
_
__
__
__
_
_
_
__
__
_
,2019.JasonA.Seth,CityClerkAPPROVEDBYTHEMAYORthis__
___
_dayof__
_
__
__
_
__
__
_
__
__
_
__2019.DenisLaw,MayorApprovedastoform:ShaneMoloney,CityAttorneyRES.1791:12/6/18:scr2AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO.EXHIBIT“A”INTERLOCALAGREEMENTESTABLISHINGACOOPERATIVEEFFORTTOSUPPORTREGIONALECONOMICDEVELOPMENT(Startup425)3AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO.INTERLOCALAGREEMENTESTABLISHINGACOOPERATIVEEFFORTTOSUPPORTREGIONALECONOMICDEVELOPMENT(Startup425)Thisagreement(“Agreement”)isenteredintobyandbetweenthecitiesofBellevue,Issaquah,Kirkland,RedmondandRenton,municipalcorporationsoftheStateofWashington,forthepurposeofpromotingeconomicdevelopmentineachoftheirjurisdictions.WHEREAS,usingsuchquantifiablemetricsasnewbusinessformation,startupdensityandventurecapitalinvestment,ithasbeenshownthecitiesofBellevue,Issaquah,Kirkland,Redmond,andRenton(“Parties”)consistentlyrankamongthehighestinstartupactivitywithintheirboundariesnationwide;andWHEREAS,inrecognitionofthatfact,thePartiescreatedaninformalprogramknownasStartup425,whoseoperationsandofferingsaredesignedtosupportstartupsandearly-stagecompanieswithinthejurisdictionsoftheParties;andWHEREAS,thePartieshavedeterminedthatformalizingtheirrelationshipbythisAgreementwillfurtherthegoalsofStartup425,benefitthegeneralpublicservedbytheParties,andenablethePartiestoprovidefinancialsupporttowardthoseends;andWHEREAS,thisjointundertakingisauthorizedpursuanttochapter39.34RCW,andhasbeenauthorizedbythelegislativebodyofeachParty.NOW,THEREFORE,thePartiesagreeasfollows:1.INCORPORATIONOFRECITALS.TheRecitalssetforthaboveareanimportantandintegralpartofthisAgreementandareherebyincorporatedbyreference.2.PURPOSE.ThepurposeofthisAgreementistoacknowledgetheParties’mutualinteresttojointlyparticipateintheadministration,operation,andstrategysettingforStartup425.3.ADMINISTRATION.NoneworseparatelegaloradministrativeentityiscreatedtoadministertheprovisionsofthisAgreement.Instead,theCityofKirklandwillfunctionastheadministratorofStartup425(the“Administrator”).IfnecessarytochangetheAdministratorthePartiesmaytransferthisfunctiontoanotherPartybyagreementoftheParties.4.POWERS.TheAdministratorshallhavethepowerto:(1)developandrecommendabudget;(2)adoptprocedurestoadministerStartup425;(3)makerecommendationstothePartiesconcerningplanning,policy,andfundingforStartup425projects;(4)establishpolicesfortheexpenditureofbudgeteditems;and5)enterintocontracts,provideaccountingandlegalservices,andexecutesuchothercontracts,agreementsorotherlegaldocumentsnecessaryforStartup425tocarryoutitspurpose.5.SCOPE.ThisAgreementallowsthefollowingactivities:4AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO.A.Host,edit,andmaintaintheStartup425website.B.CoordinateprovisionoftheStartup425freeworkshopseriesforearly-stageentrepreneursinpartnershipwithavarietyofoutsidepartners.ActivelyparticipateintheEastsidestartupandsmallbusinesscommunitytopromoteavibrantecosystemofentrepreneursandsmallbusinessowners.C.Engageinalong-rangeplanningeffortbythePartiesin2019tochartafuturecourseforStartup425forgrowthandsuccess,includingconveningabusinessadvisorycommitteetoidentifyunmetneeds,revenuegeneratingactivitiesandasustainableoperationsmodel,tobefollowedbytheimplementationofstrategiesgeneratedbytheplanin2020.Theplanmayresultinarecommendedneworganizationalstructure.Regardless,thePartieswillreviewmanagementofStartup425attheendof2020andmaydeterminetochangeoutoramendthecurrentmanagementatthattime.D.QuarterlyupdatesforallPartiesthatcovercustomersserved,servicesprovided,budget,andotheritemsasrequestedbytheParties.E.OtherrelatedprogramsasproposedbytheAdministratorortheotherParties.6.TERMANDTERMINATION.ThisAgreementshallbecomeeffective(“EffectiveDate”)whensignedbyallPartiesandshallremainineffectuntilDecember31,2020.Thereafter,theAgreementshallrenewautomaticallyforone-yeartermsendingDecember31unlessanyPartygivesnotice30daysbeforetheendofthethenexistingtermthatitiswithdrawingfromtheStartup425program.TheAgreementshallthereafterremainineffectastotheremainingPartiesunlesstheAdministratoratitssolediscretiondeterminestheStartup425programisnolongerviablewithoutthePartywithdrawinginwhicheventtheAdministratorwillgivenoticeofthedatethatitiswithdrawingfromparticipation,andtheAgreementwillterminateonthatdateunlessthePartiesselectanotherAdministratorbeforethatdate.Nojointly-ownedpropertywillbeobtainedunderthisAgreement,andanyParty’srealorpersonalpropertyheldbytheStartup425programwillbereturnedtothatPartyupontheParty’swithdrawalorthisAgreement’stermination.7.FINANCING.ThecitiesofBellevue,Issaquah,RedmondandRentonwilleachprovide$15,000annuallyfor2019and2020tofundStartup425managementandday-todayoperations.Thefirstpaymentwillbedue30daysaftertheEffectiveDate.Subsequentpaymentswillbedueby]anuary31ofeachsuccessiveterm.AdeferredaccountwillbeestablishedattheAdministratorforfundsreceivedforStartup425.TheAdministratorwillcontributeupto$40,000,tomanagetheStartup425programanditsday-to-dayoperations,andprovideaccommodationsincludingbutnotlimitedtoofficespace,meetingspace,andnecessaryequipmentforitsoperation.8.CONTACTPERSONS.ForpurposesofthisAgreement,thefollowingpersonsshallserveascontactpersonsfortheirrespectivejurisdictions:Bellevue:MichaelCummins;mcumminsbellevuewa.govIssaquah:TimDuller;timd@issaciuahwa.gov5AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO._____
_Kirkland:EllenMiller-Wolfe;emwolfe@kirklandwa.govRedmond:JillSmith;jesmithcredmond.qovRenton:JessieKotarski;jkotarski@rentonwa.gov9.GENERALMATTERSANDRECORDING.A.EntireAgreement.ThisAgreementisthecompleteexpressionofthetermshereof,andanyrepresentationsorunderstandings,whetherwrittenororal,notincorporatedhereinareexcluded.B.Modification.ThisAgreementmayonlybemodifiedinwritingandmustbesignedbyallPartiesparticipatinginStartup425atthetimeofthemodification.C.NoAssignment.NoPartyshallhavetherighttotransferorassignitsrightsorobligationsunderthisAgreementwithoutthepriorwrittenconsentofallotherParties.D.Venue.AnyactionfiledunderorrelatedtothisAgreementmustbebroughtinKingCountySuperiorCourt.F.Recording.ThisAgreementshallbefiledwithKingCountyRecordsbytheCityofKirklandorotherwisemadepublicinaccordancewiththeInterlocalCooperationAct.F.DisputeResolution.IfanydisputearisesamongthePartieswhichisnotresolvedbyroutinemeetingsorcommunications,thedisputingpartiesagreetoseekresolutionofsuchdisputeingoodfaithbymeeting,assoonasfeasible.Ifthedisputingpartiesdonotcometoanagreementonthedispute,theymayagreetopursuemediationthroughaprocesstobemutuallyagreedupon,withthepartiestothedisputesharingequallythecostsofmediationandassumingtheirowncosts.G.NoThirdPartyBeneficiaries.ThisAgreementisforthebenefitofthePartiesonly,andnothirdpartyshallhaveanyrightshereunder.H.RetainedResponsibilityandAuthority.Exceptasexpresslyprovidedforherein,thePartiesretaintheresponsibilityandauthorityformanagingandmaintainingtheirownrespectivesystemsandprogramsrelatedtoeconomicdevelopmentactivities.I.Severability.Theinvalidityofanyclause,sentence,paragraph,section,orportionthereofshallnotaffectthevalidityoftheremainingprovisionsoftheAgreementIntheeventtheprovisioninvalidatedisnecessaryforanyPartytocontinuetoreceivethebenefititwasreceivingundertheAgreementbeforetheinvalidation,thePartiesagreetoamendtheAgreementtoprovideasubstituteprovisionthatenablesitorthemtocontinuetoreceivethatbenefit.Ifthat6AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO.______cannotbedone,theAgreementwillbedeemedterminatedasofanydaterequiredbytheinvalidation.10.COUNTERPARTS.ThisAgreementmaybesignedincounterpartsand,ifsosigned,shallbedeemedoneintegratedagreement.App
ro
v
e
d
on
th
is
_
_
_
_dayof_
_
_
__
__
__
_
_
_
,201g.7AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO.Jurisdiction:BellevueApprovedastoform:By:Name:MichaelCumminsCityAttorneyTitle:DirectorofCommunityDevelopmentDate:_______________________________8AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO.Jurisdiction:IssaquahApprovedastoform:By:__________________________________
_
_____
_
_
_____
_Name:MaryLouPaulyCityAttorneyTitle:MayorDate:______________________________9AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO._
_
_
_
_
_Jurisdiction:KirklandApprovedastoform:By:________________________________________
_
_
_Name:JamesLopezCityAttorneyTitle:AssistantCityManagerDate:_______________________________10AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO.Jurisdiction:RedmondApprovedastoform:By:
_
_
___
_
_
___
_
_
___
_
_
___
_
_
___
_
_
___
_
_
_
_
___
_
_
_
____
_
_
_
___Name:JohnMarchioneCityAttorneyTitle:MayorDate:
___
_
_
___
_
_
___
_
_
___
_
_
___
_
_
___
_
_11AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
RESOLUTIONNO._
_
_
_
_
_Jurisdiction:RentonApprovedastoform:By:___________________________________
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_Name:DenisLawCityAttorneyTitle:MayorDate:______________________________12AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
S U PPOR TI NG E NTR E PR E NE UR S H I P A ND I NNO V ATI O N
1 AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
o The Startup 425 program provides the
resources that startups and small
businesses need to be successful.
o Five-city, regional partnership led by
economic development staff in each city.
o Kirkland, Bellevue,Redmond,
Issaquah,Renton
o Programming partners:
o King County Library System
o Greater Seattle SCORE
o WA Department of Commerce
o An ecosystem in place to support
entrepreneurs from ideation to business
expansion.AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Workshops
Topics like “marketing” and
“business planning”
Most are free-of-charge
One-on-One Mentoring
Partnership with SBDC
Specialized assistance for
mid-stage businesses
Specialized Programs
Global Passport,focused
on exports for mobile
technology startups
Service Offerings
Web Resources
Online “concierge”
assistance and chatbot
Downloadable resources AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
4
Business Advisors
Our small business advisor and partnerships
with business development experts support
founders on their entrepreneurial journey.
o The cities of Bellevue and Redmond
share a Small Business Development
advisor (SBDC), Ron Anson, to assist
businesses with a technology focus
o The City of Kirkland employs Duncan
Milloy to provide the same services to
the small business community AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Startup425
Foundations
Workshops
Providing you the skills and knowledge to perform critical
planning and organizational activities to support your
business success.
Developed and presented by Greater Seattle –Eastside
SCORETeam
•Ideation –How Good is My Idea
•Structure and Licensing
•Business Plan
•Financing
•Marketing –Content Marketing
•Networking & Mentoring AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Regional
Results
to Date
299
attendees responded
to 2018 spring post-
workshop survey
30%
of attendees make
<$50,000
78%
YTD increase in web
traffic as of Q2 2018
52
workshops
scheduled at KCLS
branches in 2018
82%
said the workshop
was “extremely”or
“very”helpful
Net Promoter
Score:
48
(50+ is “excellent”)
25%
existing businesses
and freelancers
443
registrants in 2017
62%
registrants in 2017
identified as female
60%
registrants in 2017
identified as person
of color
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
2018
Results &
Highlights
Workshops held: 56
Registrations: 1,317 (+64.6% YoY)
Unique registrants: 493 (+54.1% YoY)
Completed user surveys: 628 (+96.3% YoY)
Web inquiries: 55 (+37.5% YoY)
Contact list subscribers: 782 (+30.3% YoY)
Attendees identifying as persons of color:
50%
Attendees identifying as women: 66%AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
7 AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500 • Seattle, WA 98104-1035 • 206-464-7090 • psrc.org • January 2019Puget Sound Regional Council
As the region prepares
to add more people and
more jobs in the coming
decades — about 1.8
million more people by
2050 — VISION 2050
will provide a guide for
sustaining a healthy
environment, thriving
communities, and a
strong economy.
VISION 2050
Draft SEIS Open Houses
We need your input! PSRC will be seeking comments in March 2019 on the Draft Supplemental
Environment Impact Statement (SEIS) for VISION 2050, the region’s long-range plan to keep the central
Puget Sound region healthy and vibrant as it grows.
The SEIS reviews the environmental effects of three regional growth alternatives that distribute growth
in unique patterns throughout the region.
Drop in to an open house to learn more about the alternatives and join the regional conversation:
Tuesday, March 12 / 4-6PM / Edmonds City Hall
121 5th Avenue N, Edmonds, 98020
Wednesday, March 13 / 4-6PM / South Tacoma Public Library
3411 S 56th Street, Tacoma, 98409
Monday, March 18 / 4-6PM / Bothell Police Community Room
18410 101st Avenue NE, Bothell, 98011
Tuesday, March 19 / 4-6PM / Bremerton City Council Chambers
345 6th Sreet, #600, Bremerton, 98377
Thursday, March 21 / 12-2PM/ PSRC Boardroom
1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500, Seattle, 98104
Can’t attend an open house in person? Participate online
at https://www.psrc.org/.
For more information, please email VISION2050@psrc.org,
call 206-464-7090, or visit https://www.psrc.org/vision.
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
2050 Horizon
Target Review1
2
2012-2017 data
Ratify
2050 Horizon
Ratify
2043 HorizonScoping
Ratify4:1, UGC, RAH3
2023-43 Targets
| Adjust Plans
OFM Forecasts
VISION 2050
Urban Growth Capacity Study
2023 Comprehensive Plans
Growth Targets
Countywide Planning Policies
AGREEMENT ON KING COUNTY COUNTYWIDE GMA CALENDAR -Completing UGC, Targets and CPPs before 2023 Comp. Plans
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
King County 2020 Urban Growth Capacity Study
(Buildable Lands)
King County Planning Directors Meeting
January 24th, 2019 AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
What is the Urban Growth Capacity Study?
•Buildable Lands/Review + Evaluation Program established in GMA, framed in CPPs
•Provides cities + county feedback on accommodating targeted growth in our planned land use patterns
•Questions it answers:
•Is development occurring at planned urban densities?
•How is growth tracking to adopted targets + land use assumptions?
•Is there adequate land capacity available for anticipated growth in jurisdictions and the UGA?
KC 2020 Urban Growth Capacity Study 2
Citations:
RCW 36.70A.215
KC CPPs AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
New requirements
•Revised guidelines + Bill 5254 requirements (pending)
•Two additional reasonable measure triggers
•Are targets being met?
•Are densities being achieved?
•In addition to: Is there sufficient capacity for targets?
•Document changes in development regulations with significant impacts on available capacity
•Identify and document infrastructure gaps affecting capacity
•Market Factor rationale/documentation
KC 2020 Urban Growth Capacity Study 3 AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
Existing Buildable Lands Process
•Analyze recent development from plats + permits
•Calculate achieved densities, new housing units + jobs
•Subtract recent development from targets
•Identify vacant + redevelopable lands
•Calculate capacity
•Compare remaining target + capacity
•Adopt reasonable measures for inconsistent capacity
KC 2020 Urban Growth Capacity Study 4 AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
2020 UGC Process
•Analyze recent development from plats + permits
•Calculate achieved densities, new housing units + jobs
•Subtract recent development from targets
•Identify vacant + redevelopable lands
•Calculate capacity
•Compare remaining target + capacity
•Adopt reasonable measures for inconsistent capacity, growth, or densities
KC 2020 Urban Growth Capacity Study 5New RequirementsCompare achieved densities to planned; development regulation changes
Compare development to target/land use assumptions
Market factor analysis, report on significant infrastructure gaps
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
Timeline –high level
•Data collection: 2019
•Study development: Winter 2019-2020
•Study complete: June 2020
KC 2020 Urban Growth Capacity Study 6
2018 2019 2020
Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Commerce Funding
2018-19 Grant Potential 2019 Funding
KC 2020 BLR Process
Ratify --->
Data Development + Compilation
Draft + Finalize Report
Scoping + GIS Data Production
Jurisdictional Review + Data CollectionWho: King County
What:
•Solidify methodology
•KC GIS performs parcel
analysis for:
•Housing unit growth
•Subdivided parcels
•Parcel/built sq ft
•Initial achieved
densities
Who: SCA + Cities, KC
What:
•Review KC GIS analysis
•Report on recent development
•Report on achieved densities
•Research and select development
assumptions/discounts:
•Redevelopment
•Market Factor
•Public/RoW
•Identify vacant + redevelopable land
Who: King County, Cities, IJT/Subcommittee
What:
•Calculate capacity
•Collaborate to finalize development data
•Compare:
•Capacity + targets/LU assumptions
•Achieved + zoned densities
•Recent growth + targets
•Reasonable measures
Who: King County, IJT/Subcommittee
What:
•Draft Report
•Jurisdiction Review / Commerce Review
•Finalize Report
•GMPC Approval in June 2020
•County + Cities Ratify by end of 2020 AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
Timeline –next steps
•Technical Committee + IJT convening now
•Initiate contact and outreach in February
•Initiate phase 1 data reporting in late February (recent development)
•Reporting Guide + Template
•Initial KC GIS reporting on recent development
•Phase 1 completed by May 2019 (tentative)
•Initiate phase 2 data reporting mid-2019 (land supply/capacity)
•Complete data collection fall/winter 2019
•Watch legislative session/budget for new funding in 2019
KC 2020 Urban Growth Capacity Study 7 AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
Roles + Expectations
•County role
•Complete initial GIS analysis for cities
•Aggregate data countywide
•Perform unincorporated urban analysis
•Coordinate report, policy decisions
•City role
•Compile and report necessary data
•Permits, critical areas, zoning, development regulation changes. infrastructure
gaps, right-of-way/public purpose/market factor deductions
•Review county GIS analysis
•Phase 1: recent development
•Possible Phase 2: developable land supply
•Review final results KC 2020 Urban Growth Capacity Study 8 AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
King County 2020 Urban Growth Capacity Study
Thank you!
Rebeccah Maskin, Demographic Planner
206-263-0380 | rmaskin@kingcounty.gov AGENDA ITEM #5. a)