HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet for 1/5/2015 .
� AGENUA
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
January 5, 2015
Monday, 7 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ROLL CALL
3. SWEARING-IN CEREMONY: Ruth Perez, Councilmember Position #6
4. PROCLAMATION
a. National Mentoring Month —January 2015
5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
6. AUDIENCE COMMENT
(Speakers must sign up prior to the Council meeting. Each speaker is allowed five minutes. The
first comment period is limited to one-half hour. The second comment period later on in the
agenda is unlimited in duration.) When you are recognized by the Presiding Officer, please walk to
the podium and state your name and city of residence for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the
recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further
discussion if requested by a Councilmember.
a. Approval of Council meeting minutes of 12/8/2014. Council concur.
b. City Clerk reports appeal of the Hearing Examiner's final decision upon
reconsideration regarding the Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat (LUA-13-000642j by Brent
Carson, Van Ness Feldman, accompanied by required fee. Refer to Plannin� and Development
Committee. Consideration of the appeal by the City Council shall be based solely upon the
record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and additional submissions by
parties (RMC 4-8-110.F.6.).
c. City Attorney recommends adoption of a resolution authorizing a Memorandum of Agreement
regarding future operation of the Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network (PSERN). Council
concur. (See 9.a. for resolution.)
d. Community and Economic Development Department recommends approval of a contract in an
amount not to exceed $100,000 with Reid Middleton, Inc. to review structural plans through
12/31/2015. Council concur.
e. Community and Economic Development Department recommends appointing Michael
Schabbing, General Manager of Marriott Renton and Southcenter Hotels, and Brent Camann,
Senior Asset Manager at SECO Development, Inc., to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. Mr.
Schabbing fills the vacancy left by Brad Knutson, and Mr. Camann has made a change in
employer. Council concur.
Page 1 of 4
�
f. Community and Economic Development Department recommends adoption of an ordinance
amending RMC 4-1-210.C., Rental Housing Incentive, to help leverage additional public and
private funds to support affordable multi-family rental housing development in the Sunset Area.
Refer to Plannin� & Development Committee.
g. Community and Economic Development Department recommends adopting a
resolution declaring the Sunset Area as a "Redevelopment Area" and an "Investment Priority
Area." Refer to Plannin� & Development Committee.
h. Community and Economic Development Department recommends adopting a resolution to
authorize application for a HUD Choice Neighborhoods Initiative Implementation grant for up to
$30 million for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan. Refer to Plannin� & Development
Committee.
I i. Community and Economic Development Department requests authorization to
waive development and mitigation fees for Renton Housing Authority's four Sunset Area
Transformation Plan housing projects, contingent upon the receipt of a HUD Choice
Neighborhoods Initiative Implementation grant. The requested fee waivers expire December 31,
2020 unless otherwise extended by the Council. Refer to Plannin� & Development Committee.
j. Community Services Department submits CAG-14-100, Cedar River Gabion Repair project; and
requests approval of the project, commencement of a 60-day lien period, and release of
retainage in the amount of $10,398.50 to Jansen Inc., contractor, if all required releases are
obtained. Council concur.
k. Public Works Department requests authorization to fill a Lead Water Utility Pump Station
Mechanic position at Step E of the Grade a18 salary scale. Council concur.
I. Transportation Systems Division requests approval of a Local Agency Agreement with the
Washington State Department of Transportation for the obligation of Surface Transportation
Program (STP) grant funding in the amount of $1,237,000; and all subsequent agreements
required to complete the Duvall Ave. NE (NE 4th St. to NE 10th St.) Preservation project. Council
concur.
m. Transportation Systems Division requests approval of a Local Agency Agreement with the
Washington State Department of Transportation for the obligation of Congestion Mitigation and ,
Air Quality (CMAQ) grant funding in the amount of $707,000; and all subsequent agreements
required to complete the 116th Ave. SE (SE Petrovitsky Rd. to SE 172nd Ln. - extended) Sidewalk
project. Council concur.
n. Transportation Systems Division requests approval of a Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement
with the Washington State Transportation Improvement Board for the obligation of grant funding
in the amount of $1,024,750; and all subsequent agreements required to complete the Main
Ave. 5./Downtown Circulation (S. 3rd St. to Mill Ave. S.) project. Council concur.
o. Transportation Systems Division requests approval of a Local Agency Agreement with the
Washington State Department of Transportation for the obligation of Surface Transportation
Program (STP) grant funding in the amount of $2,600,000; and all subsequent agreements
required to complete the Rainier Ave. S. Corridor Improvements - Phase 4 (S. 3rd St. to NW 3rd
PI.) project. Council concur.
p. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of Amendment #1 to LAG-14-005, with
Rainier Flight Service, LLC, for the use of a portion of their leased area for Airport equipment
storage with a corresponding monthly rental reduction in the amount of $161.33 per month.
Refer to Transportation/Aviation Committee.
Page 2 of 4
q. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of Amendment #2 to LAG-14-005, with
Rainier Flight Service, LLC, for lease language modification concerning the removal of movable
office furniture or trade fixtures. Refer to Transportation/Aviation Committee.
8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics
marked with an asterisk (*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held
by the Chair if further review is necessary.
a. Finance Committee: Vouchers
9. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
Resolution:
a. Interlocal agreement with various agencies regarding Puget Sound Emergency Radio
Network (See 7.c.)
Ordinances for first reading:
a. Title IV (Development Regulations) Docket #10B D-101, Applicability of Urban Design
Regulations (Approved via 12/8/2014 Planning & Development Committee Report)
b. Title IV (Development Regulations) and Title VIII (Health and Sanitation) Docket #10B D-
104, Maximum Lot Area, Building Coverage and Impervious Surface Area Regulations
and Residential Six Dwelling Units Per Acre (R-6) Zone (Approved via 12/8/2014 Planning &
Development Committee Report)
c. Title IV (Development Regulations) Docket #106 D-105, Creation of Tracts for Utilities,
Open Space, Critical Areas, and Other Similar Areas (Approved via 12/8/2014 Planning &
Development Committee Report)
d. Title IV (Development Regulations) and Title V (Finance and Business Regulations) Docket
#10B D-106, Wireless Communication Facilities (Approved via 12/8/2014 Planning &
Development Committee Report)
e. Title IV (Development Regulations) Docket #106 D-108, Fences, Hedges and Retaining �
Walls (Approved via 12/8/2014 Planning & Development Committee Report)
f. Title IV (Development Regulations) Docket #106 D-109, Tree Retention and Land Clearing
(Approved via 12/8/2014 Planning & Development Committee Report)
g. Title IV (Development Regulations) and Title VIII (Health and Sanitation) Docket #10B D-
112, Administrative Code Interpretations (Approved via 12/8/2014 Planning & Development
Committee Report)
10. NEW BUSINESS
(Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded information.)
11. AUDIENCE COMMENT
Page 3 of 4
�
12. ADJOURNMENT
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA
(Preceding Council Meeting)
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
January 5, 2015
Monday, 6 p.m.
Economic Development Update (includes Update on Main Street Program)
• Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk • CITY
COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21 AND ARE RECABLECAST:
Tues.&Thurs.at il AM&9 PM,Wed.& Fri at 9 AM&7 PM and Sat. &Sun. at 1 PM&9 PM
Page 4 of 4
� �- .
1�� +.-...�,
De;;��'" D city of _, Y
� � .
. � .
Mayor's Offite
��ocldmation
�ieneas,our success as a community depends on helping every child succeed in school and
reach their full potentiai in life,and we realize that young people need a solid foundation of
support to help them become well-educated,con�dent,and p�oductive citi2ens;and
'Gt�Fiereas,Communities In Schools is the only dropout-prevention p�ogram in the nation proven
to increase graduation rates,and this research shows that mentoring has beneficiai and long-
term effects on youth by increasing their chances of high school graduation and college
attendance and decreasing the likelihood of substance abuse and other�isky behaviors;and
ti1�li'ereas,thousands of Renton's children are in need of a caring adult mentor in their lives,and
closing this mentoring gap will require more investment,partnerships,and volunteers ready to
make a difference in a child's life;and
�G1/fiereas, National Mentoring Month is an oppartunity to raise public awareness of the
importance of inentoring,recognize the dedicated individuals who serve as mentors,and
encou�age more citizens to help build a brighter future for Re�ton's youth througfi mento�ing;
and
�GVliereas,the mission of Communities In Schools of Renton is to surround students with a
community of suppoK,empowering them ta stay in school and achieve in life;
Now, tFierefore,I,Denis Law, Mayor of the City of Renton,do hereby proclaim lanuary 2015 to
be
�ationaC�entoring �Vlonth
in the Gty of Renton, in tribute to the many dedicated individuals who volunteer their time,
compassion,a�d talents to mentor young people, and 1 encourage all citi=ens to join me in this
special observance and to consider giving back to our community as mentors.
in wit�ess whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of Renton to
be affixed thfs Sth day of January,2015.
r
�
Denfs Law, Mayor
�ty ojRenton, Washingion
Renton City Hali • 1055 South G�ady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 + rentornva.gov
i
. j
�
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
`T b.
Subject/Titie: Meeting:
Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Final Decision upon REGULAR COUNCIL- OS Jan 2015
Reconsideration dated 12/5/2014 regarding the
Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat. (File No. LUA-
13-000642)
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
*City Clerk's letter (12/5/2014) City Clerk
*Appeal —Van Ness Feldman (11/26/2014)
*HEX's Final Decision upon Reconsideration
(11/15/2014) Staff Contact:
*Reply to Order Authorizing Recon. —Van Ness �ason Seth, City Clerk
Feldman (11/5/2014)
Recommended Action:
Refer to Planning and Devefopment Committee.
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ N/A Transfer Amendment: $ N/A
Amount Budgeted: $ N/A Revenue Generated: $ N/A
Total Project Budget: $ N/A City Share Total Project: $ N/A
SUMMARY OF ACTION: �
EXHIBITS CONTINUED:
*City's Answer on Reconsideration (10/22/2014)
*HEX's Order Authorizing Reconsideration (10/21/2014)
*Request for Reconsideration by Van Ness Feldman (10/16/2014)
*HEX's Final Decision (10/3/2014)
Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision upon Reconsideration on the Vuecrest Estates
Preliminary Plat was filed on 12/5/2014 by Brent Carson, Van Ness Feldman, accompanied by the
required $250.00 fee.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Council to take action on the Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat appeal.
— — i
r '
�
. � . � -
Denis Law , �. - �I�r Q�'.- ' '
. ' �{dy0f �` � �_. _ r � --- r - - '�`' fJj. .
✓'~ � �� �
� ��'���� � �' �' � :�t��;
w..,r�``'�"•.dr�+�'.�:..�.w.�l►� ,..�++�..� -:\..C�
City Clerk -Jason A.Seth,CMt
December 5,2014
APPEAL FILBD BY: Brent Carson,tjan Ness Feldman � .
RE: � Appeal of Hearing Examinxer"s Fina1 Decision upon Reconsideration clzated Navember 15,
2014,regarding the Vuecrest Estates Prelimiinary Plat located a.t the 4800 Block af
Smithers Ave. South(Fi1e Na.LUA-13-000642) ,.
To Parties of Record:
I Pursuant to Title N,Ghapter 8,Renton City Code of Orc�inances,written agpea2 af the hearing
�n
� ezarriiner's final decision upan reconsideratton on Vuecarest Estates land use application has bcen
� filed with the Cify Clerk.
In accordance with Rentan Municipal Code Section 48-1 lOF,the Ciiy Clerk shall notify a1I
parties af arecord of the receipt of the agpeal. C7ther pazties of recc�rd may subnzi�Iettei�s iimited to
support of tIieir positions within ten(10}days of the date of mailing af the notification of the
filing of the appeal. The cieadline for submission af additional letters is S:QO pm,Friday,
T7ecember 19,2014. �
I NOTiCE IS HEREBY GI�J�EN that the written appeal and ather pertinent doc�ents will be
reviewed by the Councit's Ptanning and Development Cammittee. The Council Liaison will
notify all parties of record of the date and tisne af the Planning an;d Development Cctmmittee
meeting. If you are nat listed in local telephone directories and wish to attend the meeting,
please call the Council Liaisan at 425-430-6501 for informafian, `The recommendation ofthe
Committee wilt be presented for consideratian by the full Council at a subsequent Council I
m�ing. �
� Enclosed you will f nd a copy of the appeal and a capy af the Renton ivlunicipal Code regardzng
appeals of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommentiations. Please nate that the City Council
will be considering the merits of the appeal based upan the wnitten record previously established.
Unless a showing can be anade tha.t addifiional evidence could not reasonably have been available
at the prior hearing held by the Hearin.g Examii�er,no further evidence or testimonv on this
matter w�be accepted by the City Council. � (
For additional information or assistance,please feel free to call me at 425-430-6502.
S' cerelY, . I
' � . . I
ity Clerk . . I
Fa�closur�s .
cc: Couucl Liaisoa .
7 055 South Gtady Way•Renton,Washington 98057•(425a 434-65101 Fax(425?430-651 G•rentonwa.gov
- �
,� ��,
Citv of Renton Municipal Code:Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110—Appeals
48-110C4
Filing of Appeal and Fee:The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 5-
1-2,the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658,9-13-1982; Ord.5660, 5-14-2012; Ord.5688,5-13-2013)
4&110F: Apaeals to Citv Counal—Procedures
!.Standing: Unless otherwise provided by State law or exempted by a State or federal agency, only the
applicant,City or a party of record who has been aggrieved or affected by the Hearing Examiner's
decision and who participated in the Hearing Examiner's public hearing may appeal the Hearing
Examiners decision.A person(s)will be deemed to have participated in the public hearing process if
that person(s):
a. Testified or gave oral comments at the public hearing;or
b. Submitted any written comments to City staff or the Hearing Examiner
regarding the matter prior to the close of the hearing; or
c. Has been granted status as or has requested to be made a party of record prior
to the close of the public hearing.
2. Notice to Parties of Record:Within five (5)days of receipt of the notice of appeal,the City Clerk shall
notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal.
3.Opportunity to Provide Comments: Parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions
within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal.
4.Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional
evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council.The cost of transcription of the hearing
record shall be borne by the applicant. If a transcript is made,the applicant is required to provide a copy
to the City Clerk and the Renton City Attorney at no cost. It shall be presumed that the record before
the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012)
5. Burden:The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant.
6.Council Evaluation Criteria:The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the
record,the Hearing Examiners report,the notice of appeal and additional arguments based on the
record by parties.
7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If,upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an
application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-8-070H1,as it exists or may be amended, and after
examination of the record,the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the
record, it may modify or reverse the decision of the Hearing 6caminer accordingly. (Ord.5675, 12-3-
2012)
8. Decision Documentation:The decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any
modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing
, Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
9.Council Action Final:The action of the Counci!approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the
Examine�shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under
subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord.3658,9-13-1982;Ord.4389, 1-25-1993; Ord.4660,3-17-1997;Ord.
5558, 10-25-2010)
. -
. 4.,
C1TY OF REN7QN
N4V 2 6 2014 ���.' I
1 ��i� '�' �
RECElVEp I
z CITY CLERK'S OFFICE �
� �J i G..`' �bE. �.,��.�. �(`�=-'�'���� I
3 . I
4
5 . �
6 I
7 BEFORE TF�CITY COUNCIL F4R THE CTTY OF RENTUN
8
9 RE: Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat I
APPEAL OF HEARING
10 EXAMTNER'S FINAL DECISION
Preliminazy Plat UPON RECt?NSIDSERATIQN
11 LUA13-U00642
12 � I
13
i The Applicant far Vuecrest Estates Preli�Einary Plat,by and through its counse2 of
14
15 recorc3,Brent Carson and Van Ness Feldman LLP,files this appeal af the Hearing
2� = Examiner's Final Decision Upon Reconsideration datecl November 15,2014(tl3e
I
1? "Decision")and asks the City Couneil to eliminate or modify Condition i 3 of the
' X 8 Decision for the reasons set forth below.
19 I. Standing , I
�� Pursuant ta Rentan Municipat Code(RMC}4-$-i 10(F},the Applicant has �
2I ���g t�����Hearing Exami.ner's De�isian. I
I 22
23
24
25 '
APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S Va[1 N2SS �
FINAL DECISiON UPON RECONSIDERATION 1 � ��dman�. . j
719 Sacond Avenue Suite tl5t1 I
5eattie, WA 96104 I
{246) 623-9372 i
I �.
�
.--�--- - -------. .
1 II. Substantial Errors Justifying EIi.mination or. Modification of Condition 13
2 A. Introduction
3 This Appeal is focused entirely on the requirement of Condition 13 in the
4 Decision. Condition 13 forces the Applicant to extend a public road, Smithers Ave. S.,
5 over adjouung private properiy that the Applicant does not own or control. The record '
6
demonstrates that the owner of that adjoining private property refused to grant the
7
, 8
Applicant any rights of access. With the condition, as imposed,the Applicant has no
9 ability to develop the Vuecrest Estate's plat.
10 No other subdivision previously approved in this area under the same conditions
11 has been placed in this unfair,unreasona.ble and illegal predicamen� These prior
12 subdivisions each extended Smithers Ave. S. through their properties and ended that
13 Public road with a temporary cul-de-sac. The Applicant for Vuecrest Estates likewise
14
proposed to extend Smithers Ave. S.through its property and build a temporary cul-de-sac
15
at the end of its properiy. When the adjoini.ng property to the east develops, Smithers '
16
1� Ave. S.will be extended by that owner to Mai.n Ave:S.(102�Ave. SE)providing a
1 g secondary access route for this neighborhood. Unforiunately,unlike each of the prior
19 subdivision approvals,the Hearing Examiner in this case rejected a temporary cul-de-sac
20 and imposed Condition 13,which requires the Applicant,prior to final plat approval,to
21
extend Smithers Ave. S.to the east,across another owner's private property,to connect to
, 22 � .
Main Ave. S.
23
24 In addition to the disparate treahnent of Vuecrest Estates, as compared with other
25 subdivisions in this neighborhood,the Staff in this case misrepresented to the Applicant
APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S �Van Ness
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION 2 ��dman�►
719 Second Avenue Sutte 115Q
Seattle,WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
_ _ �
�
. . �
. - j
�
I
I that a temporary cul-de-sac would be approved. At the very start af the pracess,the Fire
I Z
i u
De,partment s regresentative stated in wziting to the Applicant that: A proposed
3
w ul acc table if it meets all r uired dzmensions aud
temgorary cul-de-sac A d he ep� �
II
4 �
construction require�nents." E�'bit 3S,Att.B. The Cit�s senior plann�also confirnied ,
5
the City's position on the acceptance of a temparary cul-de-sac:
6
,� "The City is asking that yau provide stub to the property to the�eas't but aze
I nat asking you to make the impravements to provide secondary access as
I g part of the proposed development. However,withaut the secondary access•
a cul-de-sac would be required for fire turn arouad. . . ."
9
Ex. 35,Att. C. When the Ciiy Staffproposed that the Applicant apply for a variance in
10
order ta approve a temporary cu2-de-sac, Staff wrote: "it will be supparted by the City."
11
�2 Ex. 3�,Att. H.
13 B���n the StafPs clear representations to the Applicant on the acceptability of a
14 temporary cul-de-sac,the Apglicant invested hundreds af thousands af dollars to pracess
15 �s prelimu�ary glat and address all issues raised by the City. If a secondary access were
16 g4�����e required,the Apglicant would not have a groceeded with this project. Yet,
17
when the staff repart was issued weeks before the Preliminary Plat public hearing,the
18
19 Staff reversed c�urse,rejecting the previously accepted temparary cul-de-sac design,and
2� dernanding extension of Smithers Ave. S.to lp2 Ave. SE. The Sta�s behavior in this
21 matter and their last-mi.n.ute reversal justifies the City Cauncil to question the credibility
2� of the Cit�s testimony and to strike or revise Condition 13. I
23
24 i
25 I
APPEAL OF HEAi2irTG EXAMINER'S �Ngc,�
FIl�TAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION 3 � �[d���, I
719 Second Avenue Suita 1454 I
Seattie, WA 98104
{2fl8) 623-9372
II
�
'--
1 B. A Tem Cul-De-Sac Com lies with RMC 46-060.H.1 �I
P��'Y P
2 The Hearing Examiner erred by finding that a temporary cul-de-sac, as proposed .
3 by the Applicant, and as originally accepted by Staff, failed to meet the requirements of
4 RMC 46-p60.H.1. The Cit�s dead end street standards prolubit�ermanent dead end
5
streets unless a future connection is physically impossible. RMC 4-6-060.H.1. However, I
6
this code provision,as previously interpreted by City Staff, allows a temuorarv cul-de-sac
7 .
8 to be built if,in the future,that road can be extended when the adjoining property is
g developed. ,
10 The Applicant did not propose a permanent dead end street. Instead,it proposed a
� 11 temporary cul-de-sac. To mitigate impacts,the Applicant proposed to instatl sprinkler
12 systems on every home in the development and to provide an internal circulation road
13
within the plat. Moreover,development of Vuecrest Estates would bring this
14
neighborhood one step closer to having a completed secondary access. With Condition
15
16 13,the plat cannot develop and the opportunity to extend Smithers Ave. S. closer to 102na
1'7 Ave. SE is lost.
i 8 C. If Required, a Variance from the Secondary Access Requirement Should have
been Granted
19
As presented above,the temporary cul-de-sac should have been approved without
20
21 the need for a variance. However,if a variance is required,it should have been granted by
22 the Hearing Examiner. Council should reverse the Hearing Examiner and grant the
23 variance. �
24
25
APPEAL OF HEARIl�IG Ex:ANIII�TER'S � I�an Ness ,
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION 4 �fdman�,
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattie, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
�
• �
• � � � . �
.. l
;
1 1. The Hearing Examiner Applied the Wmng Variance Criteria»
2 The Hearing Examiner mistakenly applied the street improvement modification
3 pravisions set forth in RMC 4-9-250(C)rather than the variance provisians in RMC 4-9-
� 250(B}. Had the correct variance provisions been applied,the unrefuted evidence
5
presented by the Applicant and its experts sh+�uld have led the Hearing Examin�r to grant
6
the variance from the secondary access requirements.
�
$ The subject application was for a Freliminary Plat. Prelirninary Plats are regulated
9 un.der Title IV,Chapter 7 of the Municipai Cade. RMC 4-7-150 establishes the general
10 and m�ini.mum street requirements for plats. RMC 47-2 50(D},which imposes the
� �1 requirements for streets in subdivisions,states that: "The stree#standards set by RMC 4-
12 b-060 shall apply unless atherwise atmroved." (Emphasis Added}. The street standards in
13
RMC 46-060 include thase pravisions in RMC 46-060(H}Dead End Streets. Thus,in a
14
15 Plat application,the street standards in RMC Mb-060 are.applied through the minimum
16 street requirements as set forth in Chapter 7,Section 4-7-154 and may be varied in the
17 preliminary plat apgroval. . .
18 The Hearing Examiner is given exgress anthority ta grant variances from the
1� requirements far subdivisians,as set forth in Chapter 7,including variances from the
24
street standards. See RMC A�-7-240(1). The Hearing Exazniner may grant such a variance �
21
by following the variance pxocedures set forth in RMC 4-9-250(B). RMC 4-7-240(A)
22
' 2� states: "A variance from the requirements of this Chapter may be appraved by the �
24 Hearing Examiner,pursuant to RMC 4-9-250(B)".
25 �
APPEAL OF HEARING EXA'MINER'S V1C1 NP�SS
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION 5 � ��dman�
719 Secand Avenua Sufte i 15D
Seattle, WA 98t04
(20$} 623-$3T2
� — — — ——
1 The Applicant applied for a variance under RMC 49-250(B),seeking a variance
2 from the secondary access standards in RMC 46-060,which were being imposed on this
3 subdivision through RMC 4-7-150. Exhibit 35,Att.I. The variance application provided
4
an analysis showing compliance with each of the four criteria under RMC 49-250(B)
5 �
including,in particulaz,criteria RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(b)which states that"the granti.ng of
6
� the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfaze or injurious to the
g property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is
9 situated." The Applicant never asked for a street improvement modification under section
. 10 g�C 49-250(C). It was an error for the Hearing Examiner to apply the street
11 �Provement modifica.tion provisions,under RMC 49-250(C),when a variance was
12
sought under RMC 4-7-240(A).
13 •
14 2• The Evidence Supports the Granting of a Variance
Witnesses for the Applicant presented unrefuted evidence that the variance criteria
� 15
16 �d been met and that the variance should have been granted. See Testimony of Mr.
1'7 Maher Joudi;Testimony of Mr. Cazl Anderson; and written testimony of Vincent J.
18 Geglia, Exhibit 35,Att.K.
19 �_Vince Geglia, a traffic engineer with TrafEEX,provided a report
20
demonstrating that the surrounding streets in this neighborhood cazry low volumes of
21
traffic at relatively low speeds and concluding that the risk of�c accidents that would
22 �
23 block access to emergency vehicles is very low. E�chibit 35,Att.K. His report also
24 confirms that the looped road proposed for Vuecrest Estates will provide opportunities for
25 circulation of emergency vehicles withi.n the plat.
APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMIl�TER�s Van Ness
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION 6 � ��dman�
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
, (206} 623-9372
' 1 Mr. Maher Joudi, a civil engineer with D R Strong Consulting Engineers Inc.,
2 testified that the wide roadways(32.5' of pavement)and adjacent sidewalks (4.5' each
3 side)provide a total width of over 40 feet for an emergency vehicle to travel from the
4
intersection of 102 Ave. SE and SE 186th Street to the proposed development. He noted
5
the minimal on-street parking on these streets,given that each home along this roadway
6
� has a garage and off-street parking in their driveway. �
g Mr. Carl Anderson, a registered Fire Protection Engineer with The Fire Protection
9 International Consortium,Inc.,presented expert testimony regarding the minimal risks to
10 life and safety posed by this development without having a secondary access and the
11 ; si ficant reduction in risk b the A hcant a eein to install
gni y pp � gr g sprinklers in every home.
12 �
His unrefuted testimony was that the addition of 201ots"would not be a significant �
13 ; �
detriment to public safety based on what's already in the azea."
14 �
15 : The allegation by Sta�that this project would create a dead end street being 2400
16 ; feet long with 99 homes on it was fully refuted by Mr. Carl Anderson who demonstrated
1� ° that only 800 feet of the roadway would have a single access because of internal
1 g - secondary access loops that aze provided off this street along its length. Mr.Anderson
19
also confirmed that,of the 99 homes that Staff alleged to be on this street, 42 of those aze
20
on two different streets, S.47th PL and SE 185th PL,that have no impact on access to and
21
22 from Vuecrest Estates. Furthermore,of the existing 57 homes not on those two streets, 36
23 are within the Stonehaven Plat that has a looped road,which allows for two ways of
24 access or egress within that plat.
� 25
APPEAL OF HEARING E���MINER'S �Van Ness
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDER.ATION � Fefdman�
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
. 1 These facts,coupled with the significant mitigation of sprinklering these homes,
2 led Mr.Anderson to his expert opinion that there would be no material dehiment to public
3 safety by granting the requested variance. That testimony is unrefuted.
4
If the City Council determines that a variance was required,based upon this
5 '
testimony,the City Council should grant that variance and strike Condition 13 from the
6
� Decision.
g D. Condition 13 is Arbitrary and Capricious
9 Requiring.Vuecrest Estates to provide secondary access in this case, as imposed by
10 Condition 13,is arbitrary atid capriciou�. The prior subdivisions in this neighborhood
1� were authorized to extend Smithers Ave. S.ttirough their properties to a temporary cul-de-
12 sac. No secondary access was required for these other projects. Vuecrest Estates merely
13
sought to be treated like all other applicants under similaz conditions. There is no basis to
14
impose on secondary access requirement on this applicant.
15
16 It is also arbitrary and capricious to require secondary access given the City Staffls
1� express representations to the Applicant that a secondary access would not be required.
i 8 Those representations were made four separate times. In the second Pr�Application
19 meeting,the City's Fire Department representative stated the Fire Department's position
20
cleazly: "A proposed temporary cul-de-sac would be acceptable. . " Ex.35,Att.B. This
21
was reconfirmed in the Fire Department's email: "the actual[secondary access]
22
23 connection does not have to be achieved at this time." Ex. 35,Att. C. After the project
24 was put on hold, and there were further discussions with City Staff and the Mayor and the
25 City attomey's o�ce,the Fire Chief elected to withdraw an earlier letter,and the City
APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S Van Ness
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDER.ATION s �Edman�
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
' Seattle, WA 98104
� (206) 623-9372
1 informed the Applicaut that the application would be processed for approval without a '
2 secondary access. According to the testimony of Ms.Higgins,withdrawal of the Fire
3 ChieP s earlier letter was done specifically to induce the Applicant to continue processing
4 �
its plat application. In January 2014,when the City informed the applicant that a formal
5 �
variance applicafion was required,it was made cleaz in Ms. Higgins' email that the City
6 �
� supported this variance request. Ex. 35,Att.H.
g In light of these representations, Condition 13 should be eliminated and a
9 temporary cul-de-sac authorized.
10 E. Condirion 13 Violates RCW 82.02.020
11 RCW 82.02.020 restricts the City from imposing conditions on a plat where there
12 is no nexus and rough proportionality between the condition imposed and the alleged
13
impacts. See City of Federal Way v. Town& Country Real Estate,LLC, 161 Wn.App. 17,
14
45 (2011). Here,the roads serving this plat aze adequate. There is no permanent dead end
15
16 �street proposed,merely a temporary cul-de-sac. This project is providing its fair share
17 contribution to a future secondary access by extending Smithers Ave. S.through its
1 g property. This is consistent with the City's approval of the prior plats in the neighborhood
19 �at were approved under similar circumstances without requiring a secondary access.
20
The obligation in Condition 13 to extend Smithers Ave. S.to the east,across
21
� property that the Applicant does not own or control is a heavy burden that faz exceeds the
22 �
23 impacts caused by the project. The added risk to public safety from approval of thes�e 20
24 homes is negligible. The Applicant attempted,in good faith,to acquire rights from the
25 adjoining owner to extend the road to the east,and that owner would not agree to grant
APPEAL OF HEARING Ex:AMINER'S ��Np,�
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION 9 ��dman�
719 Seeond Avenue Suite 1150
� Seattle, WA 98104
(20B) 623-9372
� 1 such access rights. Condition 13 is therefore impossible to meet and effectively results in
2 denial of this project With Condition 13,as written,until the property to the east
3 develops or agrees to dedicate a right-of-way to the City,no reasonable use can be made
4 �
of the subject property. This raises the potential of a uncompensated taldng.
5
F. Condition 13 Violates the Applicant's Substantive Due Process Rights
6
Condition 13 also violates the Applicant's substantive due process rights. A land
7
g use regulation violates substantive due process where(1)the regulation fails to achieve a
g legitimate public purpose; (2)the means adopted aze not reasonably necessary to achieve
10 that purpose;or(3)the regulations are unduly burdensome on the property owner.
11 Robinson v. City ofSeattle, 119 Wn.2d 34(1992). While the Cit�s proposed secondary
. 12 access requirement may meet the first prong,it fails the second two.
13
A secondary access is not reasonably necessary. The roads serving this plat meet
14 �
or exceed City standards. There is ample width for emergency vehicles to access this plat.
15
16 The total road and sidewalk width of over forty feet(40'),the low tra.�c volumes,the low
1� speeds through this neighborhood,and low probability of blocicing accidents and the
1 g intemal circulation demonstrate that the risk of a fire truck or ambulance failing to gain
19 access to this plat through existing access roads is negligible. To mitigate impacts,every
20
home in this development will have a sprinkler system, designed to quickly and
21 -
effectively respond to a fire emergency. Smithers Ave. S.will be extended through
22
23 Vuecrest Estates eastwazd to the adjoining properEy that fronts on 102�Ave. SE.
24 Vuecrest Estates moves this neighborhood one step closer to achieving the desire for
25 secondary access. The other plats in this neighborhood were approved without a
' APPEAL OF HEARING Ex:AMINER'S Van Ness
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERAT�ON 10 ' ��dman�,
719 Second Avenue Sufte 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
� I
ert testimon fram the A licant s witnesses demonstrated that
1 secandary access. Exp y pp �
II 2 there is no szgnificant increase in risk fram ttr..e additian of twenty new hames. �
3 Regarding the third factor,courts cansider the(a}nature of the harm ta be avoided;
4 �
I (b}the avaiiabiliiy and effectiveness af less drastac measures;and(c}the econamic Ioss �
5
suffered by the property ownez.Presbytery o}'Seattle v. King Cy., 114 Wn.2d 320,331,
6 •
I � (1990}. Other nonexclusive factors that may be helpful in the balancing re�uired under
! g the third factor include the seriousness of the gublic prabiem,the exteut to which the
9 landowner's groperty contributes to the problem,the degree to which the xegulation solves
10 �e grablem, and the feasibility of less burdensome solutions. Id.
I 11 .
Here,unposition of Candition 13 effectively results in denial of the project,the
12
� loss of over hundreds of thausands of dollars invested to date in the Praject and the loss of
13 �
millions of dollars in lost profit. The City already approved neighboring plats on this
14
�5 sam�e road without requiring a secondary access,so the determinatian was alrea.dy made
16 �aY��City that this is not a serious problem. Moreaver,the repeated position of City
17 Staf�that a secandary access cannection would not be required for Vuecrest Estates
I �� confiims that City Staff did not observe this ta be a serious issue. The Applicant made a
� .
� 19
I goad faith ei�ort to either acquiie the adjoining property.to the east or acquire a right-af-
20
way tl�rotzgb.tliat pmperty,but the adjacent owner would not agree to sell or graut such a
21
22 nght-of-way.
23 There aze far less burdensame solutions ta address the City's coucerns and these
24 have been agree�upon. Every]�ome will have a fire sprinkler. An alley has been
zs
APPEAL OF HEARING E�;.AMiNER'S V�N�S
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION I 1 � ��dman�,
Tt9 Secand Avanue Suite 'tS50
• Ssattle,WA 9$104
(28B} 623-9372
� — —
- -- - —
1 designed to provide a looped system through this plat to provide enhanced
2 maneuverability around the homes. The internal roads have been design�d 4 feet wider
3 than the City minim�St3IId3tdS. All of these measures address the City's concern with
4
faz less impact on the Applicant.
5
III. Relief Requested
6 �
For all of the reasons noted above,we urge the City Council to strike Condition 13
7
g from the Decision.
9 In the alternative,we ask the City Council to revise Condition 13 to allow the
10 Applicant to provide secondary access in ways other than extending Smithers Ave. S.
11 ��iately to the east and to the specified intersection.
12 As shown in Exhibit 37,on sheet 1 of 1,there is one parcel of land(the"Easterly
13
Parcel")immediately east of the easterly end of Smithers Ave. S. as proposed to be built
14
I S by the Applicant. Mr. Jamie Waltier testified that the owner of this Easterly Pazcel wi11
16 not sell his property or provide an easement for secondary access. Exhibit 37 shows on
1'7 Sheet 1 of 1 another parcel of land(the"Southeasterly Parcel")located between Tract"B"
18 and Tract"C"on the Proposed Vuecrest Estates plat and 102�Ave. SE. Secondary
19 access might be available through that parcel.
20 �
Condition 13,as currenfly written,rea.ds:
21 � .
Prior to the recording of the final plat, a secondary fzre access shall be
22 constnccted that extends Smithers Ave S to the east to directly connect to
Main Ave S(102nd Ave SE). The e.xtent of street improvements necessary to
23 e,fJ`'ectuate this connection shall be determined by the City of Renton Fire
24 Department in accordance with applicable fire code standards and shall be
the minimum necessary to provide for safe and ef,j`'ective secondary access for
25 fire trucks and emergency vehicles. �
I APPEAL OF HEARING Ex:AMIl�iER'S �Van Ness
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION 12 Feldman�.
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle. WA 98104
. (206) 623-9372
� As written,it appears that this canditian can only be satisfied by�acquining a public
� z access easement through the Easterly Parcel and providing a fire access road to the
� 3 ecified intersection. Even if a secondary access cauld be established between the plat to
�P
4
a Iacation on 102�Ave, SE through the Southeasterly Parcel,or tttrough some ather
5
pazcel,it would appear that this would not meet the specific tenns of Condition i 3.
6 �
� If the City Council daes nai strike CQndition 13,which it should da,Candition 23
� g should, at a miuimum,be revised to read as fallaws:
I 9 Prior to 1he recording of the,final plat,a secondary fire access shall be
cnnstructed praviding a secand means of access from Main Ave 3(102"d
10 Ave.SE)to the plat by fire trucks and emergency vehicles. The extent of
�� street improvements necessary to e,�'ectuate this connection shall be
determined by the City of Rentan Fire Department in accordance wrth
�2 applicable fire cade standards and shall be the minimum necessary to
provide for safe and effective secondary access for fire trucks and emergency
13 vehicles
14 At Ieast this revised candition will pravide the Applicant with some flexibility ta seek a
15 secandary fire access route. .
16
�� Dated this 26�`day of Navember,2014.
1$ �
�
� 19 V� , s E
20
21 B ., _J�
B t C VV'�$A#26240
�°�
22 J �
23 .
24
l
� 25
I �
( APPEAL OF HEARiNG E.��AMINER'S V�l1 N�SS '
AM N
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION 13 Fe[dman�
719 Secoad Avenua Suite 1154
� Seattie, WA 98104
(208) 623-93�2
1 I,Jennifer Sower,declare as follows:
2 That I am over the age of 18 years,not a party to this action, and competent to be a
3 witness herein;
4 That I, as a legal assistant in the office of Van Ness Feld.man,LLP, caused true and
5 correct copies of the following documents to be delivered as set forth below:
( 1. Appeal of Hearing Exami.ner's Final Decision Upon Reconsideration; and
7 2. Exhibits 35 and 37 entered into the record in September 16,2014 hearing; and
g 3. This Certificate of Service I
9 and that on November 26,2014,I addressed said documents and deposited them for
' 1� delivery as follows:
11
12 Mr.Jason Seth [x] Via hand delivery
Actin D u Clerk
g eP tY
13 City of Renton Clerk's Office
1055 S. Grady Way
14 Seventh Floor
Renton,WA 98057
15
16 L�w�� [x] Via email
Renton City Attomey [x] Via U.S.mail
1� Renton City Hall lW��(�rentonwa.�ov
1055 S.Grady Way
18 Renton,WA 98057
19
20 I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that
21 the foregoing is true and correct.
22 EXECtTTED at Sea.ttle,Washington on this 26�day of November,2014.
23 �,,
24 J ' er Sower,Declarant
25
APPEAL OF HEARING Ex;AlV�1ER'S (Van Ness �
FINAL DECISION UPON RECONSIDERATION 14 ��dman�
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
1 '
2 :
� �
3 '
4 '
5 �
6 �
� `�
�
8 .
9 BEFORE TI�HEEIRIl�IG EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
10 �
1� ; RE: Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat � FINAL DECISION UPON
12 Preliminary Plat ) �CONSIDERATION
LUA 13-000642 �
13 ; �
)
" 14 ' �
) �
15 SUNIlVIARY
16 �
The applicant of the above-captioned matter has requested reconsideration by letter dated October
17 16, 2014. The reconsiderarion request is limited to eliminating or modifying Condition No 13 and
� also to admitting an exhibit that was erroneously excluded from the administrative record. Condition
1 g � No. 13 will not be eiiminated, but will be modified lazgely as requested by the applicant. The
19 � resume of Carl Anderson is admitted as Exhibit No. 38.
20 : EXHIBITS
21 In addition to the addition of Exhibit No. 38, the following exhibits are admitted as part of the
22 �;reconsideration process:
' 23 :Exhibit 39: Order Authorizing Reconsideration,dated October 21, 104.
' �Exhibit 40: City's Answer on Reconsideration Request,dated October 22,2014
24 Exhibit 41: Sundance response to Reconsideration,dated October 31,2014.
25 �Exhibit 42: Reply to Order Authorizing Reconsideration, dated November 5,2014.
26 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND FINDINGS OF FACT ',
PRELII��IINARY PLAT RECONSIDERATION- 1 I
�
1 The issues raised in the applicant's reconsideration request are individually addressed below:
2 ; l. Annlicable Variance/Waiver Criteria. The street waiver standards of RMC 4-9-250(C)apply
3 to the applicant's request to waive the secondary access requirement of RMC 4-6-060(I�(2). The
�applicant argues that the variance criteria of RMC 4-9-250(Bx5) apply because RMC 4-7-240(A)
4 ;provides that RMC 4-9-250(B) applies to the requirements "of this Chapter". The applicant argues
that since RMC 4-7-150(D) requires compliance with RMC 47-060,that this transforms RMC 4-7-
5 060 into a part "of this Chapter", specifically Chapter 4-7 RMC. Reasonable minds could certainly
6 �disagree as to whether the RMC 4-7-150(D) mandate for compliance with RMC 4-7-060 makes that
�provision a part"of this Chapter". Indeed,the fact that RMC 4-7-0-060 is not expressly incorporated
� 'by reference into Chapter 4-7 RMC would lead most people to conclude that RMC 4-7-060 is not a
�part of Chapter 4-7 RMC and is simply a requirement in another chapter of the RMC that applies to
g � subdivisions. For the reasons identified in the Order Authorizing Reconsideration, Ex. 39, it is
9 'concluded as a matter of law that the street waiver criteria of RMC 4-9-250(C) apply to the
applicant's request to waive the secondary access requirement of RMC 46-060(I�(2).
10 -:
2. Failure to Provide Secondarv Access Si�nificantiv Unsafe. As a finding of fact, it is
i l �detemuned that the failure to provide secondary access to the proposed subdivision creates a
12 �significantly unsafe condition. The applicant focuses upon the inconsistencies in the City staff
position to argue that the secondary access is unnecessary. As noted in the Final Decision on this
13 :matter, the inconsistencies in the staff position aze troubling. However,there is nothing in tlie record
to suggest or explain why City fire personnel had any reason to overstate the dangers of waiving
14 ;secondary fire access. In several prior examiner decisions, City staff have often taken highly
unpopulaz positions counter to extensive public opposition in order provide objective
15 �recommendations on the application of development standazds. There is nothing to suggest in this
16 •:��strative record that City staff have succumbed to public pressure to require a secondary
=access.
17
�: Despite the odd sounding comments made by Ms. Higgins, it appears likely that staff's vacillation on
1 g _the secondary road issue arises from the difficulties of balancing past pernutting decisions, public
19 ,�safety, recent safety problems (e.g. the wildfires identified by the fire chie� and the applicant's
constitutional nexus/proportionality rights. All these factors pose very complex and challenging legal
20 'and policy issues. Given these multiple factors, it is not surprising that staff remained open minded
about the secondary access issue until late in the permitting process.
21
22 In focusing all of its reconsideration attention on the testimony of City staff, the applicant glosses
over the fact that its own fire expert was unable to opine that there would be no safety problems with
23 waiver of the secondary access requirement. As discussed in the Final Decision of this case, Mr.
Anderson was unable to provide any assurance that a secondary fire access was unnecessary for safe
24 and adequate fire response, despite a d'uect request from the Examiner to provide that assurance. If
25 the City's fire chief takes the position that secondary access is necessary for safe fire response and
the applicant's own fire expert can't dispute that position, it is difficult to see how the applicant can
26 _ seriously question why a finding is ultimately made that secondary access is necessary for safe fire
PRELIMINARY PLAT RECONSIDERATION-2
1 ;response.
2 �3. Unsafe Fire Resnonse is Materiallv Detrimental to Public; Unsafe Access Not Consistent
3 'with Waiver, Modification or Variance Criteria. Unsafe fire access is unquestionably counter to the
public welfare. The applicant takes the remazkable position that unsafe fire access is not materially
4 �detrimental to the public welfaze, and therefore there is no consistency issue with the materially
detrimental criterion for variances, RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(b). The applicant asserts that the examiner
5 erred by requiring the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed single access was safe under the
6 ;materially detrimental standard. See Ex. 39, p. 5. Under the applicant's reasoning, the public
welfaze is not adversely a.ffected if the residents of Vuecrest aze left with a street system that prevents
'7 ; fire apparatus from reaching them within the time necessary to safely respond to emergencies. The
applicants are essentially arguing that variances to fire access standards should be approved even
g when such variances would endanger City residents. This is a patently absurd construction of the
9 �"public welfare" term and the City's variance standards. If the single access does not provide for
` safe fire access as determined by the hearing examiner, there is no question under any reasonable
10 :interpretation that as a conclusion of law the applicant's proposal fails to qualify for a variance under
'the material detrimental criterion of RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(b), fails to qualify for a street waiver under
11 ��e "no detrimental effect" standard of RMC 4-9-250(C)(5)(e) and fails to qualify for a modification
12 �under the "safety" criterion (the most obvious, other criteria aze unmet as well) of RMC 4-9-
250(D)(2)(b)-
13 -
'4. Record Does not Establish that Improved Secondarv Access Necessarv for Resident EQress.
14 �The applicant correctly argues that it shouldn't be responsible for providing for a fully developed
�
secondary access route and that there should be some flexibility in where the route is located. This
15 �Position is reasonable. The City's fire chief did not focus lus testimony on problems associated with
16 P resident egress from the subdivision during emergencies. It is deterniined as a finding of fact that
�there is nothing in the record to suggest that pavement and curb, gutter and sidewalk is necessary to
17 provide safe egress to residents during times of emergency. If the primary access route becomes
�unusable duting an emergency and residents must leave to protect themselves, it doesn't appear that
1 g �that they will hesitate to use a dirt road to do so. Given the nexus/proportionality issues associated
19 ��� requiring the applicant to provide for secondary access beyond its subdivision borders, any
secondary access requirement should be designed to be the minimum necessary to assure for public
20 safety.
21 DECISION
22 The Final Decision of the above-captioned matter dated 10/13/14 is supplemented with the
23 additional fmdings of fact and conclusions of law made above. Condition No. 13 is also revised to
�provide as follows:
24
25 : 13.Prior to the recording of the final plat, a secondary fire access shall be constructed that
extends Smithers Ave S to the east to direcfly connect to Main Ave S (102nd Ave SE). The
26 : extent of street improvements necessary to effectuate this connection shall be deternuned by
PRELIIvIINARY PLAT RECONSIDERATION-3
. _
1 ! the City of Renton Fire Department in accorda.nce with applicable fire code standazds and
' 2 : sha11 be the minimum necessary to provide for safe and effective secondary access for fire
' trucks and emergency vehicles.
3 �
DATED this 15th day of November, 2014.
4 • - -�1`i--�' �"�--���_
5 Ph^if t.q!l�rrcht� -_-------
6 '�
. Ci of Renton Hearin Examiner
� 7i
tY g
8 .
� Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
9
RMC 4-8-080 provides that the fmal decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the
10 -Renton Ciry Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) requires appeals of the heari.ng examiner's decision
to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision.
11 �`Additional information regazding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's
12 � Office, Renton City Hall—7�'floor,(425)430-6510.
13 p�ected property owners may request a change in valuation for properiy tax purposes
14 notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
i
15 �
16 '
17 ; I
! '
18 �,
19 : Ii
20 ; ',
21
22 °
23 :
24
25 �
26 �
PRELIlVIINARY PLAT RECONSIDERATION-4
Cf3Y0�RENTt3M
1 NQV �� 2014 �;I�j Q.�' .
2 RECElYE(} �
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
3
4 ���`� r�� ��{! c�j{,�.t�
5
6
7 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
8
9 RE: Vuecrest Estates Prelirninary Plat
REPLY TO ORDER ALJTHORI?ING
10 REC4NSIDER.ATION AND
Preliminary Piat RESP4NSES THERETO
11 LU.A13-000642
12
13
This Memorandum replies ta the Hearing Examiner's Order Authorizing
14
�� Reconsideratian and demonstrates why the variance requested under Rerxton Municipal
16 C°de t�M�}4-7-240 should be granted. This Memorandurn a�so replies ta the two
17 responses ta the Applicant's Request for Recansideratian received by October 31,20 i 4.'
18
I. THE PLAIN MEANING OF THE GITY CODE CQNFl�tM5 THAT T�iE
19 VARIANCE PROVISI4NS IN RMC 4-7-244 AND THE VAItI.ANCE CRITERIA
Ilv RMC 4-9-250.B.5 APPLY
20
The Order Authorizing Reconsideration raises questians about the City Council's
21
22 intent in passing RMC 4-7-240 and whether the City Cou�ncil intended another code
23 Provision, such as the street waiver provisian in RMC 4-9-2S4.C,to be the anly means by
24 i These two resganses aze the October 31,2Q14 Memorandum from David N.Rasinussea,Presidcnt,
Sundance at Talbot Ridge H�A and the City of Renton's October 22,2014 City's Answer on
25 Reconsideration Request by Applicank
REPLY TO ORDER AUTHORIZING ��/�N��
RECONSIDERA.TION AND F��CIrp1n u,
RESPONSES THERETO 1 7�g $t�ond Avenue s��tt tt�o
Seattle. WA 98104
(206}823-9372
1 which relief from the dead-end street standard in RMC 4-6-060 may be granted. The City
2 Council's intent,however,is irrelevant.
3 Rules of statutory construction used by courts in interpreting state law apply in the
4
context of interpreting City ordinances. Griffin v. Thurston County, 165 Wn.2d 50, 55
5
(2008). If statutory language is unambiguous,the canons of statutory construction aze not
6
� to be used. Id. The meaning of an unambiguous statute must be derived from the code
g language. The Hearing Examiner is ttot pemutted to look for the City Council's intent
9 that irught be imputed to the Council or to construe the code m a way that the Heanng
10 Examiner believes will best accomplish some legislative purpose. See State v. Tvedt, 153,
I 1 Wn.2d 705, 732(2005). �
12
RMC 4-7-240 plainly and unambiguously provides that"A variance from the
13
requirements of this Chapter may be approved by the Hearing Examiner pursuant to RMC
14
15 4-9-250B." The phrase"This Chapter"used in RMC 4-7-240 cleazly refers to Chapter 7
16 Subdivision Regulations, codified in Title N Development Regulations of the Renton
1� Municipal Code. When the City reviews a proposed subdivision of real property,the
18 application must meet specific requirements for streets as set forth in RMC 4-7-150
19
Streets—General Requirements and Minimum Standards. RMC 4-7-1 SO.D expressly
20
states: "The street,standards set by RMC 46-060 shall apply unless otherwise approved."
21
22 This language in RMC 4-7-150.D unambiguously incorporates the street standards of
23 RMC 4-6-060 into the provision of Chapter 7. Moreover,by expressly stating that the
24 street standazds in RMC 4-6-060 apply"unless otherwise approved,"this code provision
25
REPLY TO ORDER AUTHORIZING � Van Ness
RECONSIDERATION AND Feldman LLP
RESPONSES THERETO 2 719 Second Avenue s��ce ��so
Seattle, WA 96704
206 623- 72
� )
93
1 offers the opporlunity to vary the requirements of RMC 46-060 when approving a
2 subdivision. The phrase"unless otherwise approved"cannot be ignored or deemed ',
3 superfluous. State u Bunker, 144 Wn.App. 407, 418 (2008). Rather,it demonstrates that '
4 �
approval of a subdivision under Chapter 7 may vary these street standards. The
5
mechanism provided to vary any requirement in Chapter 7 is through a variance, as noted
6
� in RMC 4-7-240.
g The fact that alternative means may be provided under the City Code to modify a
9 City standard is not unusual, nor does it cause the City Code to be ambiguous. For
10 example,the City's critical azea regulations provide multiple options for modifying those
ll
requirements. See RMC 4-3-OSO.N—Alternatives,Modifications and Variances. The fact
12
that the City Code provides a subdivisivn applicant a means to seek a variance from the
13
14 street standards through a variance under RMC 4-7-240 must be accepted by the Hearing
15 Examiner as an unaznbiguous requirement to consider and rule on such a request.
16 There is no ambiguity that the Applicant requested a variance under RMC 4-7-240.
1� Exhibit 35,Attachment I is the letter submitted by Maher Joudi entitled"Vuecrest Estates
1 g —Variance Request." That letter sets forth the four criteria for a Variance under RMC 4-
19
9-250.B.5.
20
The Applicant demonstrated that these four variance criteria in RMC 4-9-250.B.5
21
22 were met. We again ask the Hearing Exazniner to apply the correct criteria,grant the
23 variance, and strike Condition 13.
24
25
REPLY TO ORDER AUTHORIZING � Van Ness
RECONSIDERATION AND Feidman�
RESPONSES THERETO 3 71g Second Avenue s��ee ��50
Seattle, WA 98104
(208) 623-8372
,
1 II. Response to Sundance at Talbot Ridge HOA III
2 The October 31,2014 Memorandum from David N. Rasmussen,President of the
, 3 Sundance at Talbot Ridge HOA,fails to address any of the azguments presented in
4 Applicant's Request for Reconsideration pertaining to the requested variance,other than a
5
conclusory statement that the request should be rejected. The Talbot Ridge HOA has
6
apparently failed to understand the Applicant's request—that the Hearing Examiner(and
7
I the City Staf�applied the wrong standard in reviewing the variance request, and that
8
9 based upon the record before the Hearing Examiner, the variance should have been
10 granted. No further response is needed.
11
12 III. Response to City's Answer on Reconsideration Request by Applicant
13 The first issue presented in the City's Answer on Reconsideration Request by
14 Applicant("City's Answer")concerns whether the variance provisions should apply. The
15 Applicant has already adequately addressed this issue in its Request for Reconsideration
16 and in the reply above to the Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration.
1� The City's second issue, concerning the weight of testimony,deserves a response.
18
In particular,the Applicant strongly disagrees with the City's statement that the Applicant
19
provided no reason to examine the credibility of Chief Peterson. See City's Answer at 3.
20
21 As bome out by the record, Corey Thomas,the Plan Review Inspector for the City
22 of Renton Fire Department, expressly informed the Applicant that a temporary cul-de-sac
23 was an acceptable street design. Exhibit 35,Attachment B ("A proposed temporary cul-
24 de-sac would be acceptable if it meets all required dimensions and conshuction
25
REPLY TO ORDER AUTHORIZING � Van Ness
RECONSIDERATION AND Feldman ,�
RESPONSES THERETO 4 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 98704
(206) 823-9372
—
1 requirements.");Exhibit 35, Attachment C("The road section can be 28-feet if you
2 provide the stub raad only for future connectian,the actual connectian does not have to be
3 achieved at this time."}. Chief Petersan reversed these written regresentations by Fire.
4
Department representative Carey Thomas when Chief Peterson wrote in his Augvst 15,
5
2013 letter that"any request for a secondary access variance will be denied." (E�cliibit 35,
6
� Attachment E}. Chief Peterson reversed himself two months later when, on October 7,
g 2013,he wrote: "I am withdrawing my letter dated August 15,2413,regarding Vuecrest
9 Prelirninary Plat. Please understand that I reserve the right to reissue the letter based on
10 ��final plat design." Exhibit 35,Attachment G. Then,in testimany before the Hearing
l� Examiner,Ghief Petersan reversed the Fire Department's position yet again,oppasing the
12
requested variance. Chief Petersan never acknowledged his October 7letter and the fact
13
that there was no change in the plat design justifying reversal of his October 7, 2013
14
�S decision.
16 The incansistent statements by C'hief Petersan and other Fire Departrnent
l7 representatives present the fundamental issue of witness credibility. As courts have noted:
I �g "a person who speaks inconsistently is thought to be 2ess credible than a person who does
19
not" State v.Alten S. 98 Wn.App.452,467(1999).
I 20
The record also demonstrates tha#the Octaber 7,2013 letter was written explicitly
21
22 for the Applicant to believe that a ternparary cul-de-sac would be apgrov�d and to induce
23 the Applicant to continue processing its prelimin.ary plat application. Testimony of
24 Elizabeth Higgins. Past misrepresentations of a witness provide furtl�er rneans to judge a
25 -
REPLY TO ORDER AUTHORIZING � V����
I RECONSIDER.ATION AND Feldman�Ly
RESPONSES THERETO S 7�g $��pnd Avenue Suite �tso
Seattle, WA 981 Q4 I
I (206}623-9372
,
1 witness's credibility. In the Matter of the Disciplinary Proceedings Against Marshall,
2 160 Wn.2d 317(2007).
3 Given the inconsistent positions taken by the Fire Department over the history of
4
this preliminary plat application,and the Fire Chief s October 7,20131etter,the Hearing
5
Examiner should question the credibility of Chief Pederson's testimony. Moreover,the
6 -
� Hearing Exazniner heazd from three sepazate experts,Registered Fire Protection Engineer
g Cazl Anderson, Civil Engineer Maher Joudi,and Traffic Engineer Vince Geglia on why
9 the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare.
10 '�e third issue presented in the City's Answer concerns the Applicant's request,in
11
the alternative,to modify Condition 13 to provide greater flexibility. While the Applicant
12
appreciates the City's support for greater flexibility in Condition 13,the Applicant
13
disagrees with the City's demand that a fully improved road section be built by Vuecrest
14
15 Estates on property it does not own or control.
16 To illustrate the importance of greater flexibility in Condition 13,and to address
1� the City's position on the extent of road improvements for a secondary fire access,page
1 g one from Exhibit 37 is attached to this Reply Memorandum and mazked as"Attachment
19
A". Attachment A shows the two sepazate parcels of land between the Vuecrest Estates
20
Preliminary Plat and 102°a Ave. SE. For illustrative and argument purposes,these two
21
22 parcels have been marked on Attachment A as Pazcel A and Parcel B.
23 To implement the specific language of Condition 13,as imposed in the Hearing
24 Examiner's Final Decision, access would be required through Parcel A. That is because
25
REPLY TO ORDER AUTHORIZING � Van Ness
RECONSIDERATION AND Feldman�
RESPONSES THERETO C) 779 Seoond Avenue s��ce ��so
Scattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
�
. i
1 Candition 13 reads"Smithers Ave. S sha11 . . .be extended to the east..." The record
2 dernonstrates that the awner af Parcel A is unwilling to sell or gramt an easement. li
3 Testiman of 3amie Waitier.
Y
4 '
Hygothetically, a temporary alternative secandary fire access might he able tc�be
5
established through Pazcel B to 102�d Ave. SE or through some other route. Such a
6
� secandary fire access might provide access to fire and emerge�cy vehicles until a full
I public raadway is established thraugh Parcel A wben Parcel A is developed.
8
' 9 'I"he City's argument against allowing a temporary fire access and iequiring a
10 i��11y improved road section"is based on an unsupported claim that the"raad will never
I l� be built to standards"In fact,under the linkage and connection requirements in RMC 4-7-
� 12
150(E)(2)and(4�,whenever Parcel A develaps,the full road section established for
13
� Srnithers Ave. S will need to be continued from the eastern boundary of Vuecrest Estates
14
1� to l 02 Ave. SE. That is a burden rightfully imposed on the owner of Parcel A. If the
16 variance is denied because of concerns for fire access, then Condition 13 should address
. 17 fire access only and provide Vuecrest Estates with flexibility on achieving that objective.
18
19 N. Conclusion
� z� We urge the Hearing Exarniner to reconsider his Final Decision,grant the
2� requested variance and strike Condition 13. If the Hearing Examiner denies the variattce,
22 we ask the Hearing Exaininer to revise Condition 13 to allow a temparary fire access lane
23 to be established,prior to final plat approval, across any parcel that could provide a
24 secondary means af access for fire and emergency vehicles.
25
l
I REPLY TC1 ORDER AUTHQRIZING V1[1 NeSS
I RECONSIDERATIQN AND � Feldman�
I RESPONSESTHERETO 7
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 981U4
(206) 623-9372
� - - -- - - - -- - - -- -
1
2 Dated this Sth day of November,2014.
3
4 VArr NEss D
5 ,� �
By, f �
6 Br�nt,��son, BA#16240
7
8
9 �
, 10
11
12 �
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
REPLY TO ORDER AUTHORIZING ( Van Ness
RECONSIDERATION AND Feldman��
RESPONSESTHERETO 8
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
(208) 623-9372
,
1 I,Jennifer Sower,declare as follows: �
2 That I am over the age of 18 years,not a party to this action, and competent to be a
3 witness herein;
4 That I,as a legal assistant in the office of Van Ness Feldman, LLP,caused true and
5 correct copies of the following documents to be delivered as set forth below:
6 1. Reply on Order on Reconsideration;
7 2. This Certificate of Service; and
8 3. Attachment A
9 and that on November 5, 2014, I addressed said documents and deposited them for
10 delivery as follows:
11
Mr. Jason Seth [x] Via hand delivery
12 Acting Deputy Clerk
13 City of Renton Clerk's Office
1055 S. Grady Way
14 Seventh Floor
Renton,WA 98057
15
Mr. Phil A. Olbrechts [x] Via email
16 City of Renton Hearing Examiner volbrechts(�a,omwlaw.com
1� L Warren .
an'Y [x] Via email
1 g Renton City Attorney [x) Via U.S.mail
Renton City Hall
lwarren rent nw v
19 1055 S.Grady Way � o a.�o
Renton,WA 98057
20
21 I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that
22 the foregoing is true and correct.
23 EXECUTED at Seattle,Washington on this 5�'day of November, 2014.
24 iX,���.
25 J fer Sower,Declazant
REPLY TO ORDER AUTHORIZING � Van Ness
RECONSIDERATION AND Feldman�
RESPONSES THERETO 9 71 g Second Avenue s��t� ��so
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
ATTACHMENT A
. . . .
�a�r�rF' �T 3�
! .. �
. _ . ..
� � �
� i i � i i i i
' ` • ' ` - ' • ' . ' - �' ATTACHMENT A r �`�'�
� � � � " � I I I �I $ ,.�r.. ��pr
. ( i ��?�iii�i�� , � I �� ! 7� _ . .. s�r�rr �`.rw
�_i.,J___ \ / ' i L._��.�1 i - � _.._.�'ilTMdl __`_t� 1, r'��.._._.•,.._.._...�.:�=~�.�--i ', ... ..
-------------t--t--__..s_ ,'�^�,�,___i__"Tf" ---�—�-;.,--.--`�� I f� �i f ."�+' `"',*�-' � `�
j I A. --` Ji' / ,�s~��� j 1 $ ! �� a � � ..�.r� � � 1�t �
/ r.r.r��...+.i + rµ� rr 7��
I I � I , 1 ' 1 y _�.n_ .-�.r u,.r.�.- rcw,r � ��
��w.�-�__.��4�? ' 1 1 I � � '�' -�� e` �
� � . I I 1 �
I i , —�}.__J_�.—L---J � aanrre
F_1______ 1 { f— ___' �� ��
! I ' .. . � ` . ' � �
... , + . _ —_J 1 ' —_---� � �
�. ' �
� yt . � ` � �y � ! l`Y � ' y ���
�L �---�-• � -�� 1 l� '"�s�, �� �i � � R
,
' q � -���'•� � � ,.�r `\, �� b _.� , ���
»z��--� _ _t, 'A• '' '' � ~'"�•r..__.____---- aanrxr ' t �—=;r�-••� < �
..�� _�` v�„ , , , —�-------;--- __r–__� �
..�. � �`� s . l �� ' '``'i,, f � . � ,..,.�.�
�'��' � �`�/ ' /� � I I I I i ; ;� i � r`.�c '�` �...�
• `' aw " � �_ ... � � j I I I i i ' `.nr a�.
�� � i-i�r"�'—`"'' � � �„�t��". � . , f�' .""�'� \� � � • l I I � I Iy , rw - _ ..r
-- � � _ � I ��.. ���.� �.�..ma.l.��.���,��.....��� �.\
��� � ,� �` ' ! `,; �-�--,.��_s�.�a�__L._ — � a� atairrxr�
,��_._.�...`?l _ , � ` � 1 I/
, , .�l.s =t � �: ..`.1�., i ^�1. i
� . . :� �` I -, �,l� � ,iL .�; `.�__. ; ,�i�
� ' '. � - PARCEL A -
` � \ _ , ..._..
� �� ���_ �
,: �� ��_��.__�_ `��- � �
! �.,, __....».�.:a.a.;.,� i ,..r..�
; � ' .rracr � : _ . �• _ . .. .. � R�
i , ` -: ~`� ...
.,.... _ , _ ...•,,/� ; ". .._'—_--•� � _ --------------I ararmrn
J . ., ____.�._�- �
r � _==a.�_ __--— �
.,`� _:i'� ,/..„_, ` *"`� i
_ /, -- i .R«.
_ i
. _ f_ � , i a
'-�-::. .
li - _ ___
, ---- . .: .�� � -,� ��.� -.. --- PARCEL B ; �,.P.� �,
� '� .. . , +. • n��� ' �
� � , jRA4T�C' _ . . � CIF2'TI'1 ���
_ . �' '4lPi!' .- � '"""'°'°"" w�a aau�a+
1.
'�+.� . . . 1 wwcr wo� umr
.
r,,
I .�, .!.. . .. Je_ _ .. . t .. .. , ., --u._______—��_.`.�_._�.`----__..! ��,rn ..
� " " . _ _.. — pMM t
�r { ,�d . , ' � - O � �
. . �oF I
,. i
l� t .
•I •
'_.�� l.
. ..,..� ,...
i � .M„�..,,.�.,.. �-
.,...,.,.�v,...,.,.�.,.�.....�.
----J
' CITY OF RENTON �
OCT 2 2 2014
1 RECEIVED
CITY CLERK'S OFFtCE
2
3
9
5
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
6
RE: Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat )
� �
Preliminary Plat ) CITY'S ANSWER
8 LUA13-000642
) ON RECONSIDERATION
9 ) REQUEST BY APPLICANT
)
10
' INTRODUCTION
11
This Vuecrest Plat application primarily revolves around a dispute as to
12
13 whether on extra-long, dead end street should be allowed. The Examiner decided that
' i4 it should not be allowed.
15 The Request for Reconsideration (Reconsideration) raises three basic points,
16
each of which is without merit. The Examiner should refuse to reconsider his decision,
i�
except to rephrase Condition 13.
18
ARGUMENT
19
20 The three points will be rephrased as responses to the Reconsideration.
21 1. The Examine�used the Correct Criteria in Denvin�the Waiver.
22 The Reconsideration argues that the Examiner erred in den in a Waiver
Y g
23
under RMC 4-9-250.C.5, and that the Examiner should have used the variance procedure
24
under
25
Cit�s Answer to ApplicanYs ��'�Y ��j Renton City Attorney
Request for Reconsideration-1 ♦ � � 1055 South Grady Way
0 R I �I N A L � Renton,WA 98057-3232
Phone: (425)430�480
��N.�� Fax: (425)430-6498
1 RMC 4-9-250.6. However,variances are applicabie to only certain land use regulations
2 4-9-250 B.1, none of which are street standards. This point was made in the Exominers
3
decision footnote 3 at page 27. But even if there was a variance available both waiver
4
and variance criteria require a finding that there will be no detriment to the public
5
6 welfare,4-9-250.B.5.b for variances and 4-9-250.C.S.e for waiver,a fad that was not
� established by the Applicant. The Reconsideration also refers to the "modification
8 provisions "(page 4 at line 3 citing to 4-9-250.C.) but modification is dealt with in
9 subsection 4-8-250.D, again noted in Examiner decision in footnote 3 at page 27, as
10 �
unavailing and requires a finding that public safety is met.
11
2. The Examiner Should Not Give Greater Wei�ht to Testimonv of the Applicant's
12 Expert than that of the Fire Chief.
13 The Reconsideration incorrectly states, in several spots,that there is
i4
unrefuted testimony that the variance criteria had been met, (page 2, line 2;poge 5,
15
line 21). These assertions, of necessity,emphasize testimony about lack of detriment to
16
i�
public welfare. They were, of course, refuted by the testimony of Chief Peterson about
1 g concerns of greater response time and potentially blocked access in case of fire or
i 9 natural disaster,summarized in the Examiner's decision at page 8. In fact,Chief
20 Peterson's early opposition to this plat was recently reinforced by a wildfire,in the city,
21 that blocked egress for citizens from their homes down a long, dead end access road.
22
(Examiner's decision pg. 8J
23
Further,the City has a strongly stated policy against long,dead end roads
24
25 expressed in RMC 4-6-060.H. The policy is clear under RMC 4-6-060.H.2 that any dead
end street over 700 feet in length requires two mean �c and fire sprinklers for all
City's Answer to ApplicanYs �j1' � Renton Clty Attorney
Request for Reconsideration-2 � � � 1055 South Gredy Way
..r Renton,WA 98057�232
Phone: (425)430�480
��N�� Fax: (425)430-6498
1 houses beyond 500 feet. The only exception to that policy is for waiver of the
2 turnaround to be ranted b the CED Administrator with a
B Y pproval of the Fire&
3
Emergency Services. There is no provision for waiver of the limitations of the length of
4
the dead end street. There is also no room for an expert witness to argue that the
5
6 policy,so clearly enunciated,can be ignored because in the expert's opinion "there
� would be no material detriment to public safety." (Reconsideration,pg. 6, lines 6, 7J.
8 That opinion not only contradicts City policy but also recent experience from the
9 wildfire. It is•also refuted by the testimony of Chief Peterson,one of the City
io
Administrators charged with enforcing and interpreting the code section in question.
il
There is also no reason shown in the Reconsideration why the Examiner
12
should change his opinion that Chief Peterson's testimony was more persuasive than
13
14 the expert, Mr.Anderson. The failure to state a reason to re-examine credibility alone,
is should be enough to carry the day for the City.
16 3. Public Safetv Should Not be Compromised bv Chan�in�Staff Positions.
17 The essence of this dead end road conflict is public safety. The Examiner is
�$
asked, because of conflicting staff inessages,to ignore public safety,City policy and
19
State policy and grant a waiver of code that limits the length of the dead end street.
20
The Examiner is asked to ignore by implication, RCW 58.17.110(1) (a)that each plat to
21
22 be approved,must provide appropriate streets and RCW 58.17.110(1) (b)that the plat
2s would be in the public interest. The Examiner is without jurisdiction to do.
24 The Reconsideration advances an estoppel argument without so stating. That
25 is unsurprising because estoppel generally does not run against the State or its
�SY
Cit�/s Answer to Applicant's p1'� �r�j Renton c�ty Attomey
Request for Reconsideration-3 � ♦ 1055 South Grady Way
„� Renton,WA 98057-3232
Phone: (425)430-6480
��N��� Fau: (425)430�6498
i �
�- subdivisions, such as the City. Estate of Hambelton v. Department of Revenue�,
� Wn.2d. (Octaber, 2014}. Estoppel is even more inappropriate if pubiic safety is I
� I
clearly implicated,as in this case.
4
App(icant can hardly act surprised by Chief Peterson's positic�n. He oppased
5
6 the pfat by letter dated August 15,2013, and only conditionally withdrew it by letter
7 dated Octaber 7,2p13. He did not state that he would approve the road length if the
e plat stayed the same. And, subsequently,the ChieYs fears were vindicated not only by a
� wildfire incident in the City but undoubtedly by the�SO landslide.
10
And,applicant knew by State law and City code that appraval of the eutra
11
length dead end road was not within the power of the mid-leve{staff. The ultimate
12
1� approval had to came frorn the Exar�iner and the Examiners authority could not be
�4 fettered by staff statements. And Applicant should havQ been aware that any variance,
�5 waiver ar modification c�€the road length had to be granted by the CED Administratar in
l� consultation with the Fire and Emergency Services or the Examiner,as the case may be.
1� No statement of mid-levet staff can remave the authority of the Examiner and City
ie
Administrators to make decisions about this dead end road and the piat itself.
19
The Reconside�ation does acknawledge that the applicant was an notice af
20
Chief Peterson's opposition to the extra-long,dead end street. But it does nat
21
2� acknowEedge that the pfatting pracess often involves opposition on one or more aspects
23 af the pfa#that are ultimately resofved. And such was the case here. Canterns about
2� drainage and set-bacics fram steep siopes were resolwed. The applicant doesn't claim to
2� be naive about the give and take of the process. This preliminary plat has been
Cit�s An5wer to Applitant's ('j�'�Y 4� Renton CHy Attorney
B l05S Sonth Grady Way
Request for Recansideration-4 ♦ � '�' Renton,WA 980573232
Phone: (426}430-6d8d
��N�Q Fax: {425j 43Q-6498
�
�- approved in afl respects,with cond'rtions. Once the conditian of praviding a secondary
2 means of access fias been met the p(at may proceed. it may not be timely today, but
3
may be tomorrow.
4
M4DIFiED CONDITiON I3
5
6 The City agrees that Condition 13 can be modi�ed to p�ovide the applicant
� with more flexibility in providin�a secondary mea�s of access.But,that condition .
s should not be limited to access by fire and emergency services vehicles only; it shauld
� also state that the secandary access must be a fully improved road section so that it
10
would provide an acceptable road surface for egress for citizens in an emergency.
�1
Othe+twise,the raad will nevec be built to standards as the"final link"develapment will
I 12
have lega!access to developed City streets that are nearby and wil! not trigger the City's
i�
1� dead end road#imitations and thus would nat require the later developer to bring
z5 Applicants secondary means of access ta City standards. There would remain,anly an
1� emergency access road,noi a completed standard street section.
17 Alternatively,if the fxaminer is not wifling to mflcli#y the conditians as
18
praposed,then the original condition should �emain.
��
coNc�us�oN
Zo
For the reasons stated,the Reconsideration shoutd be denied,but Condition
21
2� 13 modified as stated above.
23 DATEO THIS��"�clay of October,2014.
24 j?,{ `
(� /,,',��e-�r�Zt�t�i��/(.�V�tiF'r�-----
25 `'Eawrence J.War�i,W58A#5853
Rentan C' o
�' �j, Renton City Attomey ,
City's Answer to Applicant's � g � �055 South Grady Way
Request far Retonsideration-S � � Rentan,WA 98057-3232
..t� Phone: {425y d30�480
�t.�i�Q Fax: (425�434-6498
-� - - -
1
2 -
3 • �
4
5
6
7
8 . BEFORE THE HEARING E�S;AMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
9 `` )
RE: Vuecrest Preliminary Plat )
10 � ) ORDER AUTHORIZING
� ) RECONSIDERATION
11 ; LUA13-000642 �
, �
12 � )
)
13 )
14 The Applicant has requested reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the above-captioned
matter. Since the reconsideration request affect parties of record and the interests of the City,the parties
15 of record who testified at the hearing and City staffwill be given an opportunity to respond to the request
16 for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued. Any responses must be
based upon evidence that is already in the record No evidence that has not been recorded at the hearing
1� or entered as an exhibit at the hearing will be considered in the reconsideration request.
18 The Applicant seeks reconsideration of its denial of a variance request to the requirements of RMC 4-6-
060, which prohibits the Applicant's proposed dead end street. The Applicant raises a challenging
19 ��deration issue, because there aze three different sets of variance/modification/waiver' criteria that
20 each arguably apply to the proposed dead end street. The Applicant azgues that the variance criteria of
RMC 4-9-250(C)apply. City sta� in the staff report, asserts that the request is a"modification",which
21 would require application of the RMC 4-9-250(D) criteria. The final decision employed the street
"waiver"criteria of RMC 4-9-250(C).
22
23 . 1 For those not familiaz with Renton's variance%dificarion/waiver standards, RMC 4-9-250(Bx5)allows for the
24 �`�'ariance" of zoning standards identified in RMC 49-250(Bxl) and other standards in the RMC that ezpressly
authorize applica6on of RMC 4-9-250(C). RMC 49-250(C)allows for the"waive�'of straet improvements. RMC
25 4-9-250(D)allows for"modification"of"standards",apparently those standards not subject to the variance or street
waiver process. 'Ihe Applicant's reconsideration request presents the issue of which of these three types of review
26 processes apply—variance,wairer or modification?
Reconsideration- 1
1 �.The weak point in the Applicant's position is that the RMC 4-9-250(C)criteria only applies if RMC 4-6-
060 is considered a requirement of Chapter 47 RMC. RMC 4-7-240(A) provides that the criteria of
2 RMC 4-9-250(C) apply to"the raquirements of this Chapter [Chapter 4.7 RMC]". Of course,RMC 4-
3 �6-060 is a part of Chapter 4-6 RMC. The Applicant notes that RMC 4-7-150(D) requires compliance
.with RMC 4-6-060. Through ttus cross-reference, the Applicant argues that RMC 4-6-060 should be
4 considered a part of Chapter 4-7 RMC. The Applicant's interpreta.tion raises some troubling issues,
.notably.
5 �
' 1. For the reasons outlined in Foohiote 3 of the Final Decision, the variance criteria
6 advocated by the Applicant would not apply if RMC 4-6-060 were not considered a part of
Chapter 4.7 RMC. This means that a dead end road built as part of a subdivision would be
� � subject to variance criteria while the waiver criteria would apply for the same dead end street
g proposed as part of another type of development proposal. For example, under the
Applicant's interpretation the RMC 4-9-250(C)variance criteria would apply to its proposed
9 dead end since it's part of a subdivision, but if the exact same street configuration were
proposed as part of a college caznpus or apartment comple�c,the modification criteria of RMC
10 : 4-9-250(C) would apply instead. Why would the City Council intend that a different safety
11 ; �dard (as applied in the variance/waiver criteria) apply to the same dead end street simply
. because it's part of a subdivision as opposed to another type of development project?
12
; 2. Street waiver criteria, RMC 4-9-250(C), are precisely designed to address the unique
13 � circumstances applicable to street improvements. Why would the City Council intend to
forego these spacifically appficable waiver standards for the generic variance standards of
14 RMC 4-9-250(B)because a street was proposed as part of a subdivision?
15 �
3. Subdivision review is subject to numerous development standards that aze not cross-
� referenced in Chapter 4.7 RMC, such as zoning bulk and dimensional standardsZ and
16 �
drainage standards. Why would the City Council i.ntend applicable variance criteria to
1� � differ depending on whether or not a development standard is cross-referenced in Chapter 4-7
- RMC?
' 18 =
A response from the City on the issues raised above would be of particular value, due to the City's
19
1 '1. Persons who testified at the hearing on the above-captioned matter and City staffshall have until 5:00
� pm, October 31, 2014 to provide written comments in response to the request for reconsideration
2 submitted by the Applicant, dated October 16,2014.
3 �2. The Applicant shall have until November 5, 2014 at 5:00 pm to provide a written reply to the
4 : responses authorized in the preceding paragraph.
5 ; 3. All written comments authorized above may be emailed to the Exam.iner at olbrechtslaw(�a,grnail.com
� and Elizabeth Higgins at EHi��insla�Rentonwa.�ov. In the altemative written comments may be
6 mailed or delivered to Eliza.beth Higgins, City of Renton Senior Planner, at 1055 South Grady Way,
� Renton, WA 98057. Mailed or delivered comments must be received by the City by the dea.dlines
specified in this Order.
8
4. No new evidence may be presented in the replies or responses. All information presented must be
9 drawn from documents and testimony admitted into the public hearing of this proceeding, held on
September 11, 2014. Applica.ble laws, court opinions and hearing examiner decisions are not
10 � ��idered new evidence and may be submitted if relevant to a response or reply to the Applicant's
11 : request for reconsideration.
12
13 � DATED this Z 1 st day of October,2014.
f�- �
14 � ' --'�i-�' ���.
Ph��_c�hntiht�e -_._.___.._..—
15 �
16 . City of Renton Hearing Examiner
�
17 ' "
18 �
19
20 :
21 °
22
23
24
25 �
26
Reconsideration-3
�iTY OF RENTON
I ocT � s 2a14 �.�,
2 i2ECEtVED �/1��
CiTY CLERK'S OFFtCE
3 e!%�, /�`y'�'I Cc�:�-�>;
� 4
5 �
6 �
7 BEFORE THE HEARING E�i;AMINER FOR THE CTTY OF RENTON
8 �
9 RE: Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat
I O Preliminary Plat REQUEST FOR
LUA13-000642 RECONSIDERATION
11
12
13
� I. INTRODUCTION
14
Purs�uant to Renton Municipal Code(RMC)48-100(G)(9)and RMC 4-8-
� 15
16 I 10(E)(13),the Applicant for the Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat requests that the
1� Hearing Examiner reconsider his Final Decision dated October 3,2014(the"Decision")
1 g with re�pact to the issue of secondary accsss. The Hearing Examiner failed to apply the
19 ���riteria to consider the variance,which was sought under RMC 4-9-250(B}. By
20 applying the wrong criteria under RMC 49-250(C)(5),the Hearing Examiner reached an
21
erroneous conclusion in his Decision and in the imposition of Condition 13.
22 .
23
24
25
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION- 1 � VSII NBSS
� Feidman�
779 Second Avenue Suite 1150
�'� Seattle, WA 9H104
(206)623-9372
1 The Hearing Examiner should also reconsider his decision to accurately apply the
2 unrefuted tes�timony by the Applicant's expert,Mr.Carl Anderson',demonstra.ting that the
3 variance criteria was met,and in particulaz,that granting the variance would not be
4
materially detrimental to public welfare.
5
The Hearing Examiner also should grant the variance and remove Condition 13 to
6
� remedy the fraudulent or negligent misrepresenta.tions by City staff that secondary access
g would not be required.
9 Finally,in the alternative,the Hearing Examiner should revise the language in
10 Condition 13 to provide greater flexibility to achieving secondary access in the future.
11
12 II. ARGUMENT
13 A. The FIearing Egaminer Should Reconsider the Decision,Apply the Carrect
Variance Criteria,Grant the Variance and Eliminate Condition 23.
14 �e Hearing Examiner Decision mistakenly applied the street unprovement
15
modification provisions set forth in RMC 4-9-250(C}rather than the variance provisions
16
in RMC 49-250(B). Had the carrect variance provisions been applied,the unrefuted
17
18 evidence presented by the Applicant and its experts should have led the Heari.ng Examiner
19 � ��t the variance from the secondary access requireinents. We ask the Hearing �
20 Examiner on reconsiderarion to grant the requested variance and strike Condition 13.
21 The approval considered�by the Hearing Exami.ner,in the matter,is for a
22
Preliminary Plat Preliminary Plats are regulated by the City of Renton under Title N,
23
24 �The E�miner also erred by failing to include as an Earlubit in the Decision,Fxhtbit 38,the resume of
Mr.Anderson,which was offered and admitted{a copy of Fahibit 3 8 as submitted at the hearing is
25 attached). •
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDER.ATION-2 VBC)N@SS
� Feldman�.
S��n7 719 Second Avenue Sulte 1150
Seattle, WA 88104
(206)823-9372
1 Chapter 7 of the Municipal Code. RMC 47-150 establishes the general and minimum
' 2 street requirements for plats. RMC 4-7-150(D),which imposes the requirements for
3 streets in subdivisions, states that: "The street standards set by RMC 4-6-060 shall apply
4
unless otherwise approved." The street standards in RMC 46-060 include those .
5
provisions in RMC 4-6-060(�Dead End Streets,which were the topic of much
6
� discussion at the public heazing and are at the crux of the secondary access issue. Thus,in
g a plat application,the sbreet standards in RMC 46-060 are applied through the minuimum
9 street requirements as set forth in Chapter 7, Section 4-7-150. •
10 'I'he Hearing Examiner is given express authority to grant variances from the
11 requirements for subdivisions,as set forth in Chapter 7,including variances from the
12 ;
. street standards. See RMC 47-240{1). The Heari.ug Examiner may grant such a variance
13
by following the variance procedures set forth in RMC 49-250(B). RMC 47-240(A)
14
15 sta.tes: "A variance from the requirements of this Chapter may be approved by the
16 Hearing Examiner,pursuant to RMC 49-25{}(B)".
17 The Applicant agplied for a variance under RMC 4-9-250(B), seeking a variance
1 S from the secondary access standards in RMC 4-b-060,which were being imposed on this
19
subdivision through RMC 4-7-150. See Exhibit 35,Att.I. The variance applicatian
20
provided an analysis showing compliance with each of tb.e four criteria under RMC 49-
21
z2 250(B)including,in particular,criteria RMC 4-9-250(B)(5)(b)which states that"the
23 granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or
24 injunious to the propecty or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subje�t
25
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION-3 Van Ness
� Feidman w
T99 Second Avenus Sufte 1150
s��-� Seattlt, WA 981D4
� {208j 823-9372
1 property is situated." The Applicant never asked far a street improvement modification
2 under section RMC 4-9-250(C). It was an error for the Hearing Eaaminer to apply the
3 street improvement modification provisions under RMC 4-9-250(C).when a variance was
4
sought under RMC 47-240(A).
5
At the plat hearing,the witnesses for the Applicant presented unrefuted evidence
6 �
� that the variance criteria had been met and that the variance should have been granted. In
g particular,these witnesses established that approval of the variance would"not be
9 materially detrimenta.l"as provided in RMC 49-250(B)(5){b). See Testimony of Mr.
10 M��Joudi;Testimony of Mr. Carl Anderson; and written testimony of Vincent J.
11 Geglia,Exhibit 35,Att.K.
12 �
The Heari.ng Examiner erred by applying the street improvement modification
13 -
� standards in RMC 4-9-250(C). By ap}slying the wrong criteria,the Hearing Examiner
14 I 15 - ��enly applied a"no detrimental effect"standard from RMC 49-250(G�(5)(e)to the
16 : facts in the case. See Decision at 27.
17 The Decision acknowledges that the unrefuted testimony from the Applicant's fire
i 8 expert,Mr.Carl Anderson,was that the addition of 2Q lots"would not be a significant
19
detriment to public safety based on what's already in the area." This expert testimony
20
confirms compliance with criteria RMC 49-250(B)(5)(b)that the variance would not be ,
21
22 materially detrimental to the public welfare. By applying the improper"no detrimental"
23 standard from RMC 49-250(C)(5)(e),the Hearing Examiner mistakenly concluded that
24 Mr. Anderson's testimony was not persuasive.
25
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION-4 Van Ness
� Feldman W
5,�� 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattie, WA 881Q4
(206) 623-9372
1 Repeatedly,the Decision,as written,demonstrates that by applying the wrong
2 criteria the Hearing Examiner reached the wrong conclusions in response to the
3 ApplicanYs variance request. For example,the Decision states that the burden was on the
4
Applicant to demonstrate that the single access"would be safe." Decision at 15. There is
5
no such criterion within the context of the requested variance. The Decision likewise �
6
� asserts that the burden was on the Applicant that sprinklers would reduce the fire hazard
g "to insignificant Ievels." Again,these conclusions may be appropriate under the
9 modification criteria of"no detriment,"but these conclusions are etroneous under the ',
l� applicable variance criteria. ,
11 �e Examiner should apply the correct variance criteria and,based on the evidence I',
12 �
in this record,grant the variance as requested and strike Condition 13.
13 '
14 B. On Reconsideration,the Hearing Examiner Should Give Proper Weight to
15 �e Applicant's Ezperts who Established that Granting the Variance Would
not be Materially Detrimental to Public Welfare.
16 On reconsideration,the Hearing Examiner should give proper weight to the
1� testimony of the Applicant's experts and should discount the exaggerated and
18
questionable testimony presented by staff. The allegation by staff of a dead end street
19
being 2400 feet long with 99 homes on it failed to accurately describe the"on-the ground"
20
21 conditions. Mr.Cazl Anderson's unrefuted testimony demonstrated that only 800 feet of
22 the roadway will have a single access because of tb�e internal secondary access loops that
23 are provided off of this sheet along its length. Mr.Anderson's testimony confirmed that,
24 of the 99 homes that staff alleged to be on this street,42 of those are on two streets, S 47�'
25
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION- 5 V1t1 NeSS
� Feldman W
s�� T19 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
(206J623-93T2
] PL and SE 185`�PL,that have no impact on access to and from Vuecrest, and of the
2 existing 57 homes not on those two streets, 36 are within the Stoneha.ven Plat that has a
3 looped road which allows for two ways of access or egress within that plax.
4
These facts,coupled with the sipnificant mitigation of sprinklering these homes,
5
led Mr.Anderson to his expert opinion that there would be no material detriment to public
6
� safety by granting the requested variance. That testimony is unrefuted.
g In his October 7,20131etter,Fire Chief Mark Peterson went on record
9 withdrawing his August 15,20131etter and thereby confirrning that a secondary access
10 �,o�d not be required for this pla� There have been no changes in the plat design since
1 I the tune of that October 7`�letter that would provide Mr.Peterson with a basis to"reissue" .
12
his August 15�letter. In fact,Mr.Peterson has never reissuad that letter. Instead,Mr.
13
Peterson testified at the plat hearing as if his October 7,20131etter never existed and that
14
15 he had never given his authorization on October 7�'for the plat review to continue withaut
16 p���g a secondary access. Given Mr.Anderson's unrefuted testimony and the lack of
17 credible testunony by staff,the Hearing Examiner should,on reconsideration,grant the
1 g variance,as requested,and strike Condition 13.
19 .
.20 C: The Hearing Ezaminer Should Grant the Variance and Remove Condition 13
to Remedy the City Staff's Frandulent or Negligent Misrepresentatiuns that a
21 Secondary Access would not be Required. �
22 The reoord in this case establishes that the City staff expressly represented to the
23 Applicant that a secondary access would not be required. Those representations induce�
24 the Applicant to process this preliminary plat through the preliminary plat heaTing.
25
REQUEST FOR REC4NSIDERATION-6 VSfI NP,SS
� Feldman�.
719 Second Avanua Sutte 1150
ST�'� Seattle,WA 98'SO4
(208) 623-9372
1 The first representations on this issue occimed during the second pre-application
Z conference. Mr. Corey Thomas,on behalf of the Fire Department,prepared a detailed
3 writtea memo dated November 13,2012 confirming that a temporary cul-de-sac would be
4
� acceptable to the Fire Department. He wrote:
5
"Street system shall be designed to be extended to adjoining
6 underdeveloped properties.for future extension. It was previously decided
� to require a 32-foot wide street if the street grid could not be extended. If
this future extension can be achieved,the requirad 32-foot paved stre,et
g may be reduced to 28-feet of pavement A nroi�osed temvorarv cul-de-sac
would be accentable if it meets all required dimensions and construction
9 reuuirements." •
1Q Exhibit 35,Att.B. (Emphasis added)
11 prior to formally submitting the preliminary plat application,the Applicant sought
12
,
confirmation of the Fire Deparhnent s position that a temporary cul-de-sac would be
13 .
acceptahle. For the second time,the Fire Department expressly represented in a January
14 .
I S 23�2013 email to the Applicant that a secondary access would not be required:
16 "'�e road section can be 28-feet if you provide the stub road only for
future connec6on,the actual connection does not have to be achieved at
17 this time. A temporarv 90-foot diameter cul-de-sac is acceptable a1so. . . .
All homes require fire sprinlder systems. . . . The only way to eliminate
1 g the fire sprinklers is to complete the road connection to 102�right away
19 [sic]."
20 Ex. 35,Att. C. (Emphasis added) The City's senior planner,Vanessa Dolbee crystalized
21 the City's position that a cul-d�sac would be authorizad:
22 "The City is asking that you provide stub to the property to the east but are
not askinQ vou to make the imurovements to urovide secondarv access as
23 part of the proposed development However,without the secondary access
24 a cul-de-sac would be required for fire turn around. . . "
25 Id. (Emphasis added)
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERA.'TI4N-7 Val't NP�SS
� Feldman�. ,
�7 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 �I
Seattle, WA 98�04
{206} 623-93T2
1 After submitting the application,and after receiving the Augtist 15,20131etter
2 from Fire Chief Peterson,which indicated that a secandary access would be required,
3 there were detailed discussions with the City. These discussions led to the Fire ChiePs
4
letter of October 7 2013• a letter that withdrew his Au t 15�'letter. The A licant
� � � PP
S I
accepted the Fire Chief at lus written word that,so long as the final plat design did not '
6
� change, a secondary access would not be required. The Applicant relied on that Ietter and
g continued a lengthy and expensive process to answer all stafFissues to bring the
9 preliminary plat to hearing,including paying for an additional geotechnical report.
10 Ms. Higgns testified at the hearing that the October 7�'letter,infoiming the
11
Applicant that a secondary access was not going to be required, was solicited by Ms.
12
Higgins in order to induce the Applicant to continue processing the preliminary plat
13
application. Fire Chief Peterson's tes�tiimany at the heazing indicates that he had no
14 �
15 : �tention of allowing the preliminary plat to proceed without requiring a secondary access.
16 : Tragically,this was never disclosed to the Applicant undl the staff report was issued in
17 September 2014 proposing Condition 13 to require a sec�ndary access.
I 8 The Hearing Examiner should be deeply troubled by tl}e actions of City staff in
19
this matter and by Ms.Higgins'testimony about her soliciting Fire Chief Peterson's
20
October 7�letter to induce the Applicant to support a secondary geotechnical study. The
ZI
22 behavior of Ms.Higgins and the prior representations of City staff that no secondary
23 access would be req�uired may ultimately support a damages claim against the City by the
24 Applicant for fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation. By confirming that the Fire Chief
25
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION-8 Van Ness
Feldman�,
s,�.� 719 Second Avenae 5uite 1154
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
1 was withdrawin his rior letter,Ms.Higgins and Chief Peterson intended for the I
g P
2 Applicant to believe that no secondary access would be required. Yet,apparendy,this
3 was all a hoax, and Chief Peterson never intended to allow this plat ta be approved
4
without a secondary access. This hoax only came to light weeks before the preliminary
S
plat hearing after the Applicant spent tens of thousands of dollars to reach the preliminary
6
� plat hearing. The Applicant would have ended this application a year ago had the October
� g ]5�'letter not been issued. .
9 The Fxazniner coaectly notes in the Decision at 16 that these actions by staff strain
10 �e credibility of the City's testimony. While the Hearing Examiner may not have the
11 authority to find fraudulent or negligent misrepresentarion in this matter,the Hearing
12
Examiner has the opportunity to avoid such future claims by the Applicant and to remedy
13
the outrageous behavior of City staff by granting the requested variance and striking
14
15 �ndition 13.
16 �
D. If the Variance is not Granted,The Hearing Ezaminer an Reconsideratioa '
1� shouId,in the Alternative,Revise Condition 13 to Provide Greater Fle�bility
for Secondary Access.
18
In the event the Hearing Examiner does not agree to reconsider the standazds
19
applied to the requested variance,or applies the variance criteria but concludes that the
20
21 variance should not be granted,the Applicant asks the Hearing Examiner to revise
22 Condition 13 to allow the Applicant to pzovide secondary access in ways other than
23 eactending Smithers Ave. S.immediately to the east and to the specified intersection.
, 24
25
, REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION-9 Van Ness
� Feldman �
�_� T19 Second Avenue Suite 115�
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
1 As shown in Exlu�bit 37,on sheet 1 of 1,there is one pazcel of land(the"Easterly
2 Parcel")immediately east of the easterly end of Smithers Ave. S as proposed to be built
3 by the Applicank Mr.7amie Waltier testified that the owner of ttus Easterly Parcel will ,
4
not sell his property or provide an easement for secondary access. Exhibit 37 shows on
5
Sheet 1 of 1 another parcel of land(the"Southeasterly Parcel")located between Tract"B"
6 �
� and Tract"C"on the Proposed Vuecrest Esta.tes plat and 102"d Ave: SE. Secondary
g access might be available through that pazcel.
9 Condition 13,as cuirently written,reads.
10 Smithers Ave. S. shall connect to S. 48`k PI and be extended to the east to
11 provide a secondary access from Main Ave. S(102"d Ave. SE)at its
intersection with SE 186`�`St.
12 -
As written,it appears that this condition can only be satisfied by acquiring a public
13
access easement through the Easterly Parcel and providing a fire access road to the
14
15 specified intersection. Even if a secondary access could be established between the plat to
16 a location on 102"�Ave. SE through the Southeasterly Parcel,or through some other
17 parcel,it would appear tiiat this would not meet the specific terms of Condition 13.
1 g On reconsideration, if Condition 13 is not deleted based upon the granting of
19 Applicant's variance request,Condition 13 should be revised to read as follows:
20
Prior to recording the final plat, a secondary fire access shall be
21 constructed providing a second mearrs of access from Main Ave S(102"d
Ave. SE)to the plat by fire t►ucks and emergency vehicles. The extent of
22 improvements for this secondary fire truck access shall be deternuned by
23 the City of Renton Fire Department in accordance with applicable fire
code sta�dards and shall be the minimum necessary to provide for safe
24 and e,,ffective secondary fire access.
25
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION- 10 Van Ness
� Feldman�
S�_� 779 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Sesttle, WA 98104
(206)623-93T2
1 III. CONCLUSION
2 The Applicant was induced into proceeding with this plat application by repeated
3 representations by City staff that no secondary access would be required. The Applicant
4 has met its burden to obtain a variance from the secondary access standard. On remand,
5
the Hearing Examiner should apply the variance criteria in RMC 49-205(B}(5),not the
6
modification provisions in RMC 4-9-250(C}, give proper weight to the ApplicanYs expert
7
8 testimony that established compliance with these criteria,approve the variance and strike
g Condition 13.
10
� �
Dated this 16 day of October,2014
11
12 V.vv N�Ss F Mart
l3 . �
BY
14 Brent C'�.a�son,W$BA#16240
15
lb
17 �
18
� 19
20
21
22
23
24
25
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION- 11 Van Ness
� Feidman�
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 I
s7m-7 Seaftle, WA 98104 �
(208)623-9372 ',
1
2
3
4 .
5
6
7 BEFORE THE HEARING E��AMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
8
9 RE: Vuecxest Estates Preliminary Plat
10 Prelim.i.nary Plat REQUEST FOR
LUA13-400642 RECONSIDERATION
I1
12
13 I,Jennifer Sower, de�lare as follows: � �
14 That I am over the age of 18 years,not a party to this action,and competent to be a
15 witness herein;
16 � That I,as a legal assistant in the office of Van Ness Feldman,LLP,ca.used true and
1'7 correct copies of the following documents to be delivered as set forth below:
1 g 1. Applicant's Request for Reconsideration; and
19 2. This Certificate of Secvice
2p and that on October 16,2014,I addressed said documents and deposited them for delivery
21 as follows:
22 Mr. 7ason Seth [x] Via hand delivery
23 Acting Deputy Clerk
City of Renton Clerk's Office
24 1055 S. Grady Way
Seventh Floor .
25 Renton,WA 98057
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE- 1 Van Ness
� Feldman �►
719 5econd Avenue Sufte 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
(206r623-8372
1 Mr.Phil A. Olbrechts [x] Via email '
City of Renton Hearing Examiner �
2 polbrechts(u�omwlaw.com
3
L,�.Y��.� [x] Via email
4 - Ren#on CityAttorney [x] Via U.S.mail
5 Renton City Hall
1055 S. Grady Way lwarren(a�,rentonwa.�ov �
( Rentoq WA 98057 .
7
I certify under penaity of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that
8
the foregoing is tcue and correct.
9
EXECUTED at Seattle,Washington on this 16�`day of October, 2014.
10
11 �
12 ' �� �M� .
J 'fer Sower,Declarant
13i
14
15 �
� 16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE-2 �y'd!1 NeSS
Feldman�
71S SeconQ Avenue Sulte 1156
Seatt�e, WA 98104
(206) 523-9372
1 �
2
3
4
5
6 �
7
8 - BEFORE THE HEARING EI�;AMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
9 �
10 �� Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat � ��DECISION
11 Preliminary Plat �
� LUA13-000642 �
12 �
)
13 �
)
14
SUIVIMARY
15
16 The applicant requests preliminary plat approval, street improvement waiver and possibly a critical
azea exemption for a 20-lot residential subdivision. The street wavier is to allow a dead-end road in
17 :excess of 700 fee� The critical azea exemption is for placing a drainage line across the face of a
steep slope. The preliminary plat is approved. The street improvement waiver is not approved. The
1 g applicant was unable to establish that the street waiver would not result in an unsafe fire response
19 COndition for residents of the proposed subdivision.
2p The critical area exemption is not considered to be consolidated with the preliminary plat and street
modifications of this proposal. The staff report at no point identifies the exemption as consolidated
21 with the preliminary plat application. The proposal summary makes no mention of the critical area
22 exemption. However,Page 17 of the staff report recommends approval of a critical azeas exemption,
suggesting that consolidation was intended. If the exemption was intended to be consolidated with
23 the preliminary plat application, there is insufficient information in the record to assess its merits.
RMC 4-3-050(C)(5)(d)(iv) requires a geotecbnical report to be prepared that assesses compliance
24 with the exemption criteria and to also propose mitigation. No reference to any such report is made
25 in the staff report and no such geotechnical report could be found in the administrative record.
Impacts of the proposed stormwater vault and retaining walls aze assessed in the geotechnical
26 reports, but nothing else in the geotechnical reports could be found that specifically addressed the
drainage line or the exemption criteria. Given the absence of this needed information and the fact
PRELIlVIINARY PLAT- 1
� � �
1 that the staff report does not clearIy identify the adm.inistrative exemption decision as consolidated
2 for hearing exaininer review,the exemption decision wi11 nat be considered as cc�nsolidated with the
preliminary plat and street improvement modifica.tion request.
3
4 TESTIMONY
5
� Staff Testimony
�
Elizabeth Hi�eins, Senior Planner,�Citv of Renton
8
� Ms. Hig,�ins described the praject as a proposed 20 lat singie family develapment in Sauth Renton..
g The ariginal application had 2i lots, but was subsequently revised to 20 Iots. The praposal as I
1� submitted generally meets the Renton municipal code with the exception of street standards relating
ta access, The appiicant has submitted a request for a street modification.There are enviranmentally
1� sensitive areas on or near the praperty and criticat areas reguiations apply. The project canforms to
the crirical areas cade. '
12
The 9.3 acre site is sauth of Carr Raad and east of Talbot Raad in south Renton. The praject is in an
�3 area af residential development with variaus densities. To the east are condos at higher density, To
14 �e south and sontheast are lower density zesidential developments. Densities to the north and
nartheast are consistent with the project.
15
l� The praject was originally an undeveloped partion of an existing condo deveIopment. The site is
isolated from the condas by a steep slope. T'he praject was submitted in 20I3 but was piaced on
1� hold for additional geatechnical reparts due ta concems abaut the slape.Three separate geotechnical
;reports were submitted by three individual firms.New notification was sent out. The Enviranmental
18 Review Commuttee added six additional conditians af approval.No appeais were filed.
�� The site has protected slopes an the west side. Slapes are 45 degrees ar more. The site pian was
2d revised to eliminate a rockery retaining watl an the top of the slope and stonmwater facilities were
-moved farther away from the siope. The praject will have a 10-faot No Disturb azea on the top of
z l che siope.
22 There are wetiands on site. The depression wetlands are Categary II wetlands. These require a 50
23 foot buffer. The project pmposes to da buffer averaging. Praperties adjacent to the groject will be
inctuded in the buffer. Up to 50°l0 of the buffer width will be reduc�d in places. The north wetland
24 abuts a portion of tbe wetland that is part of the Stonehaven wettand reserve. Stream studies indicate
there is a stream that is neazby,bat not witt�in the pmject site. The water collects across the subject
25 property but the stream is not on it.The property was vacant except for a temparary cul de sac.
26 The property has a mix af deciduaus aad evergreen trees. The Applicaat submitte� a tree
PRELIIVIINARY PLAT-2
, -
1 `replacement plan. There are 101 significant trees on the property. These are trees measuring 6" in
2 diameter. 54 trees will be removed for streets and alleys. There are be 120 trees in critical areas
buffers, all will be retained. 42 of the significant trees will be retained. 23 significant trees must be
3 replaced with 140 2"trees.All of the new trees will be planted in Tract C.
4 The site has three different zoning classifications. They aze R-14, a medium density residential
development near the condos, an R-1 zone, a low density designation in the sloped area, and 6.06
5 :acres of R-8 in the upper portion. The 201ots are in the R-6 zone. After deduction for critical azeas
6 and roadways there aze 4.57 developable acres. With 201ots the resultant density is 4.23 du/acre,
which is above the 4 dulacre minimum.
'7 There will be 20 single family residential lots of 4,SOOsf to 8,OOOsf. Tract A is a stormwater tract.
Tracts B and E are wetlands tracts. Tract C is the tree replacement area. Tract D is an open space
g tract.Tract F is a Native Crrowth Protection Area on the slope. There will be an a11ey to provide rear
9 ,access to abutting lots.
10 Stai�recommends formation of a homeowners association to have equal undivided ownership of the
tracts,alley and private road.Another recommended condition of approval(StaffReport#9)lots 17-
11 20 would provide easements to other lots to a11ow alley to provide through access. With respect to
12 access, Applicant has requested a modification to street standards. Renton requires a secondary
access when primary access is a dead end street over 700 feet in length. Staff does not support the
13 modification request because it does not meet the test that there is no physical way a second access
can be achieved. There are no physical constraints that cannot be overcome. They believe the second
14 access is possible. They recommend a condition of approval requiring construction of a second
access prior to recording of the final plat.
15
16 A portion of the project is included in the Talbot Urban Separator which imposes requirements for
development. With a single exception, these requirements don't apply because the project dces not
17 �propose development within the Urban Separator. This exception is the drainage facility which will
extend from the top of the slope through the Urban Separator. Vegetation removed during
18 installation of the stormwater conveyance system must be replaced.
19 with respect to drainage, the stormwater system has been revised from the original plan to minimi�e
2p the impact to the critical slope. Dischazge from the stormwater vault will be within a closed 12"
°pipe down the slope. Staff recommends a condition of approval requiruig a stormwater easement.
21
22 The project meets compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and development regulations, if
the required conditions of approval are met. Staff recommends the Applicant submit a detailed
23 landscape plan. The project complies with the critical areas regulations if the conditions of approval
from Environmental Review Committee are met. With the exception of the street requirement, the
24 project meets the requirements of the subdivision code and the Talbot Urban Separator. In terms of
25 public services (police, fire, parks, schools), resources are available to provide services to the
property. Students would nced to be bussed to school. There aze sidewalks available for safe
26 walking routes to bus stops. A certificate of water availability would be required by the Soos Creek
PRELiMINARY PLAT-3
1 Water District. A stormwater easement is required to demonstrate that downstream systems would
2 be available. Staffrecommends approval of the project with conditions.
3 In response to a question by the Hearing Examiner, Ms. Higgins stated the Applicant would have to
negotiate an agreement with adjacent property owners to acquire an access easement or purchase
4 land. The Applicant does not own the property the City will require for secondary access. Staff
sta.ted they would not allow the Applicant to record the final plat without this secondary access, in
5 =the event the Applicant was unable to purchase the adjacent property or acquire an easement.
6
'Applicant Testimony
7
Maher Jouei,ER Stron�Consultin�En�ineers.Annlicant's Aeent
8
9 Mr. Jouei thanked Staff for the thorough review of the project. The Applicant concurs with the
majority of the report with the exception of the secondary access.
10
Public Testimony
11
12 Owen Reese
13 Mr• Reese is a civil engineer with Aspect Consulting.He is representing the Campen Springs Condo
Association. He was hired to review the proposed development. Harbor homes approached the
14 :Condo Association with respect to the stormwater lines. The Condo Association is on the downside
�of the steep slope to west of the proposed development. The Condo Associarion had questions about
15 stormwater management.and protection of the steep slope. Harbor Homes and their agents have
16 been very open and helpful. The Condo Association issued a letter of intent to allow an easement for
stormwater lines. The Condo Association and Harbor Homes aze worlcing together cooperatively.
17
The Condo Association has identified several minor issues along th� westem line of lots. Harbor
1 g Homes has been very responsive. The Condo Association is providing testimony today to allow
19 Staff and the Hearing Examiner to hear their issues.
20 There are no current retaining walls proposed. The Condo Association is requesting the City to
allow only engineered retaining walls to be constructed on the proposed development, rather than
21 just erosion control structures. They further request any new fill should be free drai.ning s�uctural
22 fill and not native soils.The native soils will not provide the needed results with respect to drainage.
23 The back yards of western lots slope towards the steep slope. At one point there was a proposed
`interceptor trench. The Condo Association requests the City require Harbor Homes to minunize the
24 extent of the western lot that drains to the slope. Whatever does drain there,please make sure it does
25 so in a dispersed manner.
26 The stormwater tight line should be designed using sound engineering practices in a straight line
PRELIlVIINARY PLAT-4
i
1 with high density plastic. The Condo Associarion is requesting anchors along only the top and
2 °bottom of the pipe rather than along the whole length as the City recommended. This will keep the
�pipe in place even if the slope moves. The anchors should be designed to a11ow for tree fall and soil
3 movement. The water should be slowed down before entering the Condo Association property. The
°pipeline should be constructed at the top and pulled down the slope rather than moving it up hill.
4
An engineering geologist from Aspect Consulting reviewed the site. With respect to the ephemeral
5 stream, the stream is in a well-defined channel outside the wetlands and then disperses down the
6 slope, depositing sediment on the downhill side in an alluvial fan. This stream is prone to
:movement. The concem is that if the streazn changes its channel, it may deliver sediment
'7 downstream and overwhelm the Campen Springs stormwater system. The Condo Association is
asking Harbor Homes to monitor the stream and create a more defined channel. In response to
g questioning from the examiner, Mr. Reese responded that the proposal will not exacerbate the
9 condition of the stream.
10 Eric Hanson
11 �, Hanson testified he understands Vuecrest will be developed. He believes the existing proposal
12 `is not consistent with the character of the area or Renton. He stated this proposal should be denied
for two reasons. The first reason is because of the variance to extend Smithers Road to another dead
13 �d. The second reason is he feels the proposal gives only meager concessions to critical azeas.
14 , Mr. Hanson noted the Renton municipal code requiring a secondary access. He stated the road is
needed for emergency services and traffic flow. He supports the Staff requirement for secondary
15 access. He does not feel mitigation is adequate because the road is 2,400 feet from the main arterial,
16 �ore than three times farther than code requirements. He stated the deviation is major. He is not
surprised the Renton Fire Department arid Community Development staff does not support the
17 . deviation. He stated the traffic will double or triple on local streets due to the proposed
:development. He is concemed about pedestrian safety. There aze no engineering or geographical
18 .reasons for the variance.The only reason is that the Applicant does not own the adjacent property.
19
Mr. Hanson's second concern is environmental sensitivity. The project has steep slopes, a wetland
20 `and a stream. He stated the environmental review identified 401 significant trees. Reinoval of the
trees would create erosion and slide risks. The existing vegetation also sustains deer in the area.. The
21 proposed mitigation for the trees is not sufficient. Only 65 trees would be replaced or retained. The
22 emphasis should be on retaining the trees rather than replacing them with less robust trees. He
acknowledges 140 additionai 2" diameter trees will be planted. Immature trees are a poor substitute
23 for existing trees and vegetation. They won't effectively prevent erosion.
24 David Rasmussen
25 Mr. Rasmussen is the president of the Sundance Talbot Ridge Homeowners Association. He
26 concurs with Mr. Hanson's comments and believes they represent those of the HOA. He is
PRELIMINARY PLAT-5
1 concemed about water access during an emergency situation. Sundance abuts green lands on three
2 sides. There are plans to develop one of these sides. His concern with water flow is the chance of a
wild fire on the greenbelt. He's concerned there will be insufficient access for emergency fire
3 protection. Additionally,there must be secondary access.
4 Jim Condelles
5 °Mr. Condelles represents the Reserve at Stonehaven Homeowners Association which is adjacent to
6 the Sundance association. Mr. Condelles objects for the same reasons as Mr. Rasmussen and Mr.
Hanson. Secondary access should be required.There is a bottleneck on a dead end road.
7
He urges the development be scaled back.He stated he doesn't feel the wetlands buffer averaging is
g ei�ective. He wants to see full 50 foot setbacks adjacent to all parts of the wetlands. He notes the
9 varying seasonal character of the wetlands. He stated the small change to the project from the
original proposal is insufficient to protect the critical azeas. The character of the northwest is being
10 eroded by piecemeal development. He noted all the types of wildlife he's seen on this property. He
.also noted the old growth evergreen trees.This is a virtual rainforest in an urban area that serves as a
11 wildlife corridor. He wants to see a rethinking of the scope.
12 .Ellen Brishten
13
Ms. Brighten owns two adjacent properties. She owns properiy in Campen Springs. She has not
14 been notified of the projeet. She also owns at Talbot Park. She regularly sees deer. She also stated
there are water problems. The springs at Campen Springs move. She is concerned about drainage
15 issues. Ms. Brighten displayed several pictures of the area(Ex. 34).
16
Travis Martinez
17 �
Ms. Martinez is the president of the HOA for Talbot Pazk due north of Campen Springs. They have
1 g �a water problem that results in $50,000 worth of damage per year due to the springs. They aze very
19 COncerned stormwater issues will increase. They have received no guarantee that they will not be
adversely affected or reimbursed when they are affected by project related stormwater.
20 �
Ron Hensen
21 Mr. Hensen lives on Smithers Avenue. Smithers Road is adjacent to the proposed development He
22 has owned the property for 12 years. He has maintained the property for years. He recounted the
development history of the area. He knew development would happen on this property eventually.
23 He is concerned about his property values and safety. There is a 50 acre Department of Natural �
Resources property to the north that is currently for sale. Altogether, there was a single point of
24 access for a couple dozen homes. In the near future, that number could be 150 homes on the same
25 single point of access. This will result in more traffic and a reduced quality of life for existing
residents.
26 -
PRELIl�IIl�IARY PLAT-6
1 There is an unnoted existing drainage out of the wetlands. There used to be another smaller stream
�that was obliterated by the traffic circle. The stream can be observed about 8-9 months of the yeaz.
2 During rain events, the system is overwhelmed and water overtops into the stormwater drainage
3 system. There is a subsurface hydrologic connection that connects the wetlands. Proposed Lot 17 is
a seep that will not support a residential development. He is in support of a stormwater system that
4 proactively drains this development and future developments.
Mr. Hensen also described abundant wildlife in the area.
5
6 Staff Response
� I,azrv Warren,Renton Citv Attomev
g The Hearing Examiner asked the City Attorney if there is a proportionality problem in that the
9 Applicant is being asked to provide secondary access now when it should have been provided by
:past developments for developments farther down the road. Are the Applicants being asked to create
10 ��Provement that mitigates more than their own impact?
11 In response, Mr. Wanen stated he had not considered the question in that fraznework: He stated he
12 .did not feel there was a proportionality problem because each future development along the line
would be required to do their part.
13
The Hearing Examiner asked if the City was considering a latecomers agreement to allow the
14 'Applicant to be reimbursed for a portion of the costs when later development took place. Mr.
Warren stated the Applicant must request a latecomers agreement. He stated there was only one lot
15 :between the proposal site and the connection point. The expense should not be huge.
16
Elizabeth Hi¢eins
17
:Ms. Higgins addressed the request by Mr. Reese related to retaining walls. She stated mitigation
1 g �measure #4 from the Environmental Review Committee requires a building permit for retaining
19 �'�'�ls for any proposed wall,regardless of location or size.
Zp Steven Lee. Citv of Renton Ensineer
21 Mr. Lee responded to Mr. Reese's recommendations. He stated he.concurred with Mr. Reese. He
22 agreed that all of Mr. Reese's suggestions should be implemented as conditions of approval. He
wanted to add one further condition. With respect to the stormwater pipe on the slope, he suggests
23 the addition of a slip joint at the base of the hill to allow for movement.
24 Mr. Lee stated he felt the project will not affect downstrearn stormwater. He noted other projects
25 have been installed on steeper slopes than this. These prior projects have been successful in
avoiding erosion.The closed tight line stormwater pipe will eliminate erosion impacts.
26
PRELIMINARY PLAT- 7
1 In response to the Hearing Examiner, Mr. Lee stated he was unawaze of the small stream that used
2 to be in the location of the temporary cul de sac. The post project result will be a reduction in
surface run off from the project than current conditions. He stated slope stability will be improved
3 ;post project.
4 Mark Peterson.Chief,Renton Fire Devartment
5 �In response to the Hearing Examiner,Mr. Peterson stated the fire department is opposed to the street
6 modification. He feels the length of the street is too challenging to service to the area by fire
apparatus. He stated last year there was a wildfire traveling along the electric easement in a nearby
� neighborhood. This neighborhood had one access point that was cut off by the fire. The fire
department could not get in to help residents and residents could not evacuate. Mr. Peterson is also
8 concerned about the neighborhood being cut off in a seismic event. City code requires a secondary
9 � access in roads over 700 feet� The fire department cannot maintain adequate response times to the
neighborhood. Without secondary access, an additional minute is added to the response time to this
10 neighborhood.
11 Applicant Response
12 Brent Carson. Van Ness Feldman.Annlicant's A�ent
13 �
The Applicant disagrees with the Staff with respect to the street modification. In response to Mr.
14 Peterson, Mr. Carson noted the Renton Fire Department has sent the Applicant a letter stating they
would not support the project without a secondary access. He further noted the Fire Department had
15 �rescinded that letter,with the condition that they could reinstate the letter at any time based on final
16 Plat design. He noted that the fire department reinstated the letter even though there had been no
change in fire access since the time the letter had been rescinded.
17 =
Mr. Carson introduced a letter into the record (Ex. 35)with attachments addressed to the Examiner.
18 This packet included a letter from the Applicant's traffic consultant. Mr. Carson called several
19 ���ses. Mr. Carson introduced two fiuther exhibits (Ex. 36 and Ex. 37),the resume of Nfr. Jouei
=Maher and a set of site plans.
20 �
Maher Jouei, ER StronQ Consulting EnQineers,ADDI1CaClt's A�ent
21
22 Mr. Jouei stated the Vuecrest Estates project drainage is tight lined to Campen Springs. Talbot Pazk
drainage goes a different direction than the project drainage. The Vuecrest system will collect all
23 impervious surface drainage and send it to Campen Springs.
24 Mr. Jouei stated the City sent them a letter stating a pmposed temporary cul de sac might be
25 acceptable under certain conditions including a stub road for future connections. They would not be
asked to construct the actual connection. The pre-application meetings did not suggest they would
26 be required to provide a completed secondary access. On July 3, 2014 the Applicant received
PRELIMINARY PLAT-8
1 preliminary comments with an email note that said the situarion regarding the second access had
:changed. They subsequently were told they could not construct the project as proposed because the
2 Fire Department would not support the project without secondary access. That letter was rescinded
3 �in October 2013. In February 2014, they received a letter from Ms. Higgins that stated the City
would support a street modification to permit the project to go forward without secondary access.
4 The City did not mention they would not support the modification until August 2014. There has
been no material change to the layout since October 2013. Mr. Jouei stated the project is a part of
5 the solurion by construction a stub for future access. There is one undeveloped property left before
6 �the grid system is completed.
'7 Mr. Jouei stated the project complies with the road dimension requirements in the code. He stated
emergency vehicles can access the project even in worst case scenarios with cars pazked on both
8 sides. The road curvatures meet the requirements. There is a loop road in Stonehaven that provides
9 �secondary access.
10 �• Jouei reviewed the variance criteria in the street modification. He stated the project suffers from
unique circumstances because Talbot Ridge and the Reserve at Stonehaven were approved with the
11 same variance the current Applicant proposes. He stated the variance will not be rnaterially ,
12 detrimental to the public welfare because the roads meet the dimensional requirements.He noted the
additional trips from Vuecrest would result in 1.6 additional vehicles per minute in the PM Peak
13 Hour. These roads are a11 LOS A with no accident history. He stated the project benefits the welfaze
of the public by connecting the grid system. The project has an internal loop system with the alley.
14 �The alley will be designed to accommodate emergency vehicles. The project will not ask for any
special considerations beyond those already granted to existing developments. The proposal is the
15 ��mum requested by the City by providing a stub road. The project provides what the City asked
16 for initially.Nothing has changed since then. ,
17 Mr. Jouei noted there are not many on-street parked cars.All area homes include two car garages for
every lot to accommodate parking.
18 ;
19 Jamie Waltier.Hansen Homes
20 ,Mr. Waltier thanked Staff for their efforts on the project. He stated the neighbor to the east is not
interested in selling his property. They will not be able to purchase a right of way or easemen� Mr.
21 Waltier stated the City had supported the stub road without a secondary access. They've incurred
22 significant costs in designing this project they would not otherwise have spent if the City has been
consistent on their requirement for a secondary access. As is, the project is not financially viable
23 with the requirement for a secondary access.
24 Carl Anderson.Fire Protection En¢ineer.Anniicant's A¢ent
25 Mr. Anderson discussed the second access issue from an emergency access perspective. He also
26 suggested mitigadon measures. With respect to the public welfare, the proposal is at the end of a
PRELIMINARY PLAT- 9
1 dead end. It does not materially affect the existing homes in the area. For the new plat, there aze
2 mitigating measures that can be taken. The Applicant is intending to put in a temporary cul de sac to
City standazds. The internal alley will also provide emergency access, though it is not intended as a
3 primary emergency access. Although not specifically spelled out in the variance request, the
intention is to put fire sprinkler systems in each proposed home. In terms of mitigating fire response
4 to the azea, a fire sprinkler system reduces the need for fire responses. The homes will not require
' full structural responses. The Staff Report mentions 99 homes aze accessed on the dead end. The
5
dead end will be 2,400 feet. However, the actual road network has internal secondary means that
6 reduces the housing served by only the dead end itself. Stonehaven has an internal looped road that
would allow another access into Vuecrest. Only about 800 feet of roadway will be single access.
'7 The 2012 International Fire Code Appendix D-107 addresses substitufion of fire sprinklers rather
than the provision of secondary fire access. This appendix was not adopted in Renton, though it
g does support the variance. �
9 In response to Mr. Carson, Mr. Anderson stated he is familiar with the International Fire Code
10 Section 503.1.2 which reads the Fire Marshall may require secondary access based on a range of
conditions. Mr. Anderson stated the project does not meet any of the conditions in the
11 aforementioned Fire Code Section.This project will eventually result in improved access.
12 �Hearing Examiner asked Mr. Anderson if he is testifying that he has no fire safety concerns over
13 �e fact that this subdivision only has one access point. Mr. Anderson responded, "I don't
' believe that the addition of Vuecrest is a significant detriment to public safety based on what's
, 14 :already there in the azea." The Hearing Examiner stated, "There are a couple points along that %z
mile dead end route where if the road was blocked there'd be no way for the fire department to
15 .get to the subdivision, isn't that correct?" Mr. Anderson responded "That's correct." The
16 Hearing Examiner, "What about the Fire Chief Peterson's concem about if you had people
evacuating quickly that would make it more difficult for the Fire Department to get to the site, is
17 :that a problem here at all, really?" Mr. Anderson responded "It could be a concern, but in the
type of isolated events you'd run into, is the likelihood that these addifional 20 homes create a
1 g significant additional detriment to public safety? I wouldn't think that number would be '�
19 -detrimental, particulazly given that this is another piece toward making an eventual connection, '
which corrects an existing 1,700 foot dead end."
20 :
21 Brent Cazson.Van Ness Feldman.Annlicant's Agent
22 Mr. Carson stated his letter goes into detail regazding each of the aforementioned issues. He wanted
23 -to highlight a few points. He stated the 11`� hour switch in the City's position. The City's code is
clear related to pre-application meetings when submitting long plats in order to avoid the
24 circumstance where applicants aze not clear about what codes will apply. The first pre-application
25 stated a permanent dead end street is not approvable given the City code. The second pre-
application meeting allowed a temporary cul de sac with a future stub to allow for eventual
26 completion of a loop system. The Code says once the pre-application is done, the applicant should
PRELIIVIINARY PLAT- 10
'I
. �
1 proceed in concert with the City's advice. The Applicant has done that.
2 �With respect to Mr. Peterson's withdrawal of his letter,this is no minor thing. Mr.Peterson stated in
3 August 2013 that a secondary access would be required for approval. Mr. Carson was hired at this
point. He spoke to the City Staff and the Mayor which led to Mr. Peterson's withdrawal of the letter.
4 Mr. Peterson stated he could reissue the letter based on the final design. The design was not changed
and Mr. Peterson did not reissue the letter. Mr. Peterson desires to have a secondary access but has
5 �not proven the need. Mr. Carson noted Ms. Vanessa Dolby of the City of Renton stated they would
6 not need to provide secondary access. Ms. Higgins also provided a letter that stated the City would
approve a street modification to allow the project to move forwazd without a secondary access. The
'7 Applicant contends a variance is not required because they are not proposing a permanent dead end,
but are instead providing a temporary cul de sac. However, to the extent a variance is required; the
g :Examiner has the authority to grant the variance. The Applicant supports approval of the variance
9 request(street modification).
10 Mr• Carson notes Stonehaven was approved with a dead end of more than 700 feet because
Stonehaven provided a temporary stub to adjacent properties. No variance was required in that plat
11 All secondary access will be provided in the future as adjacent properties develop.
12 �The adjacent property owner in this case refuses to sell the property or grant an access easement
13 :The Staffrequirement of a secondary access point represents a significant hardship to the Applicant. �
If this was a significant public interest, they could use their condemnation authority. Otherwise, this .
14 'represents an unnecessary hardship to the Applicant. The Applicant has offered adequate mitigation
;in the form of sprinklers for every residence. The effect of the City's recommendation is legally
15 azbitrary and capricious. The Applicant asks to remove Condition 5 and grant the variance and the
16 Plat request.
17 'Staff Rebuttal
18 .Elizabeth Hieeins. Senior Planner, Citv of Renton
19
.Ms. Higgins answered a question from the Hearing Examiner regazding the typical condition of
20 requiring a gravel, gated access road as emergency access. Ms. Higgins stated the secondary access
would need to comply with the Fire Code. Ms. Higgins also stated the Fire Department always asks
21 for secondary access. Public Works assumes there will be no dead ends. She stated she doesn't
22 know the history here and cannot discuss the historical interpretation of secondary access.
23 Since February, the City has taken a closer look at developments next to slopes. They have studied
slope stability on existing slopes with respect to vegetation and stormwater.
24
25 She also stated pre-applica.tion conferences allow for recommendations with respect to requirements
but do not provide enough information to set those requirements. Ms. Higgins state�the letter from
26 Chief Peterson was withdrawn at her request to get the Applicant to support a secondary
PRELIMINARY PLAT- 11
1 geotechnical study. The Applicant suggested they would not invest more money in the geotechnical
� 2 study if the Chief's letter remained.
3 _Larrv Wan-en,Renton Citv Attornev
4 Mr. Warren addressed the comment of dead end roads. He stated this project extends the dead end
road. There is no way to tell how long before the adjacent property owner will want to develop the
5 :property, if ever. The road may exist as a dead end road ad infinitum. This project creates a longer
6 .dead end road that could be blocked at some point. There is no solution to the dead end road as
currently proposed.
7
The City Code on dead end roads (RMC 4-6-060(H)) requires two means of access and sprinklers
g 'for roads over 700 feet. There is no waiver of secondary means of access. There is only a waiver for
9 methods of tum around. This code was in place before the Application but after the other existing
subdivision located along the dead end road. There is no definirion of a dead end road in City code.
ip Common definitions would call this road a dead end. This is an infill project on a difficult site.
11 ;Applicant's Rebuttal
12 'Brent Carson,Van Ness Feldman.Annlicant's Agent
13
Mr. Carson noted RMC 4-6-060(H)(6) regazding the waiver of a turnaround does not apply. Under
l4 °certain circumstances is related to the circumstances when a hunaround does not apply. The Code
section that does apply is RMC 4-7-240 in the subdivision code. This allows variances to be
' I S �approved by the Hearing Examiner.
16
This is the same situation as Stonehaven. There is no substantial increased to the public welfaze but
17 .the Staffrecommendation does provide a significant burden to the Applicant.
18 Public Rebuttal
19 David Rasmussen
20
Mr. Rasmussen stated that pazking in front of Stonehaven do not represent the true parking
21 situation, especially around the holidays.
22 EX�IIBITS
23
24 Exhibits 1-31 listed on page 2 of the September 15,2014 Staff Report,in addition to the Staff Report
itself(Ex. 1), were admitted into evidence during the public hearing. Addirional exhibits admitted
25 during the hearing aze the following:
26
PRELIlVIINARY PLAT- 12
1 Ex. 32 Eric Hanson Testimony Summary
2 Ex. 33 Owen Reese Testimony Summary
Ex. 34 Ellen Brighten Pictures of Campen Springs and wildlife
3 Ex. 35 Brent Carson Letter to HE(9/15/14)
, Ex. 36 Resume of Mr. Maher Jouie
4 Ex. 37 Set of maps showing subject site and surrounding area.
5
' FTNDINGS OF FACT
6
� Procedural:
g 1. Avplicant. Harbour Homes.
9 �2. Hearin�. The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on September 11, 2014 in
10 ��e City of Renton Council City Chambers_
11 3. Proiect Descrintion. The applicant has submitted an application for a 201ot Preliminary Plat.
; The application includes a request for the waiver of street improvements to allow a dead-end road in
12 excess of 700 feet. Approval of the project would result in the subdivision of a 9.31 acre ro
P P�Y,
13 � located in the Talbot planning area of the City, into 20 lots suitable for single-family residential use.
The proposed density is 4.23 dwelling units per net acre. The project site is currently undeveloped,
14 except for a paved,temporary cul-de-sac.
15
The site contains three land use zones, Residential 1 dwelling unit per net acre(du/ac), Residential 8
16 �g du/ac) and Residential 14 (14 du/ac) [Exhibit 3]. Additionally, the azea zoned R-1 is located
1� within the Urban Separator overlay. Only the 6.06 acre (263,328 s fl portion that is zoned R-8 is
proposed to be developed. The proposed density would be 4.23 du/ac Subdivision into 201ots would
1 g result in a density of 4.05 dwelling units per net acre. Lot sizes would range from 4,500 square feet
to 8,134 square feet. In addirion to the 20 lots, 6 tracts aze proposed for sensitive areas and tree
19 retention.
20 ,The site is proposed to be accessed via an extension of Smithers Ave. S. The requested modification
21 of Renton Municipal Code, if approved, would peimit this access although it is considered to be a
"dead end"road from the intersection of SE 186� St. The undeveloped site has approximately 400
22 trees that have been deemed to be "significanL" Trees will be removed, retained, and replaced as
23 required by Renton Municipal Code. An estimated 3,396 cy of cut and 10,035 cy of fill would be
required for site construction. A stormwater detention vault is proposed that would discharge to a
24 closed conveyance system on site and subsequently transported to an azea-wide system off site. The
applicaat has submitted a Critical Areas Report, Supplemental Stream Study, Traffic Impact
25 Analysis, Slope Analysis, Geotechnicai Engineering study, and a Drainage Technical Information
Report with the application.
26
PRELII��DTIARY PLAT- 13
1
z 4. Ade4uacv of Infrastructure/Public Services. As conditioned, the praject will be served by
a,dequate/appmpriate infrastructure and public services as follows:
3
4 A. Water and Sewer Secvice. Although the project site lies within the baur�daries of the
Renton Water Service Area, the City does not have water service mains near the project
5 � site. Water service would be provide�by the Soos Creek Water and Sewer Distric#from
� ' an existing water main lacated at the Smithers Ave S street end at the north portian af the
property. A ce7rtificate of water availability from SGWSD must be provided prior to
7 . issuance of construcrion peimits. The site is pravided sanitary sewer service by the City
� of Renton. There is a sewer main and a manhole at the south end of Smithers Ave S_
� B. Potice and Fire Protection. Police s�rvice wauld be provided by the Renton Fise
l� � Department. T1ne Renton Potice Department has comrnented that there would be minimal
impacts from the projec#.
11
�2 Fire service °would be provided by the Rentan Fire Department. Fire Prevenrion staff
indicate that suf�icient resources exisi to fi�rnish serv�ices to the praposed development;
13 • subject to the condition that tlie applicant provides Code required impravements and fees
2 4 (presumably including fire impact fees} and that a second access be pravided ta the site in
. accardance with RMC 4-6-060H,which prohibits dead end streets tonger than 700 feet in
15 length.
16 :
The need for a secand access is the most significant factual issues presented in this
1� � hearing. The applicant disputes the need for the seeondary access. It is determined that
1 g the secondary access is necessary to provide adequatelapprapriate fixe protectian service.
l� _ The proposed project site is located at the end of an existing dead end street in excess af
2p - 700 feet. The proposal asks for appraval of a temporary cul-de-sac on an extension of this
2� ° street. The length of the extended dead-end street wauld be approximately 2,364 feet,
from the point at which it becomes a dead end at Main Avec�ne South (SE 102nd St) and
22 SE 186th St to the�ew street end within the propose�i projeet. C.`�rtently,there are 491ots
23 that are accesseri by this dead end stree�
24 As testified by Renton Fire Mark Peterson, the Iength of the street is too challenging to I
2S service to the area by fire apparatus. He stated Iast year there was a wildfire traveling I
along the electr�ic easemment in a nearby neighborhoad. This neighborhood had one access II
26 ' point that was cut off by the fire. The fire department could nat get in to help residents
�
PRELR��fIINARY PLAT- i4
� - -
--�-� - -� - -- --- --- -- -- 3
' �
1 � and residents could not evacuate. Mr. Peterson is also concemed about the neighborhoad
2 being cut off in a seismic event. City code requires a secondary access in roads aver 700
t cannot maintain ad uate res onse times to the nei borhoad,
feet. The fire departmen eQ P �
3 Without seconc3ary access, an additional minute is added to the response time ta this
I 4 � neighborhood.
$ : The applicant presented its own fire expert, Carl Anderson, to provide testimony on the
6 _ safety of fire access. Mr. Anderson's testimony was not persuasive. The hearing
examiner asked Mr. Anderson if he had any safety concerns over the fact that the
� proposed subdivision only has one access point. Mr. Anderson did not respond with a
� � simple "yes" or"no". Mr. Andersan did not testify that the subdivision would have safe
� or adequate fire access with ane fire aceess roatl. Rather, he concluded that the acldition
g = of the prapased 20 lots wauld not be "a signiftcant defriment to public safety based an
10 what's already in the area'°. Mr. Anderson's sornewhat tortured response Ieaves the very
strang impression that he did not want to opine on the fire safety of a single access point
�i � to the subdivision; that instead the most supportive comment he c+auld make for his client
1� was that in the context of the safety problems faced by the 99 other lots in the area, the
safety impact to the progosed subdivisian was not that significant. The fact that other
13 subdivisions may have similar safety issues has no bearing on whether the single access
14 � to the praposed subdivision is safe and adeqnate. In short,the appiicant has nat provided
any expert testimany to refute the Fire Chief's testimony that the proposed single access
�� would be safe or adequa.te for the praposed 20 lots. .
16
1� _ Mr. Anderson noted that it�e applicant woulct be willing to provide spriinkler systems to
mitigate against the single access. He did not testify that this would campletely mitigate
1$ ' against the dangers of single access. Mr. Andersan noted that Appendix D to the,
19 �t��ional Fire Code addresses the use of fire sprinlclers ta substitute for secondary
access roads. Appendix D was not offered inta evidence and the examiner cannot take
20 judicial notice of it because it has not been adopted by the City of Renton. More
�l ' determinative is that the Renton Municipal Code daes not expressly authorize a I
substitution of secc�ndary access roads with fire sprinklers. In fact, RMC 46-060(H)(2) ,
22 atreacly requires sprinkters in additian to two access raads for streets longer than 700 feet '
23 in length. Clearly, fire spriinklers are not considered an adequate substitute for secondary '
access under city standards if they are already required in addition ta secondary access for �
2`� dead end raads such as the one servi.ng the proposed develapment. If the applicant ',
25 wishes to use fire sprinklers as a substitute for secondary access, it has the burden of I
establishing that the spnnklers will reduce the fire hazard #o insignificant levels. The 'i
26 '
PRELA�IINARY PLAT- 15 .
I
� — --- — -- -- — -- - - - - --
� - - — — — -- -- — —
)
I 1 applicant has only shown that the fire hazard is reduced, but has not established or even
2 asserted that the reduction in hazazd would be reduced to acceptable levels.
3 � The applicant's arguments aze well noted that the single access road was found sufficient
4 for the other 991ot served by it and that staff has changed its position on the adequa.cy of
the access for the proposed subdivision. The inconsistencies in the staf�'s �osition does
5 undermine the credibility of their position. However, the reasoning of the fire chiefs
6 � testimony is lughly compelling; that testimony is largely left unchallenged by the
applicant; and the need for the two access points is clearly laid out in the City's
� development standards with no express exception for sprinkler systems. Further, it must
g ; also be acknowledged that circumstances have changed since the approval of other
' subdivisions along the dead end road. In prior yeazs development occurred at a much
9 more rapid pace and expectations were high that a looped road would be completed
10 relatively quickly. The length of the dead end road was of course shorter for each
preceding subdivision and the amount of road necessary to complete a looped system was
11 � ��espondingly longer.
12 �=
: The applicant presented testimony that accidents were unlikely to prevent fire access
13 given the width of the single access road, but the fire chief was well awaze of this
14 � condition when he presented his testimony.
15 � �e preponderance of evidence and substantial evidence in the record establish that two
16 access points are necessary to provide adequate/appropriate and safe fire access to the
1� : pmposed subdivision.
18 C. DrainaQe. The applicant submitted a drainage report and drainage plan on July 1 S, 2014,
19 Ex. 11. Staff have detemuned that the report demons�rates compliance with 2009 King
County Surface Water Manual and additional requirements, based on specific site
20 conditions, as required by the Department of Community and Economic Development.
21 This proposal is specifically required to comply with the 2009 King County Surface
Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapter 1 and
22 2. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration
23 Standard, Forested Conditions. This means that off-site flow volumes and rates may not
be higher than predevelopment levels. The site is subject to full drainage review. The
24 project is required to provide detention and water quality under the cutrent King County
25 Surface Water Manual. The engineer has providad a design for a combined detention and
water quality vault to be located on Tract A of the site. A tightlined stormwater
26 conveyance system shall be utilized to transport discharged stormwater from a vault to an
PRELIMINARY PLAT- 16
�
.
1 : existing system at the bottom of the protected slope (Tract F). A recorded easement
2 ; agreement demonstrating access to the existing system is required by the conditions of
approval prior to issuance of construction permits.
3
4 � Owen Reese, a civil engineer retained by the homeowner's association of the neighboring
Caznpen Springs development, made several recommendations on drainage mitigation
5 � during the hearing. City engineering staff confumed that the stormwater suggestions
6 made by Mr. Reese should be added to the conditions of approval. The suggestions
reasonably protect against slope stability, are made by qualified experts and there is no
� evidence to the contrary. The dra.inage and slope stability recommendations made by Mr.
g Reese will be made conditions of approval�.
9 D. Parks/Ouen Svace. City ordinances require the payment of park impact fees prior to
10 building permit issuance. RMC 4-2-115, which govems open space requirements for
residential development, does not have any specific requirements for open space for
11 residential development in the R-lor R-8 district. RMC 4-2-115 does impose open space
12 ' requirements for the R-14 district based upon the number of dwelling units, but since no
dwelling units are proposed for the R-14 portion of the development, no open space is
13 required. RMC 4-3-110 requires that 50% of the portion of the plat within the Urban
14 . Separator Overlay shall be designated as a non-revocable open space tract As
� determined in the staff report, p. 14, the open space tract proposed by the applicant
15 satisfies this standard(which appears to be accomplished by Tract F,which takes up most
16 � if not all of the Urban Separator property, see Ex. 4) . The impact fees in conjunction
l� with the open space tract required by the Talbot Urban Separator provide for adequate
parlcs and open space. �
18
19 � E. Streets. The proposal provides for adequate/appropriate streets. Access to the plat is
proposed via Smithers Ave and the conditions of approval require the applicant to extend
20 Smithers through the adjoining properly to the east to 102� Ave S. Internal access
21 . includes looped a11ey access. The applicant prepared a traffic impact analysis, admitted
� � as Ex. 30, that was reviewed and approved by City public works staff. The study
22 determined that the proposal would generate 16 am peak hour trips and 21 pm peak hour
23 trips. The study shows that affected intersections would maintain a level of service A
with or without the project. There is no concurrency analysis submitted into the record.
24
25 �Mr•Reese also recommended that the agplicant monitor a migrating stream channel located off-site. Mr.Reese and
staff aclmowledged that the�proposal does not adversely affect or exacerbate this condition. Consequeatly, the
2C project cannot be legally conditioned to address the issue.
PRELIMINARY PLAT- 17
1 However, given the lack of any significant impact on affected intersections it is
2 detemuned at tius time the proposal is consistent with the City level of service standazds.
3 ' F. Paz��. Sufficient azea exists, on each lot, to accommodate required off street parking �
4 for a muumum of two vehicles per dwelling unit as required by City code.
5 ° G. Schools. Adequate/appropriate provision is made for schools. The proposal is loca.ted
6 _ within the Renton School District. The staff report notes that it is anticipated that the
. Renton School District can accommodate additional students generated by this proposal
� at the following schools: Benson Hill Elementary,Nelson Middle School, and Lindbergh
g High School. These schools are not within wall�ing distance of the proposed
development. Transportation would be required.
9
10 . A School Impact Fee, based on new single family lots, will also be required in order to
� mitigate the proposal's potential impacts to the Renton School District. The fee is payable
11 ; to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code. C�urently the fee is assessed at
12 : $5,455.00 per single family residence.
13 5. Adverse Imvacts. There are no adverse impacts associated with the proposal as conditioned
14 �'�'ith secondary access. Adequate public facilities and drainage control are provided as determined in
�Finding of Fact No. 4. The proposal involves single-family housing at a density 4.23 dwelling units
15 per acre, which is at the bottom end of the 4-8 units per acre required in the R-8 zone. This is a
'legislatively set standard of what is considered a compatible density for the azea. Consequently,
16 .��e are no issues of compatibility with surrounding development based on density.
1� � Many of the public comment letters expressed concem over the loss of trees. There aze 401
.trees on site with diameters of more than six inches. The applicant proposes to retain 42 of these
18 `trees and repla�e the remaining trees with 140 two-inch diameter trees. Most development of
undeveloped areas involves the removal of trees. What constitutes an acceptable level of �ree
19 =removal is a highly subjective determination. As with density, the Renton City Council has
' 20 ,legislatively determined an acceptable level of tree removal by the adoption of tree retention
,ordinance codified as RMC 4-4-130. As noted at p. 14 of the staff report, the applicant's tree
21 retention and replacement plan is consistent with RMC 4-4-130. Consequently, the proposed tree
removal cannot be considered a significant impact of the proposal.
22 There are protected slopes, wetlands, and a stream located within propose� sensitive area
23 tracts (Native Growth Protection Areas) on the site. The anticipated impacts of these areas have been
addressed in technical reports and studies [Exhibits 16-27J and the Environmental Review
24 Committee Report [Exhibit 31]. The project complies with all critical area regulations provided all
mitigation measures are met as identified in the Environmental Review Committee Report. A storm
25 drainage line is proposed across the face of the protected slopes. A critical azea exemption is
26 required for placing drainage lines on protected slopes. Staff determined that the proposed drainage
line, as conditioned, would improve slope stability. Staff has found slope stability to improve for
PRELINIINARY PLAT- 18
I
1 other proposals under the same conditions. As concluded in the conclusions of law, this resulting
increase in slope stability serves as the basis for approving the critical azea exemption.
2 Several public comment letters expressed concem over the encroachment of the project onto
3 _the fifly foot buffer of a Category II wetland and at least one comment letter asserted there aze two
Category II wetlands on-site as opposed to one. As depicted in a site plan attached to the critical area
4 study, Ex. 17, five2 lots encroach onto the fifty foot buffer of the wetland as well as Tract A (the
�storm drainage tract) and portions of the interior road. The applicant has proposed to remove these
5 encroachments through buffer averaging,which is allowed by the code and involves the replacement
6 of buffer reduction azea by 1:1 increases in buffer area at other parts of the buffer. A total of 10,463
square feet of buffer will be re3uced and a total of 12, 198 square feet will be added in the buffer
'7 averaging proposal. The buffer averaging proposal has been reviewed and approved by qualified
third party review, Ex. 16, as well as by staff. The critical azea studies provide a compelling and
8 :thorough justification for the averaging based upon best available science. There is no evidence in
9 the record that the proposed averaging would adversely affect the wetland or that the wetland
delineations are inaccurate. For these reasons, the proposed buffer averaging is detetmined to be
10 consistent with the City's critical area regulations and will not create any significant adverse impacts
to the wetland functions or values.
11 Erosion and slope stability were also cited in numerous public comment letters as an area of
12 :concern. As noted previously, staff have concluded that the proposed drainage line across the steep
slope will serve to improve slope stability. The City has detailed erosion control standazds
13 applicable to clearing and grading activities that will protect adjoining properties fi-om erosion
impacts. As previously noted, the City stormwater regulations require off-site stormwater flow
14 ;volumes and velocities to be at or less than pre-development conditions. The proposal has also been
subject to extensive geotechnical review coupled with third party review designed to assure that the
15 .Proposal will not adversely affect slope stability, as shown in Ex. 19-26 and 31. There has been no
16 expert testimony to show that the analysis and mitigation pertaining to erosion and slope stability is
deficient, except for some suggesrions made by Mr. Reese, all of which have been adopted except a
17 -request to monitor stream channel migration that Mr. Reese acknowledged is not affected by the
proposal. For all these reasons, it is deternuned that the proposal will not crea.te any significant slope
1 g stability or erosion impacts.
19
20 _ Conclusions of Law
21 1. Authoritv. RMC 47-020(C)and 4-7-050(D)(5)provide that the Hearing Examiner shall hold
22 a hearing and issue a final decision on preliminary plat applications. RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies
23 preliminary plat applications as Type III applications. RMC 48-080(G) classifies development
standard modifications as Type I applications. RMC 48-080(C)(2)requires consolidated pernuts to
24
25 2�e site plan actually only shows a buffer reduction in four lots,neglecting to identify a reduction in buffer for Lot
21. The text of the critical areas study,however,identifies at p. 14 that the buffer on Lot 21 will be removed through
26 averaging. Consequendy,it is understood that the site plan incoirecfly fails to identify buffer removal from Lot 21.
PRELIlbIIINARY PLAT- 19
�
1 each be processed under "the highest-number procedure", which in this case is Type III review,
2 involving a review and a final decision issued by the hearing exazniner.
i
3 2. Zonin�lComnrehensive Plan DesiQnations. The developed portion of the property is zoned
R-8. Other portions of the property are zoned R-1, R-1 and the western third is within the Talbot
4 Urban Separator Overlay. The comprehensive plan designations aze Residential Low Density
5 (RLD),Residential Single-Family(RSF)and Residential Medium Density(RMD).
6 3. Review Criteria Chapter 4-7 RMC governs the criteria for subdivision review. Applicable
� standards are quoted below in italics and applied through coaesponding conclusions of law.
g RMC 47-080(B): A subdivision shall be consistent with the following principles of acceptability:
9 1.Legal Lots: Create legal building sites which comply with all provisions of the City Zoning Code.
10 2. Access:Establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel.
11 3. Physical Characteristics: Have suitable physical characteristics. A proposed plat may be denied
12 because of f1'ood, inundation, or wetland conditions. Construction of protective improvements may
be required as a condition of approval, and such improvements shall be noted on the final plat.
13
4. Drainage: Make adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water
14 supplies and sanitary wastes.
15 4. As to compliance with the Zoning Code, Conclusion K(2) of the staff report is adopted by I
;
16 reference as if set forth in full. As depicted in the plat map, Ex. 37, each proposed lot will d'uectly
access Smithers Ave S., a public road, or indirectly via a private alley. As determined in Finding of
1� Fact No. 4 and 5, the project is adequately designed to prevent any impacts to critical areas. No
18 flooding problems are anticipated because as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4 the proposal is
19 served by adequate/appropriate stormwater facilities and the project is not located in a floodplain.
As detennined in Finding of Fact No.4,the proposal provides for adequate public facilities. '
20 �
5. RMC 4-7-080(n(1): ...The Hearing Examiner shall assure conforntance with the general
21 purposes of the Comprehensive Plan and adopted standards...
22 6. The proposed preliminary play is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive PIan as outlined
23 in Conclusion K(1)of the staffreport,which is incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full.
24 RMC 4-7-120(A): No plan for the replatting, subdivision, or dedicarion of any areas shall be
25 approved by the Hearing F.�aminer unless the streets shown therein are connected by surfaced road
or street(according to City specifications)to an existing street or highway.
26 ,
PRELIIvIINARY PLAT-20 �
r
1 �. All of the internal roads af the proposed subdivision eventually connect ta Smithers Ave S.,
2 an existing road.
� RMC 4-7-120(B): The location of all slreets shall confarm to any adopted plans for streets in the
City,
4
8. Tbe City's aciopted street plans are not addressed in the staf�report ar anywhere else in the
5 administrative record, However, the only other street cannections tha.t appear possible with the
6 steep slope and open space limitations ta the west are thase proposed and required by this decision.
7 RMC 4-7-12U(C): If a subdivision is located in the area of an o,f�'icially designed[szcJ trail,
� provisions shall be mude far reservatian af the right-of-way nr,f'or easements to the City for trail
purposes.
9
9. The subciivision is not lacated i.n the area of an afficially designated trail.
10 -
RMC 47-130(C). A plat,short plat, subdivision or dedication shall be prepared in eonformance
11 with the fotlowing provzsions:
12
1. Larcd Unsuitable for Subdivision: Lcznd which is faund tca be unsuitable for subdivision includes
}� land with features likely tv be harmful tv the safety and general health o.f'the,fu' ture residents {such
14 � la� �'�rsely a�'ected by ftooding, steep slapes, or rock formatiorrs}, Z.and which the
Department or the Hearing Examiner considers znappropriate for subdivision shall not be
1�` subdivided unless adequate safeguards are provided against these adverse conditions.
�� �a. Flaading/Inundation:If any portian of the tand within the baundary of a preliminury plat is
1� ,subject ta flooding or inundation, that portion of the subdivision must have the approval of the State
according to chapter 8d.16 RCW before the Department and the Hearing E.zaminer shall consider
1� such subdivision.
19
b. Steep Slopes:A plat, short plat, subdivisian ar dedication which wauld result in the creation af a
20 lot or lots that prirrearily have slapes forty percent(40%)or greater as measured per RMC 4-3-
�Z �SOJIa, without adequate area at lesser slopes upan whdch development rnay occur,shall not be
approved.
22
23 •--
3.Land Clearing and'Tree Retention: Shall comply with RMC 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land'
2� Clearing ReguCations. �
2� 4. Streams:
26
PRELIMINARY PLAT-21
1 a. Preservation:Every reasonable e,f�'ort shall be made to preserve existing streams, bodies of water,
2 and wetland areas.
3 �b.Method:If a stream passes through any of the subject property, a plan shall be presented which
'indicates how the stream will be preserved. The methodologies used should include an overflow
4 area, and an attempt to minimize the disturbance of the natural channel and stream bed.
5 ,c. Culverting: The piping or tunneling of water shall be discouraged and allowed only when going
6 'under streets.
7 d. Clean Water:Every ef�'ort shall be made to keep all streams and bodies of water clear of debris
g and pollutants.
9 : 10. The criterion is met. The land is suitable for a subdivision as the stormwater design assures
`that it will not contribute to flooding and that water quality will not be adversely affected.
10 Development will not encroach into critical areas except as authorized by the City's critical area
11 regulations. No piping or tunneling of streams is proposed. Trees will be retained as required by
RMC 4-4-130 as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5. The on-site stream will be protected by the
12 � critical area ordinance compliant buffer that applies to it. The City's stormwater regulations provide
13 for adequate protection of water quality for the on-site stream and wetlands.
14 RMC 4-7-140: Approval of all subdivisions located in either single family residential or multi-
15 family residential zones as defined in the Zoning Code shall be contingent upon the subdivider's
dedication of land or providing fees in lieu of dedication to the City, all as necessary to mitigate the
16 adverse effects of development upon the existing park and recreation service levels. The
1� requirements and procedures for this mitigation shall be per the City of Renton Parks Mitigation
�Resolution.
18
11. City ordinances require the payment of pazk impact fees prior to building peimit issuance.
19
RMC 4-7-150(A): The proposed street system shall extend and create connections between existing
20 'streets unless otherwise a roved b the Public Works De arhnent. Prior to a rovin a street
PP Y P PP 8
21 system that does not extend or connect, the Reviewing Of�"zcial shall find that such e.xception shall
22 meet the requirements of subsection E3 of this Section. The roadway classifications shall be as
defined and designated by the Department.
23
12. As conditioned,the proposed street system connects existing streets.
24
, RMC 4-7-150(B): All proposed street names shall be approved by the City.
25
13. As conditioned.
26
PRELIA�IINARY PLAT-22
1 RMC 47-150(C): Streets intersecting with existing or proposed public highways, major or
2 secondary arterials shall be held to a minimum.
3 14. There is no intersection with a public highway or major or secondary arterial.
4 RMC 47-150(D): The alignment of all streets shall be reviewed and approved by the Public N'orks
Department. The street standards set by RMC 4-6-060 shall apply unless otherwise approved. Street
5 alignment o,,�sets of less than one hundred twenty five feet(I25)are not desirable, but may be
6 approved by the Department upon a showing of need but only after provision of all necessary safety
� measures.
8 � 15. As detennined in Finding of Fact 4, the Public Works Department has reviewed and
, approved the adequacy of streets,which includes compliance with applicable street standards.
9
10
11 �C 4-7-I50(E):
12 1. Grid.•A grid street pattern shall be used to connect existing and new development and shall be the
.predominant street pattern in any subdivision permitted by this Section.
13
2. Linkages:Linkages, including streets, sidewalks,pedestrian or bike paths, shall be provided
14 within and between neighborhoods when they can create a continuous and interconnected netrvork
15 of roads and pathways. Implementation of this reguirement shall comply with Comprehensive Plan
Transportation Element Objective T-A and Policies T-9 through T-16 and Community Design
16 Element, Objective CD-Mand Policies CD-SO and CD-60.
17 3. Exceptions:
i 8 'a. The id attern m be ad'usted to a " "
, g'�" p ay � flexible grid by reducing the number of linkages or the
19 alignment between roads, wher.e the following factors are present on site:
20 -i. Infeasible due to topographical/environmental constraints;and/or
21 ii. Substantial improvements are existing.
22
4. Connections:Prior to adoption of a complete grid street plan, reasonable connections that link
23 existing portions of the grid system shall be made.At a minimum, stub streets shall be required
within subdivisions to allow future connectiviry.
24
25 S. Alley Access:Alley access is the preferred street pattern except for properties in the Residential
Low Density land use designation. The Residential Low Density land use designation includes the
26
PRELIMINARY PLAT-23
1 RC, R-1, and R-4 zones. Prior to approval of a plat without alley access, the Reviewing Official shall
2 evaluate an alley layout and determine that the use of alley(s) is not feasible...
3 6.Alternative Conftgurations: Offset or loop roads are the preferred alternative configurations.
4 . 7. Cul-de-Sac Streets: Cul-de-sac streets may only be permitted by the Reviewing Official where due
to demonstrable physica!constraints no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically
5 possible.
6
16. The proposed and required connections aze the maximum that can be included given the steep
7 sIopes to the west, critical areas to the south, existing development and the vacant pazcels to the
g south. Lots 11-16 are accessed by an alley.
°The proposal as conditioned contains a looped road and no cul-de-sac is proposed. The criterion
9 �above is met.
10 �C 47-150(�: All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat,
11 1ncluding streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and
sidewalks shall be constructed as spec�ed in the street standards or deferred by the
12 Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee.
13 . 17. As proposed.
14
:RMC 4-7-150(G): Streets that may be eztended in the event of future adjacent platting shall be
15 required to be dedicated to the plat boundary line. Extensions of greater depth than an average lot
16 - shall be improved with temporary turnarounds. Dedication of a full-width boundary street shall be
`required in certain instances to facilitate future development. �
17
' 18. There are no streets that could be extended in the event of future adjacent platting under the
1 g approved subdivision design.
19
RMC 47-170(A): Insofar as rractical, side lot lines shall be at rirht angles to street lines or radial
20 to curved street lines.
21 19. As depicted in Ex. 37,the side lines are in conformance with the requirement quoted above.
22 RMC 47-170(B): Each lot must have access to a public street or road.Access may be by private
23 access easement street per the requirements of the street standards.
24 20. As previously deteimined,each lot has access to a public street.
. 25 RMC 47-170(C�: The size, shape, and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width
� 26 requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of
PRELIMINARY PLAT-24
i development and use contemplated. Further subdivision of lots within a plat approved through the
2 provisions of this Chapter must be consistent with the then-current applicable maximum density
requirement as measured within the plat as a whole.
3 �
21. As previously determined, the proposed lots comply with the zoning standards of the R-8
4 'zone,which includes azea,width and density.
5 �RMC 47-170(D): Widzh between side lot lines at their foremost points (i.e., the points where the
6 =side lot lines intersect with the street right-of-way line)shall not be less than eighty percent(80%)of
,� =the required lot width except in the cases of(1)pipestem lots, which shall have a minimum width of
twenty feet(20)and(2) lots on a street curve or the turning circle of cul-de-sac (radial lots), which
8 shall be a minimum of thirty five feet(35).
9 22. As shown in Ex.37,the requirement is satisfiad.
10 �C 47-170(E): All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, ezcept alleys,
11 -shall have minimum radius offifteen feet(IS).
�
12 23. As conditioned.
13 �C 47-190(A): Due regard shall be shown to all natural features such as large trees,
14 ;watercourses, and similar community assets. Such natural features should be preserved, thereby
adding attractiveness and value to the property.
15 �
24. The on-site wetland and stream is set-aside from the developed portion of the subdivision.
16 �e criteria above is met.
1� �RMC•4-7-200 A • Unless se tic tanks are s eci call a roved b the Public Works De artment
� )• P P .� Y PP Y p
18 and the King County Health Department, sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no
19 =cost to the City and designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed
eight feet(8) into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision
2� development.
21 25. As conditioned.
22 RMC 4-7-200(B): An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all
23 surface water. Cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all natural water flow and shall be of
sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. The drainage system shall be
24 designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water)Standards. The drainage
25 system shall include detention capacity for the new street areas. Residential plats shall also include
26 deten�ion capacity for future development of the lots. Water qualiry features shall also be designed to
provide capacity for the new street paving for the plat.
PRELIMINARY PLAT-25
1 26. The proposal provides for adequate drainage that is in conformance with applicable City drainage
2 standards as deteanined in Finding of Fact No. 4. The City's stormwater standards, which are
;incorporated into the technical information report and will be further implemented during civil plan
3 =review,ensure compliance with all of the standards in the criterion quoted above.
4 RMC 47-200(C�: The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be
5 'designed and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire
Department requirements.
6
� 27. As conditioned.
8 RMC 4-7-200(D): All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Any
utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the
9 planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all
10 service connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and
approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the
1� `maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department.
12 �2g As conditioned.
13
RMC 4-7-200(E): Any cable Ti�conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic
14 utilities are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line
15 �by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley
improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. 7'he cost of
16 trenching, conduit,pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to
1� bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider
shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to
1 g final ground elevation and capped. The cable ?'v company shall provide maps and specifications to
19 the subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and cerh;fy to the City that it is properly installed.
2p 29. As conditioned.
21 RMC 4-7-210:
22 A. MONUMENTS:
23 Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling corner of
24 the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department.All surveys
shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards.
25
B. SURVEY.•
26
PRELTMINARY PLAT-26
1 'All other lot corners shall be marked per the City surveying standards.
2 C. STREET SIGNS:
3
� The subdivider shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision.
4
30. As conditioned.
5
6 � Street Improvement Waiver
� 31. RMC 4-6-060(I�(2) requues two means of access for homes served by a dead end street
longer than 700 feet The applicant wishes to have this secondary access requirement waived for the
8 �dead end street that serves i Smithers Ave. S. The len
. t, gth of Smithers Ave. S. as extended by the
9 proposed subdivision would be 2,364 feet.
10 �C 4-9-250(C)(2) authorizes the waiver of the installation of street improvements3 subject to the
11 determination that there is reasonable justification for such wavier. RMC 49-250(5) provides that
�reasonable justification shall include but not be limited to the following:
12
13 a. Required street improvements will alter an existing wetlands or stream, or have a
negalive impact on a shoreline's area.
14 b. Existing steep topography would make required street improvements infeasible.
15 ` c. Required street improvements would have a negative impact on other properties,
such as restricting available access.
16 d. There are no similar improvements in the vicinity and there is little likelihood
that the improvements will be needed or required in the next ten(10)years.
17 � e. In no case shall a waiver be granted unless it is shown that there will be no
detrimental ef�'ect on the public health, safety or welfare if the improvements are not
18 = installed, and that the improvements are not needed for current or future
19 development.
20
21
22 3 The secondary access required by staff may not have to be "improved" since its sole purpose is to provide for
emergency access and no paving or even grading may be necessary. The issue at hand could be characterized as
23 more of a street grid issue than a street improvement issue. Consequenfly, it is debatable whether the RMC 4-9-
250(Cx2)waiver process applies in this instance. The altemative modification process would be RMC 4-9-250(D),
24 which applies to those standards not covered by RMC 4-9-250(B)or(C). The proposal would also fail to meet the
RMC 49-250(D), since authorizing one access point would not meet the inteat or safety objectives of the Code.
25 The applicant used the criteria of RMC 4-9-250(B}(5)in its briefing,which clearly does not apply to the requested
modification. The RCW 4-9-250(Bx5) criteria only apply to the development standards expressly identified in
2C RCW 4-9-250(B)(1). RMC 4-6-060(I�(2)is not listed amongst those standards.
PRELIII�IINARY PLAT-27
�
1 The requested waiver cannot be approved because it fails to rneet RMC 4-4-080(C)(5)(e). As
deternuned in Finding of Fact No. 4, waiver of the proposed secondary access requirement would
2 -prevent the provision of safe and appropriate/adequate fire response. Consequently, the proposal will
3 have a detrimental effect on public safety. As testified by the Fire Chief,one access point can prevent
fire apparatus from reaching the subdivision in case of emergency due to large numbers of persons
4 leavi.ng the emergency scene or damage caused by the emergency (such as seismic events and
wildfires).
5
The applicant asserts that the proposed stub ending for Smithers Road does not qualify as a "dead
6 �end" under RMC 4-6-060(H), and hence the two access requirement does not apply. The applicant
argues that a stub road should not be considered a dead end because it is only a temporary situation
� that will be removed upon development of the adjoining subdivision to the east. It is concluded that
g the proposed stub road qualifies as a dead end. This interpretation is supported by both the plain
meaning and the intent of the ordinance. The Meriam Webster definition of"dead end" is "a street
9 that ends instead of joining with another street so that there is only one way in and out of it". The
proposed stub road cleazly meets this definition. The idea that a stub road is not a "dead end" road
10 does not meet the intent of the two access requirement, which is to prevent a dangerous situation.
11 The"temporary"road stub could be in place for years and even decades before the adjoining property
to the east is developed. The risk of preventing fire access, which is what the two access requirement
12 °�is designed to minimize, is not materially reduced by a stub road that could remain in place for this
period of time. It is also noteworthy that the "dead end" situation for development along Smithers
13 : Ave. S. could have always been considered temporary, since Smithers will eventually forra a looped
system. Despite this "temporar�' situation, staff in the Stonehaven development, located along S.
14 : 47'� SL (which is an extension of the Smithers dead end street ) still required a modification to the
15 t'ur'o access requirement of RMC 4-6-060(I�(2)4. See Ex. 37,att.J,Finding of Fact No. 14.
16 The applicant points out in its briefing that RMC 4-6-060(H)(1) provides that cul-de-sacs and dead
ends should only be authorized in circumstances where no "future connection" to a road grid is
1� physically possible. If"road stub" qualifies as a cul-de-sac or dead end, then RMC 4-6-060 would
� have to be read as only authorizing road stubs if no "future connection" to a road grid is possible,
1 g which of course makes no sense. The conclusion to be drawn from this language is either that (1) a
19 cul-de-sac or dead end does not include a road stub; or(2)RMC 4-6-060{I-�(1)impliedly only applies
to permanent cul-de-sacs or dead ends (i.e. not road stubs). Given the plain meaning of the "cul-de-
20 sac" and "dead end" terms and the fire safety objectives of RMC 4-6-060(I-�(2), the latter
interpretation is deteiminative. The City Council likely intended that RMC 4-6-060(H)(1) would
21 require staff to only authorize pennanent dead ends when it was physically not feasible to require a
connection and if any dead ends had to be allowed, the fire safety impacts would be mifigated by the
22 secondary access and sprinkler standards imposed by RMC 4-6-060{�(2). Given that a "future"
23
24 4 At the hearing the City Attomey noted that RMC 4-6-060 has been amended several times over the years and its
�nclear whether the same two access requirement applied to other subdivisions along the Smithers Ave S dead end
2$ road systcm. A look at the legislative history available to the examiner reveals that RMC 4-6-060(H)has remained
the same since at least 1995,when RMC 4-6-060 was fust adopted. The Stonehaven preliminary plat was approved
26 in 2004.
PRELIMINARY PLAT-28
- --
I _ ,—..—:�
I I
1 connection could take decades to ccimplete,it is daubtful that the Council would have intended a road " I
Z stub to remain in place for decades without the rnitigarion required by RMC 4-6-060(H)(2). I
The most difficult issue raised by tbe applicant is the potential violation of its constitutional propertY
3 rights. It is logical ta gresume that the Co�cil does not intend its development regulations ta be
a interpreted in a manner that is inconsistent with the canstitutianal rights af property applicants. At
the least,violation of those rights is ca�znter to the financial interests of the City since progerty rights
S violation easily translate into damages claims. An exaction that exceeds the pro�rtional
respo�sibility of an applicant fox a development impact is a violation af the t��icings clause. See, e.g.
6 Burtan v Clark County, 91 Wn. App, 505,516-17 (1998). A strictly proportionate ret�uirement from
the applicasrt for a looped fire access road system would arguably just be requ�ring the canstruction of
� that portion of the loop lc�cated on the preliminary plat property. However, even if this were
$ technically correct for strict proparkionality,only magh proportionality is required in exactions cases. I
See,Sparks u Douglas County, 127 Wn.2d 9Q t,91${1995}("it is not necessary for the gQvernment to show a
g `precise mathematical calculation" af 1he cannection be#ween the exaction �nd the impacl af the proposed
develapment.") It is also of high relevance that the public interest at stake is at the high end af the range of
1Q compelli,ng government interests, namely public safety. Requiring the applicant to acquire access rights I
across private pmperky to mitigate against congestipn ar aestlaetic impacts may be questionable under a I
11 proportionality analysis. However, the City is in a very good position to argue that requiring the acqui�ition I
of access rights across one adjoining Iot is entirely proportionate to avoiding the dangers identified by the I
i 2 Renton Fire Chief as attendant to placing an additional 20 homes near tbe end of a haif mile dead end road. j
13 Ultimately, the merits of the applicant's canstitutional argwnents do not have to be addressed. As I
� previausly discussed, the constitutional issues are relevant to the interpretatian of City development I
14 standards. Beyond this, the examiner has no authority to waive City development standards if they I
violate the constitutional property rights af an applican� RMC 4-9-250(C)(5)(e) strictly provides that I
�S "in na case"shall a waiver be granted unless it is shown that there will be no detrimental effect on the I
�� public health, safety or welfare. There may be some roam to allaw canstitutional restrictians to I
j influence what level of risk of harm should be considered "detrimental" under the standard,but that I
17 only goes so far. The Renton Fire Chief testified that in case af emergency there was a danger that he I
may be�prevented frorn dispatching his fire trucks ta the proposed subdivision because of the half I
( �� mile long dead end road. As determined in the findings af fact, the applicant did not provide any I
1 g convincing evidence to the contrary. No rnatterr haw liberally construed to achieve ccrnsistency with I
constitutional requirements, there is no way to reach a conclusion of"no detrimental" effect on I
20 public safety given the testimony of the fire chief. I
22
�� DECISIt3N I
I
2� The proposed preliminary plat and street improvement waiver is approved, subject to the following
conditions:
24
2s 1. The applicant shall comply with mitigation measures issued as part af the Mitigated
Determinatian af Nan-Significance for the praposal.
26 �
� PRELI�vI�NARY PLAT-29
- - __—...—.—.�
--�
�
�
1 2. All proposed street narnes sha11 be approved by the City. I
2 3. A11 lot camers at interseetions of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have I
3 ` minimum radius of fifteen feet(1 S').
'� 4. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8'� into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are
$ avaitahle,or provided vuith the subdivision developrnen�.
� = 5. All utilities designed to serve the subdivisian shall be piaced undergcound. Any utitities
� installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit fihe planting
of trees. Those utilities to be located benea.th paved surfaces shali be installed, including alI
� service connections, as approved by the Department of Public Works. Such installation shall
� : be completed and approved prior to the applicarion of any surface material. Easernents may
be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department af
10 � Pubtic Works.
tl
6. Any cable TV conduits shall be uudecgrounded at the same time as ather basic utili#ies are
12 installed �o serve each lot. Conduit far service connections shall be Iaid to each lot line by
13 . Applicant as ta obviate the necessity for disturbing the street azea, including sidewallcs, or
ailey impmvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The
14 cost of trenching, ct►nduit,pedestals andlor vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore
1$ � required ta bring service to the development shall be bame by the develnper and/ar land
� owner.'The apglicant shall be respansible only far conduit to serve his development. Conduit
16 - ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and cappe�i. The cabte TV company shall
1� _ provide maps and specificatians to the applicant and shal2 inspect the canduit and ce7tify to
the City that it is properly installed.
18
lg 7. The applicant shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivisian priar to final plat
approval.
20
8. The easements for the alley shall authorize access to a.il lots of the proposed subdivision.
22
2z 9. The applicant shall comply with nine the mirigation measures issued as part of the
Deteimination of Nan-SigniScance Mitigated,dated August 26,2014 [E�iibit 14].
23
2� 10.The applicant shall submit a detailed landscage plan, meeting all landscape plan submittal
requirements of RMC 4-8-120L. The detailed landscape sha11 be submitted ta and appmv«l
2$ by the C:�.urent Planning Fraject Manager prior to issuance of constructian permits. Stree#
26
PRELIl'►�IINARY PLAT-3Q
--- - - - - - - -�
1 trees sha11 not include Callery Pear and trees on S.48th Pl shall be a different type from those
2 on Smithers Ave S.
3 � 11. The Replacement Tree Plan shall be revised to show the proposed locations for replanting
140 two-inch diameter replacement trees.
4 �
5 12. Vegetation (trees, shrubs, and ground cover) shall be planted to replace vegetation (trees,
shrubs, and ground cover) removed for installation of the stormwater conveyance between
6 `. the stormwater vault and the west property boundary of the property. Type and quantities
� shall be sufficient to ensure erosion control in the protected slope area.
8 � 13. The primary access road, Smithers Ave S, shall connect to S 48th Pl and be extended to the
9 ' east to provide a second access from Main Ave S (102nd Ave SE) at its intersection with SE •
186th St. The completion of this street and its connection to Main Ave S shall be a condition
10 = of project approval. The extent of street improvements necessary to effectuate this
11 ���hon, sha11 be determined by the City of Renton Fire Department in accordance with
applicable fire code standazds and shall be the minimum necessary to provide for safe and
12 effective secondary fire access. The extended street, providing a second access to the
13 proposed development, shall have construction completed prior to recording the final plat.
14 � 14.A recorded easement agreement demonstrating access to the existing downslope stormwater
15 ' �ntrol system shall be submitted prior to issuance of construction permits.
16 15.A Homeowners' Association shall be incorporated for maintenance and equal and undivided
1� ownership of the tracts,the private access road, and the alley.
1 g ` 16.An easement shall be recorded along the east property boundary for future extension of the
sanitary sewer system.The easement shall be at the time of recording the final plat.
19
20
17.All new fill sha11 be composed of free draining structural fill and not native soils.
21 �
22 18.Drainage from westem lots into the steep slopes shall be minimi�ed and all such drainage
shatl be dispersed.
23
19.Anchors for the stormwater tight line sha11 only be placed on the top and battom of the pipe.
24 The anchors should be designed to withstand tree fall and soil movement. The pipeline
25 should be constructed at the top and pulled down the slope rather than moving it up the hill.
26
PRELIlVIINARY PLAT- 31
------ �
, �
1 DATED this 3rd day of Octaber,2014.
2 t �'' �:�`t�`-'� G-.�-�"'�-•�.,:.._�.�_....._.._
Ph��tlm�rht�
3
4 ' City of Renton Hearing Examiner
5 �
6 � AppeaE Right and Vafuation Notices
7 RMC 4-8-080 pravides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal ta the
� � Rentan City Council. RMC 4-8-114(E)(14)requ'vres appeals af the hearing examiner's decisian
to be filed within fourteen(14� calendar days from tlae date of ttze hearing examiner's decision.
q . A request for reconsideration to the hearing exarniner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal
� period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(13) and RMC 4-8-100(G)(9). A new fourteen (14) day
1Q appea] periad sha11 commence upon the issuance af the reconsideration. Additianal information
regardin,g the appeal process may be obtained frora the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -
1� 7�'flaor,(425)430-6510.
�z �
Affected property owners may reguest a change in valuation for property tax purpases
13 notwithstanding any pragram of revaluation.
14
15 �
16
17 -
I8 �
19
20 -
21 �
Zz
23
24
25
26
PR,ELa►�.Il�IARY PLAT-32
� — _ - - _ - - - - - - -
I
_ •
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
�• G.
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Resolution Authorizing a Memorandum of REGULAR COUNCIL-OS Jan 2015
Agreement related to the Puget Sound Emergency
Radio Network ("PSERN")
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Issue Paper City Attorney
Memorandum of Agreement Regarding Future
Operation of the Puget Sound Emergency Radio
Network Staff Contact:
Resolution Authorizing MOA re PSERN Zanetta Fontes, x6486
Recommended Action:
Council Concur
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ Revenue Generated: $
Total Project Budget: $ I City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Council approved two interlocal agreements regarding the implementation and the operation of the
Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network System ("PSERN"). However, the PSERN Operations Interlocal
Cooperation Agreement has been revised and is not in the form approved. So as not to hold up the
project any further, the parties agreed to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement to negotiate in good
faith to form the Operations Interlocal Cooperation Agreement.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: '
Adopt the resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the Memorandum of Agreement
Regarding Future Operation of The Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network.
. , .
`
CRY ATTORNE1f D ���oO� �
M E M O R A N D UM
DATE: December 3,2014
T0: Mayor,Denis Law and All City Couacil Members
FROM: Zanetta L.Fo�tes,Sr.Ass�City Attorney �
SUBIECT: PSERN Memorandum of Agreement
{SSUES
1. Whether to sign a Memorandum of Agreement regarding entering into a PSERN �
, Operations ILA at a later time.
BACKGROUND
As you might recall, a few weeks ago you considered two resolutions reiating to tnterlocal
Agreements to put in place a means by inrhich we,and 11 other jurisdictions, would implement, �
and uttimately, operate a new public safety radio system. That.system has come to be called
PSERlV (Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network). There are two separate interlocal
agreements,one to cover the changeover(calted the Implementation ILA)and the second one
would cover the long term operation of the system (called the Operations!LA).
At the time t presented the resolutions for your conside�ation, I had drafts of the two interlocal
agreements. The resolutions authorized the Mayor to sign the agreements sa long as they
were substantially the same as the drafts I submitted as exhibits to the�esolutions.
Additionally,you m�ght recall that time is of the essence. The f.ounty is aiming to place this on
the ballot fi April,2015. Further,because this has the potential to be a difficult political issue,
the county councll wants to know that there is pbuy in"from a!I the Parties to the agreements.
This meant some form of formal council action by each Party. We(the attorneys who have �
been working on this)were told that the county council wanted that"buy in"before December
Page- 1 '
r
�
1,2014.With that in mind, I presented to you what 1 believed to be the"as close to final"
version of each of the two agreements.
The tmplementation IIA has been changed, but,not substantively. Therefore, based on the
resolution you passed to author'sze the Mayor to sign it,he can sign that ILA(absent any
substantive last minute changes�.
CURRENT SITUATtON
Afte�you passed the two resolutions,t learned that the Operations ILA was facing conside�able
substantive challenges from at least one of the Parties. So much so,that the attorneys for that
entity are rewriting portions of that proposed IIA. And,due to the time constraints(we all
' realize that the new version will not make the'time deadlinej those attorneys have proposed a
Memorandum of Agreement{MOA). That is a far less camplex document than the Operations
ILA. The MOA would have the Parties agreeing to enter into an Operatians{LA at a later time.
One of the issues about this MOA is that there are 2 sections of the Implementation ILA that
woutd be binding an the Parties during the operations(the next 20+years). We (the attorneys
for the Valley Com cities and some for the Eastside cities)have some issues about one of these
pravisions. The two provisions are: The binding nature of the Cost Allocation Model,and the
governance anc!voting structure.
The Cost Allocation Model is a formula that was created to take into account different costs for I
different kinds of units and services. I have worked out the formula and am comfortable with
it. Whether we want that to be the model fo�time immemorial is another matter and is
beyond my expertise to know. But,we can address amending the Cost Atlocation Model when �,
we negotiate the powers of the Board of Directors of the new non-profit entity that wiq be
formed by the Operations ILA. �
The governance and voting structure is a bit more probfematic.The up'shot is that#here would� ��
need to be unanlmltK!n ail votes taken by the Board and.it wou[d take al!four votlnQ board
members to be present in order to take any action. (Voting alternates are permltted.) We(the ,
Valley Com cities'attorneys):were not comfortable with this structure,even in the
lmplementation ILA, because it gave each party veto power. But,foc the Implementation IEA,
we capitulated because the county was going to be on point on this and we thought that
maybe,under those circumstances, letting them have�eto power made sense. But,then once
one Party had veto power.......ail Parties wanted veto power. ,
That was acceptabie loglc for the Implementattan ILA. Now,however,Seattle(and, maybe,
. county,too)is pushing for the same vot(ng provision (unanlmity)for the Operations ItA. Our
(the attorneys for Valley Com cities)concern revolves around the potential for delay that is out
Page-2
there if one pesson gets a bee in his/her bonnet. That could be very detrimental. On the other
hand,if everyone has veto power, maybe no one will abuse�t. Aubum and TukwFfa have .
already indicated the desire for a majority vote. 8ased on a comment from Kent's city attorney,
I believe Kent is willing to capitulate and agr.ee to the unanimous vote requirement and the
quorum requirement.
As for the quorum requirement, I thintc we can tive with the requirement that there be ail four
voting members (or alternates with voting powerj present if we can get movement on the
voting. If there is no movement on the unanimous vote requirement,then I will try to have the
quorum requirement changed.
Note:with unanimity AND the quorum requirement,a Party could effectively veto a measure
just by failing to 1)appear,or 2}send an altemate. So,there would be no"record"of the Party
voting against samething. That could become a political matter years from now.
I have sent an e-mail to#he Seattle attorneys who are pcoposing this MOA,asking them to
consider flexibility in one of the two (voting/quorum}requirements. I spoke with the lead
attorney who made it clear(in a friendly way)that there is no chance of movement on this
voting/quorum issue. I might keep working on this but am not sure there will be any progress.
. Whiie we(Renton staffers)have tried to get this matter before you 6efore the end of the year
� in order to meet the timeline the rnunty set out for us,there are at least two other south end
cities that wi{) not be acting on this until January. Seattle,too,wil) nat act on this until lanuary.
ASKING OF YOU . .
I have had prepared a resolution authorizing the Mayo�to si�n the attached MOA in its current
substantive form with the caveat that a change from unanimlty in the voting to a majority will
not be a substantive change. It also leaves room for flexibility on the quorum requirement.
As I type this memo, I do not have a clean version of the MOA to attach. I am presenting the
redline versian of the MOA to you as#he exhibit to the resolution.
Due to the fact that other cities witl not be able to address this matter unti!lanua.ry, I am not
asking that you pass this resolution on December 8, 2014. I am providing this to you now,
however,so that you can review it in anticipation of it being on your agenda on S lanuary 2015.
Please feel free to cail me if you have any questions, ext.6486. ^
/ � /.i .
, Zane a ��`"
Page-3
Memorandum of Agreement Rogarding Future Operation of
The Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network " •
This Memorandum of Ag�eemeut Regard'mg Future Opecafioa of Puget Sound
Emerge�►cy Radio Network("MOA'�is entered jnto pursuant to the InterlocaI Cooperation Ad
(Chapter 39.34 RC1A�by and among King County and the cities of Auburn,.Bellevue,Federal � �
Way,Issaquah,Kent,Kirkland,Mercer Island,Redmond,Renton,Seattie,and Tukwila,each a • ,
political subdivisioa or munlcipal corporation of the State of Washington(individually,a ' '
"Party")and,(collectively,the"Pazties"). -
Recitals -
The Parties deteratiaed that it is in the public interest that a new public safety radio
systern be implemented that will provide public safety agencies and other user groups in the �-
region with improved coverage and capacity,and uniformly 6igh-quality eraergency radio � ' ,
communicstions. This new system is refemd to heretn as the"Puget Sound Emergency Radio °
Network System"or"PSERN System"
I The 1'arties are enteriag into a separate agcement("Implementation Perlod ILA")that .
designates King County to act as the iead agency for planning,procurement,financing and _ •
emplementation of the PSERN System with the oversight of a joint board established by the �
Parties. ' -
� T ' . Parties also wish to-create a newpon_profit----•-..-•��e(scaat7:o��a�cm.c�y: �
corporation to assume the ownership and control of the PSERN System at completion of the _ _
activities under the Implementation Period ILA and thereafter throughout the usefut Gfa of the
PSERN 5ystem. � '
The Parties mutuaUy desire to commit to the for�nation of the non-profit corporadon,its
goveanancc shuctuce,end other material terms regarding the future operation of the PSERN �" �
System while allowic�g the flex�ility to work in good faitfi toward a more complete agreemeat ' � �
for the incorporatioQ of the non-pc+ofit and the future operation of tho PSERN System. � •
NOW�T'fiEREFORE,in consideration of the mutual prornises,benefits and covenants '
contained hereia aad otber valuable consideration,the sufficiency of wdich is hereby '. •
acimow►edged,the Parties agree to the above Recitals and as follows: y '
Page 1 of 5 • ,
1. Effective Date�and Term
ThIs MOA shal[be effective on the date it is last signed by an authorized representative , •
of each the Parties,and shall remain in effect until the earlier of the fo{lowing events:(i)the °
Implementation Period ILA is terminated or(ii)this MOA is supe�seded by the inteclocal
agreement described in Sections 3 and 4. ,
2. IncorporaUoa of PSERN Operator �
The Parties hereby agree W create a non-profit corporation,as authorized under RCW .
3934.030,to be incorporated in Washington State for the purpose of owning,operating, '
tneintaining,tnanaging and providing ongoing upgtading and replacement ofthe PSERN System �
throughout its usefiil[ife. The future non-profit oorporarion to be created by the Parties is , , � �
referred to herein as the"PSERN Operator". ` . '
3. Iaterlocal A�eemenh,Material Terms � ' .
The Parties agree to work ia good faith and use best efforts to negotiate aad enter into a , . • ; °
future interlocal agreement that will establish the terms and coaditions appticable to the future , -
operateon of PSERN and the incorporalion of the PSERN Operator. The Parties commit and �
agree that the fotiowing tcrms and conditions are tnaterial to the future interiocat agreemeat and , ,
sHall be includcd: � �
a. The affairs of the PSERIV Operator sh�ll be govemed by a board of diredocs(the � R
"Board")that shall act on behalf of alI Parties and ac may be in the best interests of � �
public safety end the PSERN System. -
' � b. The governance and voting struciure of the Boazd shall be substa�al�as provided •
under Sections 4.1 through 4.3 of the Draft Puget Sound Emergency Radio Ndwork
Operator Intcrlocal Cooperation Agreement("Draft Operations ILA'�attac6od as � '
E�chbh 1 and made a part of this MOA. ,
c. Agencies using the PSERN System shall pay the PSERN Ope�ator user fees as
provided for in t6e Implernentation Period ILA and based on the cost allocation •
model athached as Exhibit 4 to the Implementation Period ILA.
4. Addittanal Terms and Condidans of Interlocat Agreement . � - .
In addidon to the materlal terms and conditions ia Section 3 above,the Parties shali � - ` .- �
� continue to work in good faith to supplemen�neeotiate,�amend and final ize me Draft ,
Operations IIA to inciade additional mutuatly agreed upon terms regarding the incorpagtion �
and transfer of ope�ations to the PSERN Operator,which are an6cipated to inctude tcrms • ' I
regarding transfer of employees to PSERN,insurance end liability requiraneats,end senrice � ' '
tevels for the PSERN System user agree�eats. With the exception of the material terms and � ' •f
� condidons in$ection 3 above,the Draft Operations�A-IL.A attached as Exhbit 1 is not •
Page 2 of S ' , ,
intended to,be[egalty binding until signed by an authorized ropresentative of each Pacty , ' .� .. '
folIowing any suthorization required.by each Party's respective jurisdiction. The Patties ell _
commit to working to finalize�esea�the Draft Uperations ILA in a timeframe that will , • ,
allow the fina(interlocal aQreement to be oresented to the Parties'i�respective authorizing bodies � �
for aR�roval in a tune and manner�at will eAable the PSERN Operator W be fully fuactioning ' , ' . '
no later than full system acceptance as defined under the Implementation ILA. ' `
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,autltorized representatives of the Parties have signed their aames in _
the spaces provided below. �
KING COUNTY CTI'Y OF AUBURN {
Name Name ,�
Title Title • '
Date Date
Attest: � * ,
City Clerk , , - .
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: �
Deputy Prosecufs►g Attomey City Attomey
CITY OF BELLEV�JE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY �
Naine Name � . , •
Title Title • �
Date Dste • � „ � -
Attes� Attest: � y . :
, ' ' F, _
City Clerk ` City Clerk _
Page 3 of 5 . ' ,
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: _ ;
City Attomey City Attorney �
CiTY OF ISSAQUAH C1TY OF I�NT � •
Name Name
T�ile T'nIe � ,
Date Date - •
Attest: Attest:
City Clertc City Clerk . . . .
Approved as to Form: Approved as W Form: d - �
City Attorney City Atiorney �
CITY UF KIItKLAND CTI'Y OF MERCER LSLAND
Name Name '
,
Tide Title
Date p� �
Attes� Attest:
City Clerk City Clerk
Approved es to Form: Approved as to Form: ,
City Attomey � � City Attomey . � '
Page 4 of 5
CITY OF REDMUND CITY OF RENTON ' °
Name Name
Title Title �
' Data Date . .
Attest: Attest:
City Clerk City Cierk
Approved as to Fo�m: Approved as to Form: � • , -
Gtity Attomey Cety Attorney . � ` '
CITY OF SEATTLE CITY OF TUKWILA ,
Name . Name , . .
Title TiHe u
Date � Date � '�,
Attest: Attest: . .
� . �
City Clerlc � City Clertc , � • '
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: ` , •
City Attomey City Attomey I�
Page 5 of 5 � � •
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION N0.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AUTHORI2ING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
WITH KING COUNTY AND THE CITIES OF AUBURN, BELLEVUE, FEDERAL WAY,
ISSAQUAH, KENT, KIRKLAND, MERCER ISLAND, REDMOND, SEATTLE, AND
TUKWILA RELATED TO THE FUTURE NEGOTIATIONS OF A PUGET SOUND
EMERGENCY RADIO NETWORK OPERATOR INTERLOCAL COOPERATION
AGREEMENT.
WHEREAS, the City and the Cities of Auburn, Bellevue, Federal Way, Issaquah, Kent,
Kirkland, Mercer Island, Redmond, Seattle, and Tukwila and King County (the "Parties") are
authorized, pursuant to RCW Chapter 39.34, to enter into an interlocal government cooperative
agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Council approved two interlocal agreements regarding the
implementation and the operation of the Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network System
("PSERN"); and
WHEREAS, the PSERN Operations Interlocal Cooperation Agreement has been revised
and is not in the form approved; and
WHEREAS, so as not to hold up the project any further, the Parties have agreed to enter
into a Memorandum of Agreement to negotiate in good faith to form the Operations Interlocal
Cooperation Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the current version of the Memorandum of Agreement contains provisions
requiring unanimity in voting and all Parties present to constitute a quorum; and
WHEREAS, the Parties continue to negotiate the terms of the Memorandum of
Agreement regarding those provisions; and
1
RESOLUTION NO.
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Council to permit staff to continue negotiation on those
provisions;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The above recitals are found to be true and correct in all respects.
SECTION II. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into a
Memorandum of Agreement, which shall be substantially similar to the form attached hereto as
Exhibit A. This authorization shall be effective in the event that staff is able to negotiate either
a change in the voting from unanimity to majority, or reduction in the quorum requirements, or
both.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2015.
Jason A. Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2015.
Denis Law, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
RES:1655:12/4/14:scr
2
RESOLUTION N0.
EXHIBIT A • '
Memorandum of Agreement Regarding Future Operation of
The Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network ' � •
This Mcmorandum of Agi�eement Regarding Future Operatioa of Puget Sound
Emergency Radio Necwork("MOA'�is entered into pursuant to the Iriterloca(Cooperation Ad
(Chapter 39.34 RC111�by and among King County and the cities of Auburn,Betlewe,Fedecal � �
Way�Issaquah,Keat,Kirkland,Mercer Island,Redmond,Renton,Seattle,and Tukwila,each a • ,
political subdivision or munIcipal cocporation of the State of Weshington(individually,a ' '
"P���8ild��COUC�IVC��U18"Parties"�.
Recitsls -
The PaRies detercnined that it is in thc public interest thai a new public safety radio
systern be implemented that wEll provide pablic safety agencies and other aser groups in the � �-
region with improved covcrage and capacity,and unifor�nly iugh-quality emergency radio � ' ,
commanications. This new system is refemd to herein as the"Puget Sound Emerg�cy Radio �
Network System"or"PSERN System"
I The Parties are entering into a separate agreement("Implementation Pedod ILA")that .
designates King County to act as the lead agency for planning,procurement,financing and . •
implementation of the PSERN System wittt the oversight of a joint board established by the �
Parties. ' .
� T ' . Parties siso wish to-create a new non-profit------.--•{�Istr+oil:�e�a�e msc�+N: �
corporation to assume the ownership and control of the PSERN System at completion of the � _ _
aqtivities under the Ineplementation Period iLA and theteafter throughout the useful life of the
PSERN System. • '
The Parties mutually desire w commit to the farmatioa of the non-profit corpocation,its
govemancc sttucture,and other material terms regardiog the fuhue operation of We PSERN ." �
System wt►ile allowing the flexibility to work in good faith toward a more complete agceement ' � -
for the incorporation of the non-profit and the future operation of the PSERN System. � -
NOW,THEREFORE,u►considerarion of the mutua!prornises,benefits and covenants '
contained herein and other valuable consideration,the sufficieacy of which is hereby ". •
aclmowledged,the Parties agrce to the above Recitals and as follows: � �
Rage 1 of 5 • ,
.
RESOLUTION N0.
1. Effective Date�snd Term
ThIs MOA shali be effective on the date it is last signed by an authorized representative , � _
af each the Padies,and shall remaia in effect antil the eartier of the fo{lowing eveats:(i)the °
Implementation Period II.A is terminated or(ii)th9s MOA is supecseded by the interlocal
agreement described in Seetions 3 end 4. ,
2. incorgorstion of PSERN Operator
The Parties hereby agre�a to create a non-proSt corporation,as authorized under RCW .
3934.030,to 6e incorporated in Washington State for d�e purpose of owning,operatictg, '
maiataining,managing and pc+ovid'utg ongoing upgrading and replacement of the PSERN System �
throughout its usefiil Iife. The Rnure non-profit corporatiun to be created by the Parties is , , �
referrEd to herein as the"PSERN Operator". � . �
3. Interlocal Agreemenh,Materia!Terms � ' .
The Parties agree to work in good fatth and ase best efforts to negotiate and enter into a , . ° °
future interlocal agreement that will establish the terms and conditions applicable to the future , �
operation of PSERN and the incorpoiation of the PSERN Operator. The Parties commit and �
agree that the fotiowiag terms and conditions are material to the future interlocai agreement and ,
shall be included: �•
a The affaus of the PSERN Operator shall be governed by a b oazd of directors(the � R
"Board")that shal!act on behalf of all Parties and as may be in the best interests of � �
public safety and the PSERN System. -
` � b. 4'he governance and voting sWcture of the Board shail be s�bs�tEfei�y-as provided •
under Sections 4.1 through 4.3 of the Draft Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network
Operator Intedocal Cooperation Agreement("Draft Operations ILA")attached as * "
, Ex}ubit 1 and made a part of tltis MOA. , �
c. Agencies using the PSERN System shail pay the PSERN Operator user fees as
provided for in the Implernemation Peciod ILA and based on the cost allocation •
model attached as F.xi�ibit 4 w the Implementation Period ILA.
4. Additional Terms and Conditions of Interlocal Agreement r - •
In addidon to the matedal terms and conditions in Section 3 above,the Parties s6all - ` •� �
� continue to work in good faith to supplement neeotiate.-a�amend and finalize the Draft .
Operations ILA to include additional mutuslly agreed upon terms rega�ding the incorporation •
and transfer of operations to the PSERN Operator,which are an6cipated to include tecros • '
regaMing transfer of emp[oyces W PSERN,insurance and 19ability requirem�ts,and secvice
levels for the PSE12N System user agreements. With the exception of the material terms and � ' •'
� conditions in Section 3 above;the Draft Operations�rILA attached as Exhibit 1 is not •
Page 2 af S ,
RESOLUTION N0.
intended to be Iegalty b9nding uatil signed by an authorized representative of each PaRy . ` .. _ '
following any suthorization required.by each Party's respective jnrisdiction. 1'he Pariies a}(
commit to wor�ang to fmalize a�-�eseAEthe Draft Operatioas ILA in a timeframe that wiil , , ; • ,
allow the final interfocal a�exaement to be oresented fo the Parties'i�respective authoriaing bodies. ,
for avnroval in a titne and man�►er that will enable ihe PSERN Operator to be fulEy functioning ' . '
no tater thau full system acceptance as defined under the Implementation ILA. ' � '
IN WITNESS WI�REOF,authoriied regresentatives of the Parties have signed their namcs in w
the spaces Qrovided below. "
KING COUNTY C1T'1'OF AUBURN * � ��
Name Name ,�� " ,, .
Title Title . � �
Date Date
Attest: � � '
City Clerk . • " '
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: '
r
Depury Prosecuting Attorney City Attorney �
CTl'Y OF BELLEWE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY -
Name Name _ .• , .
'���e Title • `
Date Date . " �
Attes� Attest: � � `
, ' ' ,�, .
cny ct� ` cny ci� .
Page 3 of 5 , � :
RESOLUTION N0.
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: , ;
City Attorney City Attorney '
ClTY OF ISSAQUAH CITl'OF I�NT � '
Name Name
Title Titic '
Date Date ' '
Attest: Attes� �
Ciry Clerk City Clerk � . . �
Appc+oved as to Form: Approved as to Forra: b �
City Attomey City Attorney '
CITY OF KIRIQ�IND CTTY OF MERCER LSLAND
Name Name "
.
Title �tle
Date Date ,
Attes� Attest:
City Clerk City Clerk
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: ,
City Attorney � City Attomey ' . '
Page4of5 ,
RE�OLUTION N0.
CITY OF REDMOIYD CITY OF RENTON ' � �
Name Nama
Title Tide - t
' Date Date . .
Attest: Attest:
City Clerk City Clerk , .
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: � . -
City Attomey City Atiorney � ` '
CITY OF SEATTLE CITY OF TUKWILA
Name . Name , . .
Title Title y �
Date • Date �
Attest: Attest: � _ .
� . �
City Clerk • City Cler[c , � •
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Focin: ' , `
City Attomey City Attomey
Page 5 of 5 . • •
.�
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL �, �•
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Approval of Annual Consultant Contract with Reid REGULAR COUNCIL- 05 Jan 2015
Middleton for Structural and/or Non-Structural
Code Compliance
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Issue Paper Community and Economic Development
Contract
Staff Contact:
Craig Burnell
Recommended Action:
Council concur
�
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ 100,000 Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ 100,000 Revenue Generated: $
Total Project Budget: $ 100,000 City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The City currently does not have a structural engineer on staff to review building plans. Therefore, plan
review for structural and/or non-structural code compliance for new and remodeled bu�ildings within the
City of Renton is contracted to an outside vendor.
S
TAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the consultant contract not to exceed $100,000 with Reid
Middleton to review structural plans submitted to the City of Renton.
�.
...�- ,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY � ���0� �
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 9, 2014
T0: Don Persson, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Denis Law, Mayor
CC: Jay Covington, CAO
FROM: C.E. "Chip"Vincent, CED Administrator
STAFF CONTACT: Craig Burnell, Interim Development Services Director, x7290
SUBJECT: Annual Consultant Contract with Reid Middleton for
Structural and/or Non-Structural Code Compliance for
Proposed New and Remodeled Buildings Within the City of
Renton
ISSUE:
Should the City of Renton contract with Reid Middleton to conduct structural and or non-
structural plan review for new and/or remodeled buildings within the City?
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of this Annual Consultant Contract with Reid Middleton.
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
The City's contract for structural plan review services has expired. Reid Middleton is on
our (ist of contractors providing these services and is familiar with Renton City Code.
Sincerely,
C. E. "Chip"Vincent '��
CED Administrator
cc: Renton City Councilmembers
Craig Burnell,Interim Development Services Director and Building Official
lason Seth,City Clerk
-'''�'�: �*-���� .���
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
THIS CONSULTANT AGREEMENT("Agreement") is made as of the day of December, 2014, (the
"Effective Date") by and between the City of Renton, a noncharter code city under RCW 35A,
and a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Washington (hereinafter"Renton"),
and Reid Middleton, (hereinafter "Consultant"), who are collectively referred to as the
"Parties", for structural and non-structural plan review services, verifying compliance to Renton
City Code requirements.
Renton and Consultant,for full mutual consideration as more specifically detailed below, agree:
1. Scope of Services. The Consultant will provide professional services, including
but not limited to all necessary labor and/or supervision, as specified in the attached Scope of
Services (Exhibit A), attached and fully incorporated into this Agreement by reference. This
Agreement is the entire agreement of the Parties and supersedes all prior oral or written
representation or understandings. This Agreement may only be amended by written agreement
of the Parties. The Scope of Services may be amended only as provided in this Agreement, in
Section 2. "Services" shall mean professional services, work, labor and/or supervision.
2. Changes in Scope of Services. Renton, without invalidating this Agreement, may
order changes in the services consisting of additions, deletions or modifications, and adjust the
fee accordingly. Such changes in the services shall be authorized by written agreement signed
by Renton and Consultant. If the project scope requires less time, a lower fee will be charged. If
additional work is required, Consultant will not proceed without a written change order from
Renton. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid, the remainder of the
, Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to serve the purposes and objectives of this
' Agreement.
3. Time of Performance. Consultant shall complete performance for the items
under Consultant's control in accordance with Exhibit A. If items not under Consultant's control '
impact the time of performance, Consultant will immediately notify Renton in writing.
4. Term of Consultant Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall end at
completion of the Scope of Services identified in Exhibit A, but no later than December 31,
2015. The Parties may, upon mutual written agreement, extend this Agreement to accomplish
change orders. I
5. Consultant Agreement Sum. Renton shall make payment for services to
Consultant for completed services consistent with and as provided in the attached estimate Fee
Structure, attached and fully incorporated into this Agreement by reference. Such payment
shall be the full compensation for services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies,
equipment and incidentals necessary to complete the services.
The total amount of this Agreement is not to exceed the sum of One Hundred
Thousand and no cents ($100,000). Washington State Sales Tax is not required. Renton, in
entering into this Agreement, does not guarantee that any services will be requested nor
guarantees any specific dollar amount of services during the term of this Agreement.
6. Method of Payment. Payment by Renton for services rendered will be made
after a voucher or invoice is submitted in the form specified by Renton. Payment will be made
within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of such voucher or invoice. Renton shall have the
right to withhold payment to Consultant for any work not completed in a satisfactory manner
until such time as Consultant modifies such services so that the same is satisfactory to Renton.
7. Record Maintenance and Work Product. Consultant shall maintain accounts and
records, which properly reflect all direct and indirect costs expended and services provided in
the performance of this Agreement. Consultant agrees to provide Renton with access to any
records. All originals and copies of work product, exclusive of Consultant's proprietary items
protected by copyright such as computer programs, methodology, methods, materials, and
forms, shall belong to Renton, including records, files, computer disks, magnetic media or
material which may be produced by Consultant while performing the services. Consultant will
grant Renton the right to use and copy Consultant copyright materials as an inseparable part of
the work product provided.
8. Assignment Agreement. The Consultant shall not assign any portion of this
consultant Agreement without the City of Renton's express written consent.
9. Hold Harmless. Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Renton, its
elected officials, officers, agents, employees and volunteers, from and against any and all
claims, losses or liability, or any portion of the same, including but not limited to reasonable
attorneys' fees, legal expenses and litigation costs, arising from injury or death to persons,
including injuries, sickness, disease or death of Consultant's own employees, agents and
volunteers, or damage to property caused by Consultant's negligent act or omission, except for
those acts caused by or resulting from a negligent act or omission by Renton and its officers,
agents, employees and volunteers.
Renton agrees to indemnify Consultant from any claims, damages, losses, and costs,
including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees, legal expenses and litigation costs,
arising out of claims by third-parties for property damage and bodily injury, including death,
caused solely by the negligence or willful misconduct of Renton, Renton's employees, agents or
volunteers in connection with this Consultant Agreement.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this agreement is subject to
RCW 4.24.115, (Validity of agreement to indemnify against liability for negligence relative to
construction, alteration, improvement, etc., of structure or improvement attached to rea�
estate...) then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or
damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the contractor
and Renton, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers, Consultant's liability shall be only
to the extent of ConsultanYs negligence.
� It is further specificalty and expressly understood that the indemnification provided
herein constitute the Consultant's waiver of immunity under the Industrial Insurance Act, RCW
Title 51, solely for the purposes of this indemnification. The Parties have mutually negotiated
and agreed to this waiver. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or
termination of this agreement.
10. Insurance. Consultant shall secure and maintain:
a. Commercial general liability insurance in the minimum amounts of
$1,000,000 for each occurrence/$2,000,000 aggregate throughout the duration of this
Agreement.
b. Professional liability insurance, in the minimum amount of$1,000,000 for
each occurrence, shall also be secured for any professional services being provided to
Renton that are excluded in the commercial general liability insurance.
c. Workers' compensation coverage, as required by the Industrial Insurance
taws of the State of Washington, shall also be secured.
d. It is agreed that on Consultant's commercial general liability policy, the
City of Renton will be named as an Additional Insured on a non-contributory primary
basis.
e. Subject to Renton's review and acceptance, a certificate of insurance
showing the proper endorsements, shall be delivered to Renton before executing the
work of this Agreement.
f. The Consultant shall provide Renton with written notice of any policy
cancellation, within two business days of their receipt of such notice.
11. Independent Contractor. Consultant's employees, while engaged in the
' performance of any of Consultant's services under this Agreement, shall be considered
employees of the Consultant and not employees, agents or representatives of Renton.
Consultant's relation to Renton shall be at all times as an independent contractor. Any and all
Workman's Compensation Act claims on behalf of Consultant employees, and any and all claims
made by a third-party as a consequence of any negligent act or omission on the part of
Consultant's employees, while engaged in services provided to be rendered under this
Agreement, shall be the solely ConsultanYs obligation and responsibility.
12. Compliance with Laws. Consultant and Consultant's employees and volunteers
shall perform the services required in this Agreement in accordance with all applicable federal,
state, county and city laws, rules, regulations, and executive orders. A copy of this language
must be made a part of any contractor or subcontractor agreement.
13. Discrimination Prohibited: Except to the extent permitted by a bona fide
occupational qualification,the Consultant agrees as follows:
Consultant, and Consultant's agents, employees, representatives, and volunteers with
regard to the services performed or to be performed under this Agreement, shall not
discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, nationality, creed, marital status, sexual
orientation or preference, age (except minimum age and retirement provisions), honorably
discharged veteran or military status, or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical
handicap, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification in relationship to hiring and
employment, in employment or application for employment, the administration of the delivery
of services or any other benefits under this Agreement, or procurement of materials or
supplies.
The Consultant will take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed and
that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, creed, color,
national origin, sex, age, sexual orientation, physical, sensory or mental handicaps, or marital
status. Such action shall include, but not be limited to the following employment, upgrading,
demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay
or other forms of compensation and selection for training.
In the event of non-compliance by the Consultant with any of the non-discrimination
provisions of the contract, Renton shall have the right, at its option, to cancel the Agreement in
whole or in part. If this Agreement is canceled after part performance, Renton shall be
obligated to pay the fair market value or the contract price, whichever is lower, for good or
services which have been received and accepted.
The Consultant is responsible to be aware of and in compliance with all federal, state
and local laws and regulations that may affect the satisfactory completion of the project, which
includes but is not limited to fair labor laws and worker's compensation.
Renton requires all businesses and individuals doing business in Renton to have and
maintain a valid City of Renton business license. (For information contact licensing at 425-430-
6851).
14. Other Provisions:
a. Administration and Notices. Each individual executing this Agreement
on behalf of Renton and Consultant represents and warrants that such individuals are
duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of Renton or
Consultant. Any notices required to be given by the Parties shall be delivered at the
addresses set forth below. Any notices may be delivered personally to the addressee of
the notice or may be deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, to the
address set forth below. Any notice so posted in the United States mail shall be deemed
received three (3) days after the date of mailing. This Agreement shall be administered
by and any notices should be sent to:
CITY OF RENTON CONSULTANT
Craig Burnell, Building Official
City of Renton Reid Middleton
Development Services 728 134th St SW#200
1055 South Grady Way Everett, WA 98204
Renton, Washington 98057
b. Amendment and Modification. This Agreement may be amended only
by an instrument in writing, duly executed by both Parties.
c. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be made in and shall be governed
by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington.
d. Joint Drafting Effort. This Contract shall be considered for all purposes as
prepared by the joint efforts of the Parties and shall not be construed against one party
or the other as a result of the preparation, substitution, submission or other event of
negotiation, drafting or execution.
. n lawsuit or le al action brou ht b an art
, e. Jurisdiction and Venue A y g g y y p y
to enforce or interpret this Agreement or any of its terms or covenants shall be brought
in the King County Superior Court for the State of Washington at the Maleng Regional
lustice Center in Kent, King County, Washington.
f. Severability. A determination by a court of competent jurisdiction that
any provision or part of this Agreement is illegal or unenforceable shall not cancel or
invalidate the remainder of such provision of this Agreement, which shall remain in full
force and effect.
g. Sole and Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire
agreement of the Parties and any representations or understandings, whether oral or
written, not incorporated herein are excluded.
h. Third-Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to, nor
shall be construed to give any rights or benefits in the Agreement to anyone other than
the Parties, and all duties and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement
will be for the sole and exclusive benefit of the Parties and no one else.
i. Waivers. All waivers shall be in writing and signed by the waiving party.
Either party's failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be a waiver
and shall not prevent either Renton or Consultant from enforcing that provision or any
other provision of this Agreement in the future. Waiver of breach of any provision of
this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any prior or subsequent breach
unless it is expressly waived in writing.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have entered into this Agreement effective as of
Effective Date identified above.
CITY OF RENTON CONSULTANT
Denis Law, Mayor
City of Renton Reid Middleton
1055 South Grady Way 728 134th St SW#200
Renton, Washington 98057 Everett, WA 98204
Date Date
Approved as to Legal Form Attest
Lawrence J. Warren lason Seth
Renton City Attorney Renton City Clerk
Date Date
r
Attachment 1
Reid Middleton
SCOPE OF WORK
, On behalf of the Development Services Division, Reid Middleton will perform structural and
non-structural plan review for proposed new and remodeled building projects within the City.
Qualified consultants subcontracted directly to Reid Middleton may perform the non-structural
plan review.
Structural plans and non-structural plans are reviewed for compliance with structural provisions
of adopted codes and reference standards. Review may include:
Geotechnical engineering recommendations related to project features.
Plan review relating to architectural and/or fire and life safety project features.
Other structural engineering senrices, such as field evaluation of buildings, ctient meetings as
specifically requested by the Development Services representative.
Reid Middleton shall complete the specified work generally within twenty-one (21) calendar
days of written notification by the City. (large and/or complex projects may take longer to '
review but require concurrence by the City for a time extension.)
Upon completion of each plan review, Reid Middleton will furnish a summary plan review letter
directly to the City outlining discrepancies in the plans, reports and/or calculations (if any).
Reid Middleton will perform a follow-up plan review within fourteen (14) calendar days as
required by the City to confirm that plans have been corrected adequately according to the
original plan review. In these instances, Reid Middleton will furnish an additional letter directly
to the City summarizing the results of the review.
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
7• � .
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Appointments to Lodging Tax Advisory Committee REGULAR COUNCIL-05 Jan 2015
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Community and Economic Development
Staff Contact:
Ctiff Long
Recommended Action:
Council Concur
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ Revenue Generated: $
Total Project Budget: $ � City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Resolution #3288 established the Renton Lodging Tax Advisory Committee and authorizes Council to
review the membership annually and fill any committee vacancies. Appointments of Michael
Schabbing, General Manager of Marriott Renton and Southcenter Hotels, and Brent Camann, Senior
Asset Manager at SECO Development, Inc., are requested.
These appointments reflect an opportunity for Mr. Schabbing to fill the vacancy left by the departure of i
Brad Knutson from the committee, and a change in employer for Mr. Camann. �,
�I
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Appointments of Michael Schabbing, General Manager of Marriott Renton and Southcenter Hotels, and
Brent Camann,Senior Asset Manager at SECO Development, Inc., to the Lodging Tax
Advisory Committee. Mr. Schabbing fills the vacancy left by Brad Knutson, and Mr. Camann has made a
change in employer.
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL �. . �
�
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Amendment to RMC 4-1-210C, Rental Housing .REGULAR COUNCIL- OS Jan 2015
Incentive, for "Affordable Housing" Definition
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Issue Paper Community and Economic Development
Draft Ordinance
Staff Contact:
Mark Santos-Johnson, ext. 6584
Recommended Action:
Refer to Planning& Development Committee
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ I Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ Revenue Generated: $
Total Project Budget: $ � City Share Total Project: $
�
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Renton Housing Authority plans to use more than $30 million in proceeds from federal low income
housing tax credits to help finance four Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects with 229
units. Amending the definition of"affordable housing" in RMC 4-1-210C, Rental Housing Incentive, will
help leverage additional public and private funds to support affordable multi-family rental housing
development in the Sunset Area and, more specifically,facilitate use of federal low income housing tax
credit financing in new multi-family housing development.The amendment supports the City's vision as
the "Center of Opportunity in the Puget Sound region where businesses and families thrive" and the
Sunset Area Community Investment Strategy.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt an ordinance to amend the "affordable housing" definition in RMC 4-1-210C, Rental Housing
Incentive, to help leverage additional public and private funds to support affordable multi-family rental
housing development in the Sunset Area and, more specifically, to facilitate use of federal low income
housing tax credit financing in new multi-family housing development.
.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY p ����0� .'�}
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 29, 2014
TO: Don Persson, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Denis Law, Mayor
FROM: C.E. "Chip"Vincent, CED Administrator(x 6588)
STAFF CONTACT: Mark Santos-Johnson, Community Development Project
Manager(x6584)
SUBJECT: Amendment to RMC 4-1-210C, Rental Housing Incentive,for
"Affordable Housing" Definition
ISSUE:
Should the City amend the "affordable housing" definition in RMC 4-1-210C, Rental Housing
Incentive?
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt an ordinance to amend the "affordable housing" definition in RMC 4-1-210C, Rental
Housing Incentive,to help leverage additional public and private funds to support affordable
multi-family rental housing development in the Sunset Area and, more specifically,to facilitate
use of federal low income housing tax credit financing in new multi-family housing development.
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
The City is currently working with the Renton Housing Authority(RHA),the King County Housing
Authority,the Renton School District, Neighborhood House,and other public and private entities
to create a U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD)Choice Neighborhoods
Initiative (CNI) implementation grant application for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan. The
HUD CNI grant would potentially provide up to$30 million to support the Sunset Area
Community Revitalization efforts and the Sunset Terrace Redevelopment.
RHA has four new mutti-family rental housing projects included in the Sunset Area
Transformation Plan. The four projects have a total of 229 new multi-family rental housing units,
including 157 units affordable to households at or below 60%of inedian income and 72 mixed-
income units affordable to households at or below 1209'0 of inedian income. See the attached
map for the housing project locations.
Don Persson,Council President
Page 2 of 2
December 29,2014
The four Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects have a totai budget of approximately
$75 mi�lion. If RHA secures a CNt grant,they expect to use more than$30 million in proceeds
from federal low income housing tax credits as provided for in Section 42 of the Internal Revenue
Code as part of the funding for the four housing projects.
Unfortunately,the federal low income housing tax credits use a different rent standard than
provided for in the definition of"affordable housing" in Subsection 4-1-210C.2.a, Rental Housing
Incentive. To help leverage additional public and private funds to support multi-family rental
housing development in the Sunset Area and, more specifically,to facilitate use of the federal
low income housing tax credit financing in new multi-family housing development, staff
recommends amending the "affordable housing" definition in RMC 4-1-210C.2.a. to read as
follows:
2.a. "Affordable housing" means residential housing that is rented by a low-income household
whose monthly housing costs, including rent and utilities other than telephone, do not exceed
thirty percent of the household's monthly income. However, if the multi-familv housin� proiect
is funded with federal low-income housin�tax credits(LIHTC) as provided for in Section 42 of the
Internal Revenue Code. a unit will be considered affordable housin� if it is rented at or below the
rental rate for a household at 60�a of the Kin�Countv median income under the LIHTC pro�ram
rules with a deduction for utilitv costs, if applicable. The Kin�Countv IIHTC rents are published
annuallv bv the Washin�ton State Housin� Finance Commission and are based on unit size
assumin�occupancy of 1 person for a studio unit and 1.5 persons per bedroom.
CONCLUSION:
. The Renton Housing Authority plans to use more than$30 million in proceeds from federal low
income housing tax credits to help finance four Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing
projects with 229 units. Amending the definition of"affordable housing" in RMC 4-1-210C,
Rental Housing Incentive,will help leverage additional public and private funds to support
affordable multi-family�ental housing development in the Sunset Area and, more specifically,
facilitate use of federal low income housing tax credit financing in new multi-family housing
development. The amendment supports the City's vision as the "Center of Opportunity in the
Puget Sound region where businesses and families thrive" and the Sunset Area Community
Investment Strategy.
Enc. Draft Ordinance
cc: 1ay Covington,CAO
Jason Seth,City Clerk
Iwen Wang,Administrative Services Administrator
Terry Higashiyama,Community Services Administrator
Gregg Zimmerman,Public Works Administrator
Cliff Long,Economic Development Director
Mark Santos-Johnson,Community Development Project Manager
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION
4-1-210, WAIVED FEES, OF CHAPTER 1,ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT,
OF TITLE IV(DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO.4260 ENTITLED
"CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON", BY
AMENDING THE WAIVER OF CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT AND MITIGATION FEES.
WHEREAS, on August 27, 2001, the Renton City Council approved Ordinance No. 4913
(codified in RMC 4-1-210B) to allow certain development and mitigation fees for housing that is
for sale to be waived to encourage new owner-occupied housing in Downtown Renton; and
WHEREAS, on February 1, 2010, the City Counci) approved Ordinance No. 5524(codified
in RMC 4-1-210B) to allow certain development and mitigation fees for housing that is for sale
to be waived to encourage new owner-occupied housing in the Sunset Area; and
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2011, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 5617 (codified
in RMC 4-1-210C) to allow certain development and mitigation fees for rental housing to be
waived to encourage new multi-family rental housing in the Sunset Area; and
WHEREAS, on August 20, 2013, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 5668 to extend
the sunset for these development and mitigation fee waivers to December 31, 2015, unless
extended by City Council action; and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Subsection 4-1-2106, Owner-Occupied Housing Incentive,
helped to establish the 37-unit "55 Williams" and the 50-unit "Chateau de Ville" condominium
projects as new owner-occupied housing in Downtown Renton; and
1
ORDINANCE N0.
WHEREAS, the provisions of Subsection 4-1-210C, Rental Housing Incentive, helped to
establish the 8-unit Glennwood Avenue Townhomes project and the 18-unit Kirkland Avenue
Townhomes project in the Sunset Area as new multi-family rental housing; and
WHEREAS,the City seeks to encourage additional new mu►ti-family rental housing in the
Sunset Area; and
WHEREAS, the City seeks to encourage the use of the federal low income housing tax
credit as provided for in Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code to help finance new
affordable multi-family rental housing in the Sunset Area and leverage additional public and
private investment to stimulate new commercial and residential development in the Sunset
Area; and
WHEREAS, the federal low income housing tax credits use a different rent standard than
provided for in the definition of "affordable housing" in Subsection 4-1-210C.2.a, Rental
Housing Incentive; and
WHEREAS, the City seeks to amend the definition of "affordable housing" to help
leverage additional public and private funds to support affordable multi-family rental housing
development in the Sunset Area and, more specifically, to facilitate use of federal low income
housing tax credit financing in new multi-family rental housing development in the Sunset Area;
NOW,THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: �
SECTION I. Subsection 4-1-210C.2.a, Rental Housing Incentive, of Chapter 1,
Administration and Enforcement, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260
2
ORDINANCE NO.
entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington", is hereby amended
to read as follows:
C. RENTAL HOUSING INCENTIVE:
2.a. "Affordable housing" means residential housing that is rented by a low-income
household whose monthly housing costs, including rent and utilities other than telephone, do
not exceed thirty percent of the household's monthly income. However, if the multi-family
housing project is funded with federal low-income housing tax credits (LIHTC) as provided for in
Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code, a unit will be considered affordable housing if it is
rented at or below the rental rate for a household at 60% of the King County median income
under the LIHTC program rules with a deduction for utility costs, if applicable. The King County
LIHTC rents are pubtished annually by the Washington State Housing Finance Commission and
are based on unit size assuming occupancy of 1 person for a studio unit and 1.5 persons per
bedroom.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and thirty
I (30) calendar days after publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2015.
Jason Seth, City Clerk ,
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2015.
Denis Law, Mayor
3
ORDINANCE N0.
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
4
�
1
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
�7� 9 �
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Declare the Sunset Area as a "Redevelopment REGULAR COUNCIL- 05 Jan 2015
Area" and an "Investment Priority Area" �,
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Issue Paper Community and Economic Development
Draft Resolution
Staff Contact:
Mark Santos-Johnson, ext. 6584
Recommended Action:
Refer to Planning& Development Committee
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ Revenue Generated: $
Total Project Budget: $ � City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Sunset Terrace Redevelopment is the highest priority investment strategy in the Sunset Area
Community Investment Strategy adopted in 2009.To maximize resources to assist with the Sunset Area
Community Revitalization and the Sunset Terrace Redevelopment, the City is pursuing a HUD Choice
Neighborhoods Initiative implementation grant for up to $30 million for the Sunset Area Transformation
Plan. Declaring the Sunset Area as a "Redevelopment Area" and an "Investment Priority Area" will help
leverage additional public investment for the Sunset Area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a resolution to declare the Sunset Area as a "Redevelopment Area" and an "Investment Priority
Area."
t
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY p ����0� ���
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 29, 2014
TO: Don Persson, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Denis Law, Mayor
FROM: C.E. "Chip"Vincent, CED Administrator(x6588)
STAFF CONTACT: Mark Santos-lohnson, Community Development Project
Manager(x6584)
SUBJECT: Declare the Sunset Area as a "Redevelopment Area"and an
"Investment Priority Area"
ISSUE:
Should the City approve a resolution to declare the Sunset Area as a "Redevelopment
Area" and an "Investment Priority Area?"
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a resolution to declare the Sunset Area as a "Redevelopment Area" and an
"Investment Priority Area."
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
Since the late 1990s, the City has viewed the Sunset Area (a.k.a. the Highlands) as a
high-priority redevelopment area targeted for improvement and investment. In
November 2009, Council adopted the Sunset Area Community Investment Strategy for
the 269-acre Sunset Area study area. The highest priority investment strategy was
support for the Renton Housing Authority's Sunset Terrace Redevelopment.
The Sunset Area is a high-priority investment area for the City and the Renton Housing
Authority (RHA). The City, Renton School District (RSD), RHA, and others have invested
or committed more than $66 million to date in public investments in the Sunset Area to
support the Sunset Area Community Revitalization and/or the Sunset Terrace
Redevelopment. The City is seeking to leverage additional public investment in the
Sunset Area.
Currently, the City is working with RHA, the King County Housing Authority, RSD,
Neighborhood House, and other public and private entities to create a U.S. Housing and
Urban Development Department (HUD) Choice Neighborhoods Initiative (CNI)
Don Persson,Council President
Page 2 of 2
December 29,2014
. implementation grant application for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan. The HUD
CNI grant would potentially provide up to $30 million to support the Sunset Area
Community Revitalization efforts and the Sunset Terrace Redevelopment.
� To improve the potential for Renton to secure a CNI grant for the Sunset Area
Transformation Plan, staff is requesting that Council declare the Sunset Area as a
"Redevelopment Area" and an "Investment Priority Area". The Sunset Area
Redevelopment Area and Investment Priority area designations will help Renton's CNI
application to be more competitive and help leverage additional public investment to
attract additional private investment to stimulate new commercial and residential
development in the neighborhood.
CONCLUSION:
The Sunset Terrace Redevelopment is the highest priority investment strategy in the
Sunset Area Community Investment Strategy adopted in 2009. To maximize resources
to assist with the Sunset Area Community Revitalization and the Sunset Terrace
Redevelopment, the City is pursuing a HUD Choice Neighborhoods Initiative
implementation grant for up to $30 million for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan.
Declaring the Sunset Area as a "Redevelopment Area" and an "Investment Priority Area"
will help leverage additional public investment for the Sunset Area.
Enc. Draft Resolution
cc: Jay Covington,CAO
lason Seth,City Clerk
Iwen Wang,Administrative Services Administrator
Terry Higashiyama,Community Services Administrator
Gregg Zimmerman,Public Works Administrator
Cliff Long,Economic Development Director
Mark Santos-Johnson,Community Development Project Manager
CITY OF RENTON,WASH�NGTON
RESOLUTION N0.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DECLARING THAT THE
SUNSET AREA IS A "REDEVELOPMENT AREA" AND "INVESTMENT PRIORITY
AREA".
WHEREAS, the Sunset Area (as reflected in the attached Sunset Area Vicinity Map) is
one of Renton's older commercial and residential areas and is in need of revitalization; and
WHEREAS, since the late 1990s, the City has viewed the Sunset Area (a.k.a.the
Highlands) as a high-priority redevelopment area targeted for improvement and investment;
and
WHEREAS, in December 2003,the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5061 designating
the Highlands as a "residential targeted area"for the purpose of allowing a limited property tax
exemption for qualifying new owner-occupied or rental multi-family housing in the Highlands to
help support capital investment and redevelopment in the area; and
WHEREAS, in the Fall of 2006,the City convened the Highlands Task Force on Land Use
and Zoning which resulted in the City Council adopting changes in May 2007, to the City's land
use policies and zoning codes to stimulate redevelopment in the area;and
WHEREAS, in August 2007,the City convened the Highlands Phase II Task Force to study
additional neighborhood issues which resulted in recommendations that the City Council
prioritized and adopted in the Highlands Action Plan in early 2009;and II,
WHEREAS, in July 2008,the City Council adopted Ordinance No.5400 establishing the I
Highlands as a designated residential targeted area for low-income housing serving households
1
RESOLUTION N0.
at or below eighty percent(80%) of the median income to help support development of new
high-quality affordable housing; and
WHEREAS, in June 2009,the City commissioned a Community Investment Strategy study
to prioritize additional public investment in the 269-acre Sunset Area study area which resulted
in the City Council's adoption of the Sunset Area Community Investment Strategy in November
2009;and
WHEREAS,the highest priorities for the Sunset Area Community Investment Strategy
included support for the Renton Housing Authority's Sunset Terrace Redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, in February 2010,the City Council amended RMC 4-1-210 to allow the waiver
of development and mitigation fees to encourage new owned-occupied housing in the Sunset
area and help support redevelopment in the area; and
WHEREAS, in June 2010,the City and the Renton Housing Authority partnered together
to conduct a Sunset Area Community Planned Action NEPA/SEPA Environmental Impact study.
The study was completed in April 2011 and resulted in the City Council's adoption of the Sunset
Area Community Planned Action in lune 2011,to help facititate and support private and public
investment and redevelopment in the Sunset Area over the next 20 years; and
WHEREAS, in August 2011,the City Council further amended RMC 4-1-210 to allow for
the waiver of development and mitigation fees to encourage new multi-family rental housing in
the Sunset area and help support redevelopment in the area; and
WHEREAS, in 2012, 27 percent of the households in the Sunset Area lived in poverty;
the median average household income was$39,318 [more than $16,000 less than the city as a
whole ($55,950) and more than $29,000 less than King County($68,775)]; 75 percent of the
2
---. .
i
RESOLUTION N0.
students at the neighborhood elementary school qualified for free or reduced fee lunch; and 35
percent of students at the neighborhood elementary school had limited English proficiency; and
WHEREAS, in April 2014,the City Council adopted Resolution 4214 designating the
Sunset Area as an "Economic Target Area"with the intention to leverage public investment to
attract additional private investment, particularly through the federal New Markets Tax Credit
program,to stimulate new commercial and residential development in the neighborhood and
to facilitate the creation of partnerships with other public and private organizations to help
address disparities in access to education, social services, health care, and economic and
employment opportunities for Sunset Area residents;and
WHEREAS,the Sunset Area is a high-priority investment area for the City and the
Renton Housing Authority;and
WHEREAS,the City,the Renton School District, and the Renton Housing Authority have
invested or committed more than$66 million to date in public investments in the Sunset Area
to support the Sunset Area Community Revitalization and/or the Sunset Terrace
Redevelopment; and
WHEREAS,the City is seeking to leverage public and private investment in the Sunset
Area to help address the needs of Renton's Sunset Area residents; and
WHEREAS,the City is working with the Renton Housing Authority,the King County
Housing Authority,the Renton School District, Neighborhood House, and other public and
private entities to create a U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department(HUD) Choice
Neighborhoods Initiative (CNI) implementation grant application for the Sunset Area
3
RESOLUTION N0.
Transformation Plan. The HUD CNI grant would potentially provide up to$30 million to support
the Sunset Area Community Revitalization efforts;
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The Sunset Area is declared a "Redevelopment Area" and an "Investment
Priority Area"with the intention to leverage additional public and private investment to
stimulate new commercial and residential development in the neighborhood and to facilitate
the creation of partnerships with other public and private organizations to help address
disparities in access to education, social services, health care, and economic and employment
opportunities for Sunset Area residents.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2015.
Jason Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2015.
Denis Law, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J.Warren,City Attorney
Date of Publication:
4
.
.
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL �. � �
� Subject/Title: Meeting:
Authorize Application for HUD Choice REGULAR COUNCIL-OS Jan 2015
Neighborhoods Initiative Implementation Grant for
Sunset Area Transformation Plan
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Issue Paper Community and Economic Development
Draft Resolution
Staff Contact:
Mark Santos-Johnson, ext. 6584
Recommended Action:
Refer to Planning& Development Committee
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ I Trans€er Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ Revenue Generated: $
Total Project Budget: $ � City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Sunset Terrace Redevelopment is the highest priority investment strategy in the Sunset Area
Community Investment Strategy adopted in 2009.To maximize resources to assist with the Sunset Area
Community Revitalization and the Sunset Terrace Redevelopment,the City is pursuing a HUD Choice
Neighborhoods Initiative implementation grant for up to$30 million for the Sunset Area Transformation
Plan. Authorizing the Mayor to apply for the CNI grant funds for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan
wifl help facititate and support the collaborative CNI application with RHA and KCHA.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a resolution to authorize an application for a HUD Choice Neighborhoods Initiative
implementation grant for up to $30 million for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan.
i
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY �+�r�f
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
° c���o� :��.
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 29, 2014
TO: Don Persson, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Denis Law, Mayor
FROM: C.E. "Chip"Vincent, CED Administrator(x6588)
STAFF CONTACT: Mark Santos-Johnson, Community Development Project
Manager(x6584)
SUBJECT: Authorize Application for HUD Choice Neighborhoods
Initiative Implementation Grant for Sunset Area
Transformation Plan
ISSUE:
Should the City submit a HUD Choice Neighborhoods Initiative implementation grant
application for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan?
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a resolution to authorize an application for a HUD Choice Neighborhoods
Initiative implementation grant for up to $30 million for the Sunset Area Transformation
Plan.
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
Since the late 1990s, the City has viewed the Sunset Area (a.k.a. the Highlands) as a
high-priority redevelopment area targeted for improvement and investment. In
November 2009, Council adopted the Sunset Area Community Investment Strategy for
the 269-acre Sunset Area study area. The highest priorities for the Sunset Area
Community Investment Strategy included support for the Renton Housing Authority's
Sunset Terrace Redevelopment.
The City, Renton School District (RSD) and Renton Housing Authority (RHA) and others
have invested or committed more than $66 million to date in public investments in the
Sunset Area to support the Sunset Area Community Revitalization and/or the Sunset
Terrace Redevelopment. The City is seeking to leverage additional public investment in
the Sunset Area.
�
.
Don Persson,Council President
Page 2 of 3 ,
December 29,2014 �
The City is currently working with RHA, the King County Housing Authority (KCHA), RSD, '
Neighborhood House, and other public and private entities to create a U.S. Housing and
Urban Development Department (HUD) Choice Neighborhoods Initiative (CNI)
implementation grant application for up to $30 million for the Sunset Area
Transformation Plan. If successful, the CNI grant would provide the following funds for
the Sunset Area Transformation Plan:
• Housing — Up to $21 million for RHA's affordable housing development in the
Sunset Area
• Neighborhoods — Up to $3.75 million for eligible targeted neighborhood
improvements in the Sunset Area
• People—Up to $3.75 million total over five years for "people" services for Sunset
Terrace residents and the Sunset Area community
• Administration — Up to $1.5 million (5% of the grant) for administration,
reporting and accounting by the lead applicant, KCHA
To support Renton's efforts to secure a CNI grant for the Sunset Area Transformation
Plan, staff is requesting that Council authorize the Mayor to (i) apply for funds and
prepare a HUD CNI grant application for up to $30 million for the Sunset Area
Transformation Plan in cooperation with KCHA and RHA; and (ii) sign al) certifications
and provide all information required by HUD for the CNI application for the Sunset Area
Transformation Plan. Furthermore, staff is requesting that Council authorize the Mayor
for the City to be a Co-Applicant and the Neighborhood Lead for the CNI application
with RHA as a Co-Applicant and KCHA as the Lead Applicant and the Housing
Implementation Entity, a role to be fulfilled in conjunction with RHA if the CNI funds are
awarded.
The HUD CNI funds would provide substantial public investment in the Sunset Area, help
facilitate the Sunset Terrace Redevelopment, provide significant neighborhood and
people enhancements, and help leverage additional public and private investment to
stimulate new commercial and residential development in the Sunset Area.
CONCLUSION:
The Sunset Terrace Redevelopment is the highest priority investment strategy in the
Sunset Area Community Investment Strategy adopted in 2009. To maximize resources
to assist with the Sunset Area Community Revitalization and the Sunset Terrace
Redevelopment, the City is pursuing a HUD Choice Neighborhoods Initiative
implementation grant for up to $30 million for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan.
Authorizing the Mayor to apply for the CNI grant funds for the Sunset Area
Transformation Plan will help facilitate and support the collaborative CNI application
with RHA and KCHA.
1
•
Don Persson,Council President
Page 3 of 3
December 29,2014
Enc. Draft Resolution
cc: lay Covington,&AO
lason Seth,City Clerk
Iwen Wang,Administrative Services Administrator
Terry Higashiyama,Community Services Administrator
Gregg Zimmerman,Public Works Administrator
Cliff Long,Economic Development Director
Mark Santos-Johnson,Community Development Project Manager
.
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON '
RESOLUTION N0. �I
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON,AUTHORIZING AN
APPLICATION FOR A U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS INITIATIVE IMPLEMENTATION
GRANT FOR THE SUNSET AREA TRANSFORMATION PLAN.
WHEREAS, the Sunset Area (as reflected in the attached Sunset Area Vicinity
Map) is one of Renton's older commercial and residential areas and is in need of
revitalization; and
WHEREAS, since the late 1990s,the City has viewed the Sunset Area (a.k.a.the
Highlands) as a high-priority redevelopment area targeted for improvement and
investment; and
WHEREAS, in June 2009,the City commissioned a Community Investment
Strategy study to prioritize additional public investment in the 269-acre Sunset Area
study area which resulted in the City Council's adoption of the Sunset Area Community
Investment Strategy in November 2009; and
WHEREAS,the highest priorities for the Sunset Area Community Investment
Strategy included support for the Renton Housing Authority's Sunset Terrace
Redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, in June 2010,the City and the Renton Housing Authority partnered
together to conduct a Sunset Area Community Planned Action NEPA/SEPA
Environmental Impact study. The study was completed in April 2011 and resulted in
the City Council's adoption of the Sunset Area Community Planned Action in June 2011,
.
to help facilitate and support private and public investment and redevelopment in the
Sunset Area over the next 20 years; and
WHEREAS, in 2012, 27 percent of the households in the Sunset Area lived in
poverty;the median average household income was$39,318 [more than $16,000 less
than the city as a whole ($55,950) and more than $29,000 less than King County
($68,775)]; 75 percent of the students at the neighborhood elementary school qualified
for free or reduced fee lunch; and 35 percent of students at the neighborhood
etementary school had limited English proficiency; and
WHEREAS,the Sunset Area is a high-priority investment area for the City and the
Renton Housing Authority; and
WHEREAS,the City,the Renton School District, and the Renton Housing
Authority have invested or committed more than $66 million to date in public
investments in the Sunset Area to support the Sunset Area Community Revitalization
and/or the Sunset Terrace Redevelopment; and
WHEREAS,the City is seeking to leverage public and private investment in the
Sunset Area to help address the needs of Renton's Sunset Area residents; and
WHEREAS,the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has
issued a Notice of Fund Availability for the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative (CNI)
Implementation Grant Program and applications are due February 9, 2015; and
WHEREAS,the purposes of the CNI funds are to:(1) replace distressed public
housing and assisted housing with high quality mixed income housing, (2) improve
educational outcomes and intergenerational mobility for youth and their families and
�
(3) create the conditions necessary for public and private investment in distressed
neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the City and Renton Housing Authority have asked the King County
Housing Authority(KCHA)to join them in a mutual effort to apply for the CNI grant and,
if successful,for KCHA to administer the CNI grant and build mixed income housing
primarily in the Sunset Area of Renton; and I
WHEREAS, the City is working with the Renton Housing Authority,the King ,
County Housing Authority,the Renton School District, Neighborhood House, and other
public and private entities to create a HUD CNI implementation grant application for the
Sunset Area Transformation Plan. The CNI grant would potentially provide up to$30
million to support the Sunset Area Community Revitalization efforts;
WHEREAS, the City, the Renton Housing Authority, and the Renton School
District have taken significant steps towards planning and implementing substantial
housing and neighborhood improvements already in the Sunset Area, including: (i)
construction completed for the Meadow Crest Early Learning Center, the Meadow Crest
Playground,and 26 units of new affordable housing; (ii) construction under way for a
new Renton Highlands Library, the Harrington Green Connection and water main
improvements, and the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility; and (iii) relocation
of residents from the Sunset Terrace distressed public housing development;
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON,
WASHINGTON, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The Mayor is authorized to(i) apply for funds and prepare a U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD) Choice Neighborhoods Initiative
(CNI)grant application for up to$30 million for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan in
cooperation with the King County Housing Authority and the Renton Housing Authority;
and (ii) sign all certifications and provide all information required by HUD for the CNI
application for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan. The Mayor is further authorized
for the City to be a Co-Applicant and the Neighborhood Lead for the CNI application
with the Renton Housing Authority as a Co-Applicant and the King County Housing
Authority as the Lead Applicant and the Housing Implementation Entity, a role to be
fulfilled in conjunction with the Renton Housing Authority if the CNI funds are awarded.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of . 2015.
Jason Seth,City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2015.
Denis Law, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J.Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
+
�
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL �
� �• �.
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Request for Fee Waiver- Renton Housing REGULAR COUNCIL- 051an 2015
Authority Sunset Area Transformation Plan
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Issue Paper Community and Economic Development
Sunset Area Transformation Plan Housing Strategy
by Phase (Housing Project Map) Staff Contact:
Sunset Area Transformation Plan Housing Project Mark Santos-lohnson
Waived Fees worksheet
Recommended Action: �
Refer to Planning & Development Committee
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ Revenue Generated: $
Total Project Budget: $ � City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
RHA's four Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects meet the criteria for waiver of certain
development and mitigation fees as provided for in RMC 4-1-210C, Rental Housing Incentive. By
providing the fee waiver for the 229 units as leverage for and contingent upon receipt of the HUD
Choice Neighborhoods Initiative implementation grant application,the City's commitment will help
facilitate and support the collaborative CNI application between the City,the Renton Housing Authority,
and the King County Housing Authority for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan.The fee waiver will
assist RHA in securing CNI grant funds to construct all four of the Sunset Area Transformation Plan
housing projects in five years rather than 15 to 20 years based on other available funding. The
requested fee waiver for RHA's four housing projects in the Sunset Area Transformation Plan supports
the City's vision as the "Center of Opportunity in the Puget Sound region where businesses and families
thrive" and the Sunset Area Community Investment Strategy.
. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a 1009'o waiver of the development and mitigation fees as provided for in RMC 4-1-210C for
the Renton Housing Authority's four Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects with a total of
229 housing units. The fee waivers will be contingent upon the receipt of a HUD Choice Neighborhoods
Initiative implementation grant and will expire on December 31, 2020, unless otherwise extended by the
Council.
�
�
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY p ����0� '�`
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 29, 2014
TO: Don Persson, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Denis Law, Mayor
FROM: C.E. "Chip"Vincent, CED Administrator(x 6588)
STAFF CONTACT: Mark Santos-Johnson, Community Development Project
Manager(x6584)
SUBJECT: Request for Fee Waiver—Renton Housing Authority Sunset
Area Transformation Plan
ISSUE:
Should the City waive certain development and mitigation fees for the Renton Housing
Authority's Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects?
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a 100%waiver of the development and mitigation fees as provided for in RMC 4-1-210C
for the Renton Housing Authority's four Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects with a
total of 229 housing units. The fee waivers will be contingent upon the receipt of a HUD Choice
Neighborhoods Initiative implementation grant and will expire on December 31, 2020, unless
otherwise extended by the Council.
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
The City is currently working with the Renton Housing Authority(RHA),the King County Housing
Authority, the Renton School District, Neighborhood House, and other public and private entities
to create a U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) Choice Neighborhoods
Initiative (CNI) implementation grant application for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan. The
HUD CNI grant would potentially provide up to$30 million to support the Sunset Area
Community Revitalization efforts and the Sunset Terrace Redevelopment.
To prepare for the CNI application, RHA has requested a waiver of the development and
mitigation fees for the following four new multi-fami�y rental housing projects included in the
Sunset Area Transformation Plan:
Don Persson,Councii President
Page 2 of 4
December 29,2014
Sunset Terrace Apartments:
• Total Units-41
• Units Affordable to Households below 60%of inedian income—29 units
• Percentage of units that are affordable—70%
• Site zoning—Center Village
Suncrest Homes/Sunset Court
• Total Units—66
• Units Affordable to Households below 60%of inedian income—41 units
• Percentage of units that are affordable—62%
• Site zoning—Center Village
Harrington Park
• Total Units—10
• Units Affordable to Households betow 60%of inedian income—10 units
• Percentage of units that are affordable—100%
• Site zoning—R-14
Edmonds Apartments
• Total Units—112
• Units Affordable to Households below 60%of inedian income—77 units
I • Percentage of units that are affordable—68%
• i nin — n er Vill e
5 te zo g Ce t ag
The four projects have a total of 229 new multi-family rental housing units, including 157 units
affordable to households at or below 60%of inedian income and 72 mixed-income units
affordable to households at or below 120�0 of inedian income. See the attached map for the
housing project locations.
RHA plans to develop all four housing projects over the next five years IF Renton can secure a
HUD CNI grant. The agency is requesting the fee waivers be approved now so that they can be
considered committed funding for leverage to be included in the CNI grant application for the
Sunset Area Transformation Plan that is being submitted to HUD in early-February, 2015. This
committed funding will significantly improve the City and RHA's chances of being successful in
the CNI grant competition.
RHA's four Sunset Area Transformation Plan projects are included in the Sunset Terrace Master
Site Plan that the Council will be acting on in January 2015. The projects all meet the
requirements of the RMC 4-1-210C,Waived Fees—Rental Housing Incentive,for a waiver of
100%of the applicable fees, including:
i. Minimum number of units (either 30 units in the CV zone or 8 units in the R-14 zone);
ii. Minimum percentage of affordable units (at least 509�0); and
Don Persson,Council President ,
Page 3 of 4
December 29,2014
iii. Minimum number of units per building(4 or more),
RHA has committed to provide 100 replacement units for the Sunset Terrace public housing
project, plus 150 additional affordable and mixed-income units. Although they have completed
two small Sunset Terrace replacement housing projects in the Sunset Area, none of RHA's other
housing pipeline projects are funded at this time. CNI grant funds would allow RHA to complete
all four of the Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects in five years rather than 15 to 20
years based on other available funding. This is particularly important since support of the Sunset
Terrace Redevelopment was the City's highest priority strategy in the Sunset Area Community
Investment Strategy adopted in 2009.
The "Waived Fees- Rental Housing Incentive," RMC 4-1-201C,was adopted on August 1, 2011, in
order to encourage new rental housing in the CV, RM-F,and R-14 zones within the Center Village
Comprehensive Plan designation. The fee waiver is intended to provide an incentive for
redevelopment in the Sunset Area and encourage new multi-family rental housing.
As provided for in RMC 4-1-210C, RHA has requested that the following fees be waived for the
four Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects: building permits fees; building permit
plan review fees;water, surface water, and wastewater system development charges; Public
Works plan review and inspection fees;and fire, transportation, and parks impact mitigation
fees.
The value of the requested fee waiver is approximately$1,913,194 for the four projects as
reflected in the attached worksheet—based on the City's 2016 projected fee schedule. However,
the actual fee waiver may vary if the City's fees and/or the particulars of the projects change in
the future. This City funding will leverage more than$73 million in capital funding for these four
projects,for a ratio of more than$38 leveraged for every City fee dollar waived. The fee waivers
represent an average savings of$8,355 per unit to help facilitate affordable housing
development in the Sunset Area.
The City's fee waivers are contingent upon the receipt of a HUD CNI implementation grant for
the Sunset Area Transformation Plan and will expire on December 31, 2020, unless otherwise
extended by the Council. However,the total estimated fee waiver amount of$1,913,194 will be
included in the City's leverage CNI commitment letter to HUD with the waived fees contingent
upon receipt of the CNI grant.
Per RMC 4-1-21005, a fee waiver request for an eligible project must be made prior to or by the
administrative site plan review period unless otherwise approved by the Council. The four
Sunset Area Transformation Plan projects are included in the Sunset Terrace Master Site Plan.
Although RHA plans to submit more detailed site information for each housing project in the
future, staff recommends that the Council approve RHA's request at this time.
Per RMC 4-1-21006, RHA is required to execute and record a restrictive covenant regarding the
affordable housing unit set aside after the Council approves the fee waiver and before the
Don Persson,Council President I�
Page 4 of 4
December 29,2014
project is issued a buitding permit, unless otherwise approved by the Council. RHA plans to
record restrictive covenants on the sites to guarantee affordability for 40 years before each
project is issued a building permit.
CONCLUSION:
RHA's four Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects meet the criteria for waiver of
certain development and mitigation fees as provided for in RMC 4-1-210C, Rental Housing
Incentive. By providing the fee waiver for the 229 units as leverage for and contingent upon ,
receipt of the HUD Choice Neighborhoods Initiative implementation grant application,the City's
commitment will help facilitate and support the collaborative CNI application between the City,
the Renton Housing Authority, and the King County Housing Authority for the Sunset Area
Transformation Plan. The fee waiver will assist RHA in securing CNI grant funds to construct all
four of the Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects in five years rather than 15 to 20
years based on other available funding. The requested fee waiver for RHA's four housing
projects in the Sunset Area Transformation Plan supports the City's vision as the "Center of
Opportunity in the Puget Sound region where businesses and families thrive"and the Sunset
Area Community Investment Strategy.
Enc. Sunset Area Transformation Plan Housing Strategy by Phase(Housing Project Map)
Sunset Area Transformation Plan Housing Project Waived fees worksheet
cc: Jay Covington,CAO
Jason Seth,City Clerk
Iwen Wang,Administrative Services Administrator
Terry Higashiyama,Community Services Administrator
Gregg Zimmerman,Public Works Administrator
Mark Peterson,Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator
Cliff Long,Economic Development Director
Mark Santos-Johnson,Community Development Project Manager
i
;_ _._.___._.___._.__ __ _ - _-�� . .
NE�orf;s - - = ' � n��i _ _ � - 9 - __= �;�c,�,_
, ._-.:r
.. ..
_ �
- - � , ��� P��� � ,\ ����-�-��.=:. .- ek-� Attachment 21 �
t,1� - - 1 � Z 1-��= - - - -
, i � �f,� ,y a �- _- -- -'� _�, 1
; "' �PRR" � � i�. - -: _ -- _ _- -=�� �._.a
-� , .
N . -� . _ 0 2 (, ._`:- ------ ---_.��_.._..��: �sarK
p� � '� I_°_ �
O Z�- -� 1,0 "'rIE187ftST ; 1 � ....,:� ':
F t 1
� ��-- ;No.IF-7�idanaa '�.
w' - ���"'� :-Paslydad-_"�� pSN ST I _ - - ,_ --
Q. � ' 9�9 / ,�,�� --- �Nelphk6thootl�'ar���.� \ I _l�lE177H�<' .
2 , _ ' i� .����J...�:;;,�_, . . - � - � -
�i �� � � �� � ,
. •,��� ,
,¢ '" .'-'_.' -, i -. _
m �/ ,♦ / , _ �� ._. �\� ��iTHsr '
- - - ,f. ( ��•� " t�ti� rN,q�r 9.Q9 E. r��
� 6
Fc I�( \ _ _
- -- - - - - - - � � ci / ti '�"- _ � � . �� - � .'� ''`� ' \� _
_�. � ,. �� �_ - .
�i � � 111 : _- � - - -
� � - � i - __ �
- -
/ �� q ( � ! �,6p - �\ _
/ a �� , � ���, � � � 'r�n�
n, J � � � � 5J� , � �� �
� ' �/ w � - a
W �!NE i37tt PL_- '� �� \\ c
� w I '`� --�
� � � - , 2
b � �' � .o p I ir=t3�� , ui �O 4 \\. , m
� ¢ _ --- � NE�27H ST �:_: _.. � �� I I N �, `
/ ..��-. . - ' -_ _ � \
/ c�
y -- / -- ;o
m - _ t ._.. . -- `�
�a=
4 � � p I❑ � -a� , � ,j �- -_'_`__'" - _...' �_`� ,".��
o� !, 0 j aE �a�� 909,�"� I 2 ``
� " � � /` j w
m j__- �EPARK EN7._ I %��� Q �? p w 1 , '
�, � ,,, ���A�I ��%��i o iYi, � � ' -'I.� �NEIi1HP1 � � ,
� �
-�' �_
.
,, ., ,
� _.� '"' .'.- _. - � - ,�l� to S ❑ , a (• -- 0._ - ---
a . � __ur� y , u :O m . NE717h1ST -1
_ � �� �'� Z� ep ta j%// ,-�o 1' 2 � T
m �.\p � rE y�JJ ii Ll � m, I
c � �O ��_ j%�;'� t � � F �"-� - - IvffDiHPL �m
_ �f � �_
U � � � � '•,.` �n_ ?AO ^
a � y' �, r �9SL� O � (_ .ICrtyumas
. ' •
� ;� O - I `� `�7y�F . / ....-., � � I--.ISunsetAreaBoundary y``
� 1 --I ;,,, � ❑ 1 L_�Sunset 0.5 Miles radii
� ❑ -�y _.
o ► ❑ 1 . - _ � '-� -G��-' '�' Health_Care_0.5 miles fram Sunset Projecis Phase II-IV
o , \ _ ....,,_-=-NEffjiHtltK -� - -. , .� -
o � -NE9THPL_ l 1 F� z � 0 Services 0.5 mile Ban Proposed Projecfs
� ' \\ ��F��L� � �„ �1) . � �_ � O Other Business 0.5 miles from Proposed Projects Phase II-IV
Z ' � 0 ( A � � Bus Stop `_
� Y�E9rHSt 1 m a - �
o \ - _. ��� �----[-' I�
.c \ I !" ,�,Pa�c and Ride StaGon
V -- - - !�"�� � � ..
a \` - 2 � iwem���px�:a. '' 909 �:�r- _
� � > ':arjd NeiQltbbrh6o�':�:' ' Gtt� �❑ Roposed Projed by Phae
m q -tenter' . . �. LJ � phas&Project Name
�' ` �_ Q w � 1 . - '-'.' �' '" " I ra. E -
¢ � $� _ _ - - z � �I,VaMage Poim
°' - �\ ' c Q�--� ;� '- - I N�3TH� -t`'� � M
� - . . - � /� II,Edrtands aRmeMs
� _ � \ o n 1 = ��_ •-- � ' Q /�' II,Suncrest Homes
y ��r#F'E-,q�y \�� '�-6Ld_- � Q II,Sunset Court
�' ' - -- - e .- ' _'=:_`-. _ � ;
� ' '. •. I � �III,Hartington Park /
C' - \� '9` '_-� _ � � �IV,Golden PineApa4nents �
n \ �� �`-'.;,
�?� . � �, �-�..� r J - . �~ �N,SunsetTerraceApartrnents
��.
� ' �-- ,•.�. � _-�-�{jj -'-' � , � NlOtherBu�Roubs
� ` ' �`y
(9 � - - � ri,f�`���� . --_. -��� _ .. -
c' 1 . y . � . ������� ' _ �,-,- < ��� Conneet W Renton Tnnsit Cenbr �
c !16' �-� 908 ---_ —
�
m .:�� �9� � ��,m_��-
Q92'5 - �E-6IL-!G T � �`�_'- . � ' -- - Conn�etto SoumMr tommubr RaA Tukwila Shtlon ,.
W -
� 95I2EE - - ''
�� �f�bN$D . - - �� - m . . � �-� -� � � Conn�d to UNK Liqht Rail S1aBon .
Q2� -- -- ' .�. - , ' .� �F
� _�`
{ ' - - ----- " - ConneetWSounMrCommubrRailWntSfatlon
� � z IyF 57H Pi_ -
� , m ____
� u . 909
O � - . - i - ��-� � . _ 's'ILLTUc uACRD O
��`� '-``"`'�' SUNSET AREA TRANSFORMATION PLAN
—/��:�'�i;Erj� ��;; HOUSING STRATEGY BY PHASE
.
�
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL `
-7•J •
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Cedar River Gabion Repair- Retention Pay REGULAR COUNCIL- 051an 2015
Application
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Notice of Completion Community Services
Staff Contact:
Todd Black, x-6571
Recommended Action:
Council Concur
Fisca) Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ 10,398.50 Transfer Amendment: $ N/A
Amount Budgeted: $ 227,727.15 Revenue Generated: $ N/A
Total Project Budget: $ 227,727.15 City Share Total Project: $ 10,398.50
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Community Services Department submits CAG-14-100, Cedar River Gabion Repair, for release of
retainage. the work commenced on luly 31, 2014 and was accepted on September 15, 2014.The
contractor,Jansen Inc., completed the terms of their contract by installing new gabions along the Cedar
River.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the project, and release the retained amount of$10,398.50. All required lien releases have
been obtained. '
�
��
�,slers
,�a.Y--� o,�,
o� . f�
�:'�:__ �:
s
s� ��
o"
��iaee�'
NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT
Contractor's UBI Number: 600 039 614
Date: �0/30/2014
Name&Address of Public Agency Department Use Only
City of Renton Assigned to:
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton,WA 98057 Date Assigned:
UBI Number:
Notice is hereby given relative to the completion of contract or project described below
Project Name I Contract Number I Job Order Contracting
Cedar River Gabion Repair CAG-14-100 ❑ Yes � No
Description of Work Done/Include Jobsite Address(es)
Replace flood damaged rock-filled gabions along the Cedar River/Cedar River Trail. FEMA Disaster No.
1818-DR-WA.
, Federally funded road transportation project? ❑ yes � No
Contractor s Name Telephone Number A�davit ID
Jansen Inc. I 360-384-4720 I538581 *
Contractor Address
2110 Buchanan Loop Ste. 1, Ferndale,WA98248
If Retainage is Bonded,List Surety's Name(or attach a copy)
Propel Insurance
Surety AgenNs Address
1201 Pacific Ave., No. 1000,Tacoma,WA 98402
Date Contract Awarded Date Work Commenced Date Work Completed Date Work Accepted
7/15/2014 I 7/31/2014 I 9/5/2014 I 9/15/2014
Contract Amount $ 175,730.00
Additions (+) $ 32,240.00 Liquidated Damages $ 0.00
Reductions (-) $ Amount Disbursed$ 217,328.65
Sub-Total $ 207,970.00 Amount Retained$ 10,398.50
Amount of Sales Tax Paid at 9•5%
(If various rates apply,please send a breakdown) $ 19,757.15
TOTAL $ 227,727.15 TOTAL $ 227,727.15
NOTE:These two totals must be equal
Please List all Subcontractors and Sub-tiers Below:
�Subcontractor's Narne: �UBI Number: (Required) �Affidavit ID*
I Ronald T. Jepson&Associates I 602 679 688 I 537939
� � �
� � (
� � �
� � �
� � �
� � �
( � �
F215-038-000 07-2012
REV 31 0020e(07/06/12) Continued on page 2
.'-
Please List all Subcontractors and Sub-tiers Below:
�Subcontractor's Name: �UBI Number: (Required) �Affidavit ID*
I � I
I � I
I � I
I �
I �
� I
� �
I � 'I
I � �
I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I
I �
I I
I I I
I I I
1 I �
I I
I I
I i I
I I I
I I
Comments:
Contact Name: 7odd Black Title: Cap.�mp.Coordinator
Email Address:tblack@rentonwa.gov Phone Number: a25-a3o-ss�t
Note:The Disbursing Officer must submit this completed notice immediately after acceptance of the work done under this contract.
NO PAYMENT SHALL BE MADE FROM RETAINED F[JNDS until receipt of all release certificates.
Affidavit ID*-Provide known ones at thts time.No LNI release will be granted until all a�davits are completed.
Submitting Form:Please submit the completed form to all three agencies below.For a faster response,please submit by e-mail.
�Washington State �yy���on SWte t Washington State
Department of Revenue Department of Labor and Industries �Employment Security DepaRment
Pubflc Works Section Contract Reiease RagistraUon,Inquiry,Standards&
PO Box 47474 PO Box 44274 Coordination Unit
Olympia WA 98504-7474 Olympia,WA 98504-4272 PO Box 9046
(360)725-7588 (360)902-5772 Olympia WA 98507-9046
FAX(360)664-4159 FAX(360)902-6897 (3gp)gpZ_g45p
PWCQdor.wa.gov ContractRelease@Ini.wa.gov Fax(360)902-9287
publicworks�esd.wa.gov
For taac assistance or to request this document in an alternate forn►at,visit http://dor.wa.gov or call 1-800-647-7706.
Teletype(TTY)users may call(360)705-6718.
F215-038-000 07-2012
REV 31 0020e(07/06/12)
�
r
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL —7, �j
! 1��
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Request to Fill Public Works Department Lead REGULAR COUNCIL-OS Jan 2015
Water Utility Pump Station Mechanic Position
(Grade A18) at Step E of the 2015 Salary Schedule
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Issue Paper Public Works
Staff Contact:
Gregg Zimmerman, Ext. 7311
Recommended Action:
Council Concur
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ $118,787 Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ $118,787 Revenue Generated: $
Total Project Budget: $ City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Authorization is requested to fill the Public Works Maintenance Services Division Lead Water Utility
Pump Station Mechanic position (Grade A18) at Step E of the 2015 Salary Schedule. City Policy 300-41
requires that Council approve the filling of positions at salary ranges above Step C. As a requirement of
this position the selected candidate must possess a current Washington State Journeyman Electrician's
Card, in addition to advanced levels of knowledge, experience and skill in the electrical field. Based on
the quantity and quality of applications received when the position was initially posted in November, it
is evident the Public Works Department needs to be prepared to offer the maximum compensation
package available to a well-qualified applicant.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Public Works Department Maintenance Services Division to hire its Lead Water Utility
, Pum Station Mechanic osition (Grade A18) at Step E of the salary schedule.
P P
.;
�
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT p �,,,,�0� �
��
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 19, 2014
TO: Ed Prince, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Denis Law, Mayor
FROM: Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator
STAFF CONTACT: Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator, Ext. 7311
SUBJECT: Request to Fill Public Works Department Maintenance
Services Division Lead Water Utility Pump Station Mechanic
Position (Grade A18)at Step E of the 2015 Salary Schedule
ISSUE:
Should authorization be granted to the Public Works Department Maintenance Services
Division to fill its Lead Water Utility Pump Station Mechanic position (Grade A18) at
Step E of the 2015 Salary Schedule?
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Public Works Department Maintenance Services Division to fill its Lead
Water Utility Pump Station Mechanic position (Grade A18) at Step E of the 2015 Salary
Schedule.
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
The Public Works Department Maintenance Services Division has accepted a letter of
intent to retire effective lanuary 15 from the current Lead Water Utility Pump Station
Mechanic. The incumbent is a 13-year city employee with institutional knowledge of
the city's well houses and lift stations and is responsible for the installation,
maintenance, operation and repair of the electrical equipment and water quality
systems, including the chemical feed pump systems within the water treatment plants
and distribution systems. This position requires specific skills and licenses, including
possession of a Washington State Journeyman Electrician's Card.
City Policy 300-41 requires that Council approve the filling of positions at salary ranges
above Step C. Based on the quantity and quality of applications received when the
position was initially posted in November, it is evident the Public Works Department
�
�
Ed Prince,Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
Page 2 of 2
December 19,2014
needs to be prepared to offer the maximum compensation package available to a
well-qualified applicant. Only two of the applicants possessed a Washington State
Journeyman Electrician's Card. One of the applicants opted out of the selection process
and did not interview and the second declined the position even at Step E compensation i
level. The position has now been advertised once again by Human Resources and will
remain open until filled. In the interim the Maintenance Services Division is prepared to
contract with an electrician as needed, however the city will not have the control or
guarantee that the electrician will be available should an emergency occur at one of our
well houses or lift stations,which could result in temporary shutdown of the affected
facility and impact our residents and businesses.
Since the retiring Lead Water Utility Pump Station Mechanic is currently receiving a
salary at Grade A18,Step E ($6002/month based on the 2015 Salary Schedule), hiring
the new staff member at Grade A18, Step E(also$6002/month)will have no additiona►
fiscal impact on the Public Works Maintenance 2015-2016 biennium budget. While this
expenditure is within the budget, hiring a desirable candidate at Step E versus Step C
will increase the cost in 2015 by$7,140.
CONCLUSION:
The Public Works Department recommends authorization to fill the lead Water Utility
Pump Station Mechanic position (Grade A18) at Step E of the salary schedule to ensure
the city is able to hire the best qualified candidate who possesses the required licenses
and certifications for the position. Based on the quantity and quality of applications
received when the position was initially posted in November, it is evident the Public
Works Department needs to be prepared to offer the maximum compensation package
available to secure a well-qualified applicant.
cc: Nancy Carlson,Human Resources/Risk Management Administrator
Iwen Wang,Administrative Services Administrator
Mike Stenhouse, Maintenance Services Division Director
George Stahl,Water Maintenance Manager
Cathryn Laird,Human Resources Manager
Craig Pray,Water Utility Maintenance Supervisor
Hai Nguyen,Finance Analyst
Brian Sandler,Human Resources Analyst
Carolyn Kraft,Human Resources Assistant
l' �
� I
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
7• �G•
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Duvall Avenue Northeast (Northeast 4th Street REGULAR COUNCIL- 05 Jan 2015 .
to Northeast 10th Street) Preservation Project
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Local Agency Agreement Public Works
Local Agency Federal Aid Project Prospectus
Map Staff Contact:
Juliana Fries, Program Development Coordinator, x i
7232 �
Recommended Action:
Council Concur
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ $241,000.00 Revenue Generated: $ $1,237,000.00
Total Project Budget: $ $2,097,000.00 City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Duvall Avenue Northeast(Northeast 4th Street to Northeast 10th Street) Preservation Project was
selected under the countywide selection process for a federal Surface Transportation Program (STP)
grant of$1,237,000.
This grant will provide for the resurfacing of Duvall Avenue Northeast, with plans and bid documents
prepared in 2015 and construction in 2016. The overall condition of the pavement will be improved on
this north-south arterial. This grant requires a 13.5% match. Local funding for the match is from the
Arterial Rehabilitation Program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the Local Agency Agreement with the Washington
State Department of Transportation for the obligation of grant funding and all subsequent agreements
necessary to accomplish this project.
.>
�
� Q� .;;� �, �, t� ,,, , ,,,b„ Local Agency Agreement
Agency City of Renton CFDA No. 20.205
(Cataiu9 of Fedetai Domestic Assi.gtance)
Address 1055 S Grady Way p��No. ____.___.�______`__ _
Renton,WA 98057
Agreement No.
For OSC WSDOT Use Ony
The Locat Aget�cy(mving complied,or hereby agreeing lo oomply,with the terms and conditions set forth in(1)Trtk 23,U.S.Code Highways,(2)
the regulations issued pursuant the�eto,(3)2 CFR 225,(4)Otiice of Management and Budget C'vculars A-102,and A-133,(5)the policies and
procedures promulgatcd by the Wast�ington State Repartment of Transportation,and(6)t6e federai aid project ag�eement eatered into bet�veen the
State and Federal Govemment,relaiive W the above project,the Washington State Departrnent of Transporlation will autfwrae the Local Agency to
proceed on the project by a separate no6fication.Federai funds which are to be obligated for the project may not exceed the amount shown herein on
lice r, column 3, wit6out written authority by the Stete, subject to the approval of the Federal Highway Adminishation. All project costs not
reimbursed by the Fede�al Government shall be the responsbility of the Local Agency.
Project Description
Name Duvall Ave NE Le� 0.7 mi
Termini NE 4th St to NE 10th St
Descrlption of Work
This project will resurface Duvall Ave NE
Proposed Advefisement Date: N/A
L_____ _ Estimate of Funding
Type Of WOrk Estimated Total I Estimated Agency I Esti(mated
Project Funds Funds Federal Funds
PE ���y 20,000; 2.700) 17,300
——-- -- _ --- —---- ----
86.5% % b.Other Consultant '139,162� 18,787� 120,375
c.Other Non-participation 76,838� 76,838�
Fede�al Aid �
Participation d•S�te 5,OOOI 675 4,325
--_ _ _ -- —------- - --- -_ _ _ _ -- — ---
Ratlo tor PE e.Total PE Cost Estimate(a+b+c+d} ( 241,000 i 99,000 142,000
Right of WaY f.A�enc�r - ---- � I-----------
% ---------
-g.Other _ � � - -----
h.Other i----- �
Federal Aid i.State ---- --------- ` � -
Participation -- --- ----
Ratio for RW j.Total R1W Cost EsGmate(f+g+h+i) � ' �
Construction �.Contrad � � __.._,_ i
I.Other �
--------- -- _ _--_ --- —
m.Other
---------- --- - ----- -
n.Other ---- --------
o�
- ----- —- —_
o.A en
Federal Aid _,�-�Y - ------- - � I _- - - -- - - ---
Participation P.State - ---- ' I --- __ -------
Ratio for CN q.Total CN Cost Estimate(k+l+m+n+o+p) f �
r.Total Project Coat Estlmate(e+j+q) � 241,000� 99,000� 142,000
Agency Official Washington State Department of Transportatlon
By By
Titie Mayor,City of Renton Director of Local Programs
Date Executed
DOT Fortn 140-039 EF 1
RevuM 03/2014
Constructlon Method of Financing �c,�ecx n�a�od se�
State Ad and Award
❑Method A-Advance Payment-Agenq Share of tot�cons6uc6on cost(based on contract awa�
❑Method B-Wrthhold Gom ttas taz U�e Aqenclr's share oi btal oonstrucdon oost pine 4,aolumn 2)in the�nount of
$ at S per month for months.
Locai Force or Local Ad and Award
n Mefhod C-Aaenc.w oost incurred witl��reimbursement
The Local Agency further stipulates that pursuant to said Title 23,regula6ons and policies and prooedures,and as
a condi�on to payment of the federal funds obligated,it accepts and will comply with the applicable provisions set
(orth below.Adopted by otfiaal action on
, ,Resolution/Ordinance No.
Provisions
I. Scope of Work
' The Agency shall Provide all the work,laboy materials,and services necessary to perform the project which is described and set forth in detail in
the"Project Descriptwn"and"Type of Work."
When tMe State acts for and on behalf of the Agency,ihe State shall be deemed an agent of the Agency and shall perform tMe services described
and indicated in"Type of Work"on tl�e face of this agreement,in accordance�vith plans and specifications as proposed by the Agency and approved
by the State and tMe Federel Highway Administration.
When the State acts for the Agency but is not subject to the right of control by the Agency,the State shall have the right w perform the work
subject to the ordinary procedures of lhe State and Federal Highway Adm inistration.
II. Delegation of Autho�ity
The State is willing to fulfill the responsibilities to the Federal Government by the administradon of this project.The Agency agrees that lhe State
shall have the full authoriry to carry out this admiaistradon. The State shall review, process, and approve documents required for federal aid
reimbursement in accordance with federal requirements.If the Stale advertises and awards the contract,the State will further act for the Agency in all
matters conceming the project as requested by the Agency.If the Lceal Agency advertises and awards the project,the Stete shall review the work to
ensure conformity with lhe approved plans and specifications.
Itl. Project Administration
Certain types of work and services shall be ptovided by the State on this project as requested by the Agency and described in the Type of Work
above.In addrtion,the State will furnish qualified personnel for the supervision end inspection ofthe work in Qrogress.On Local Agency advertised
and awarded ' cts,the su rvision and inspection shall be limited ro ensuring aU work is in conformance w�th approved plans,specifications,and
federal aid requ rements.'It�salary of such ertgineer or other supervisor end all other salaries and costs incurred by State forces upon the project
will be considered a wst thereof.All costs related to this project incurred by employees of the State in the customary manner on highway payrolls
end vouchers shall be charged as costs of the project.
IV. Availability of Records
All project records in support of all costs incurced and actual expenditures kept by the Agency are to be maintained in accordance with local
govemment accounting procedures prescribed by the Washington State Auditor's Offia, the U.S. Department of Transpottation, and the
Washington State Departrnent of Transportation.The records shall be open to inspection by the State and Federal Govemment at all reasonable times
and shall be retained and made available for wch inspection for a period of not less than three years from the final payment of any federal aid funds
to the Agency.Copies of seid records shall be furnished to the State and/or Federal Govemment upon request.
V. Compliance with Provisions
' The Agenc�shall not incur any Federal aid participation costs on any classification of work on this project until authorized in writing by the State
for each class�ficatioo.The classifications of work for projects are: "
I.Preliminary engineering.
2.Right of way acquisition.
' 3.Project construction.
Once written authorization is given,the Agency agrees to show continuous progress through monthly billings.Failure to sho�v continuous progress
may resull the Agency's project becorning inactive,as described in 23 CFR 630,and subject to de-obligation of federal sid funds and/or agreement
closurc.
[f right of way acquisitioq or actual conswction of the road for which preliminary engineering is underteken is not started by the close of the
tenth fiscal year following the fiscal year in which preliminary engineering phase was authorized,the Agency will repay to the State the sum or sums
of federal funds paid to the Agency under the tertns oPthis agreement(see Section IX).
If ectual consdvction of the road for which right of way hes been purchased is not started by the close of the tenth fiscal year follo�ving the fiscal
A nc under
year in which tlie ri6ht�f�vay�hase was auth�rize�,the Agency will rc'ay 1�tfie State the sum�r sums�f fe�eral funJs paii t�the ge y
the terms of this agreement(see Section IX).
, DOT Fortn 140•039 EF Z
Revhed 05/2074
�
The Agrncy agrees that all stages of construc6on necessazy to provide the initially planned complete facilily�vithin the limits of this project wili
oonfortn to at least tbe minimum values set by approved statewide design standards applicable to ihis class of highways,even though such additional
n�orlc is financed wiUwut federal sid participation.
71�e Ageocy agraes that an federa! aid highway conswction projects,the curtent Cederal aid regulations which apply to liquidated damages
ielative to the batiis oCfedcral participation in the project cost shall be applicable in the event the contractor faits to complete the contract within the
contract time.
VI. Payment and Partial Reimbursement
Tl�e total cost of the prt►ject,including all review and engineering costs end other expenses of 1he State,is to be paid by the Agency and by the
Fedetal Government F�ral fundi� shali be in accordance with the Federal Transportation Acl as amended, 2 CFR 225 and OtTioe of
Management and Budget circulars A-102 and A-133.The State shall not be uhimately responsible for any of the costs of the project.The Agency
shall be ultimately responsible for all costs sssociated with the project which are oot reimbursed by the Federa] Govemment.Nothing in this
agnement shall be construed as a promise by the State as to the smount or natwe of federal participation in this project
The Agenc� shall bill the state for federal aid project costs incurted in conformity with appticable federal and state laws. The agency shall
minimiu the dme elapsed betwcen receipt of federal sid funds and subsequent payment oF incurred costs. Expenditures by the Local Agency for
maintenana,general administratioq supervision,ar►d other overhead shall not be eligible for federal participation unless a current indirect cost plan
has been prepared in accordance with the regulations outlined in 2 CFR 225-Cost Pri�iples for Slate,Local,and Indian Tribal Govemment, and
retained for audit
The State will pay for State incurrcd costs on the project.Following payment,the State shall bill the Federal Govemment for reimbursement of
those costs eligible for federal participetion to the extent that such costs are attributable and properly allocable to this project.The State shall bill the
Agency for that portion of State oosts which w•ere not reimbursed by lhe Federa)Government(see Section I?�.
1. Project Construction Costs
Project conswetion financing will be accomplished by one of the thrce methods as indicated in tliis agreemenL
1lfethod A—The Agency will place with the State,within(20)days aRer the execution of the construction contract,an advance in the emount of
the Agency's shaie of the tota)construction cost based on the contract award."fhe State will notify the Agency of the exect amount lo be deposited
with the Stete.The State will pay all costs incurred under the contract upon presentation of progress billings from the conUactor.Following such
payments, tMe State will submit a billing to the Federal Govemment for the federal aid participation share of the cost, When the project is
substantially completed and final actual wsts of the project can be detertnined,the State will present the Agency with a final billing showing the
amount due the State or the smount due the Agency.This billing will be cleared by either a payment from the Agency to the State or by a refund
from the State to the Agency.
Method B— The Agency's share of the total conswction cost as shown on the face of this agreement shall be withheld from iu monthly fuel tax
allotrnents.The face of this agreement establishes the months in which the withholding shall take place and the exact amount to be withheld each
monih.The extent of withholding witl be confirmed by letter from the 3tate at the time of contract award.Upon receipt of progress billings from the
contractor,the State will submit such billings to the Federal Govemment for payment of its participating portion of such billings.
Method C—The Agency may submit vouchers to the State in the format prescribed by the State,in duplicate,not more than once per month for
those costs eligible for Federal participation to the extent that such costs acc directly attributable and properly allocable to this project.Expenditures
by 1he Local Agency for maintenance,general administretion,supervision,and othcr overhead shall not be eligible for Federal participation unless
claimed under a previously approved indirect cost plan.
The State shall reimbursc the Agency for the Federal share of eligible project costs up to ihe amount shown on the face of this agreement.At the
time of sudit,the Agency will provide documentation of all costs incurced on the project.
The State shall bill the Agency fo�all costs incucred by the State relative to the project.The Stale shall elso bill the Agency for the federal funds
paid by the State to the Agency for project costs which are subsequently detertnined to be ineligible for federal participation(sce SeMion 1X).
VII. Audit of Federal Consultant Contracts
The Agency, if services of a consultant are required,shall be responsible for audit of the consultant's records to detertnine eligible federal aid
costs on the project The report of said audit shall be in the Agency's files and made available to the Stete and the Federal Government.
An audit shall be conducted by the WSDOT Intemal Audit Office in eccordance with generally accepted govemmental auditing standerds as
issued by the United States Genecal Accounting Office by the Comptroller General of the United States; WSDOT Manual M 27-50,Consultant
Authorization,Selection,and Agreement Administration;memoranda of understanding between WSDOT and FHWA;and Office of Management
and Budget Circular A-133.
If upon sudit it is found that overpayment or participation of federal money in ineligible items of cost has occurred,the Agency shall reimburse
the State for the amount of such overpayment or excess participation(see Section IX).
VIII. Single Audit Act
The Agency,as a subrecipient of federal funds,shall adhere to the federal Office of Management and Budget(OMB)Circular A-133 as�vetl as all
applicable federal and state statutes and regulations. A subrecipient who expends 5500,000 or more in federal awards from all sources during a
given fiscal year shall have a single or program-specific audit performed for that year in accordance�vith the provisions of OMB Circular A-133.
Upon conclusion of the A-133 audit,the Agency shall be responsible for ensuring that a copy of the report is transmitted promptly W the State.
IX. Payment of Billing
The Agency agcees that if payment or arrengement for payment of any of the State's billing relative to the pro'ect(e.g.,State force work,project
cancellation,overpayment,cost ineligible for federal participation,etc.)is not made W the State within 45 days a�er the Agency has been billed,the
State shall etFect reimbursement of the total sum due from the regular monthly fuel tae allotments to the Agency from the Motor Vehicle Fund. No
additional Federal projecl funding will be approved until full payment is received unless othenvise directed by the DirecWr of Local Programs.
�T Revhed 05/Z014F 3
X. Traffic Control�Signing,Marking,and Roadway Maintenance
The Agrncy�w'll not permit any changes to be made in the provisions for parking regulations and trafiic control on ihis project widwut prior
approval of the State and Federel Highway Administration. The Agency wiil not install or pem�it W be instalkd any signs,signals,or markings not
in conformence with the standards approved by the Federal Highway Administration and MUTCD. The Agency will,et its o�m expense,maintain
the improvement covered by this agreemeot
XI. Indemnity
The Agency shall hold the Pederal Govemment and tlie State harmless finm and shall p�ocess and defend at its own expense all claims,demands,
or suits,whether at law or equity brought against the Agency,State,or Fedcral Govemment,arising from the Agency's executioq peri'ortnance,or
failu�e to perform eny of the provisions of t6is agreement,or of any other agreement or rnntract wnnect�d with this agreement,or arising by reason
of the paRicipation of the State or Federal Government in the project,PROVIDED,nothiog herein shall requiro the Agency to reimburse the State or
the Federal Govemment for damages arising out of bodily iry'ury to persons or damage to property caused by or resulting from tt�e sole negligeoce of
the Federal Govemment or the Stste.
XII. Nondiscriminadon Provision
No liability shall attach to the State or Federal Govemment except as expressly provided herein.
71u Agency shall not discriminate on the basis of race,color,national origin.or sex in the award and performance of any USDOT-assisted
contract and/or agreement or in the adminisvation of its DBE program or the requirements of 49 CFR Pert 26. The Agency shall take all necessary
and reatonable steps under 49 CFR Part 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award end administraGon of USDOT-assisted contracLs end
agreements. The WSDOT's DBE program, as required by 49 CFR Pert 26 and es apQroved by USDOT, is incorporated by reference in this
agreement [mpkmentation of this program is a legal obligatioa and failure to carry out its tern►s shall be treated as a violation of this agreement.
Upon notification to the Agency of i1s failure to cxrry out its approved program,the Department may impose sanciions as provided for under Part 26
and may,in appropriate cases,refe�the matter For enforcement under 18 U.S.C.1001 and/or the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986(31 U.S.
C.3801 et seq.).
The Agency hereby agmes that it will incorpotate or cause to be incorporated inro any contract for consWction work,or modification thereof,as
defiaed in the rules and regulations of the Secretery of Labor in 41 CFR Chapter 60,which is peid for in whole or in part with funds obtained from
the Federal Govemment or borrowed on the credit of the Federal Government pursuant to a grant, contract, loan, insurance, or guarantee or
understending pursuant to any federal progrem involving such grant,contracf, loan,insurance.or guarantee,the required contract provisions for
Federal-Aid ConUacts(FHWA 1273),located in Chapter 44 of the Local Agency Guidelines.
The Agency further agrees lhat it will be bound by the ebove equal opportunity clause with respect to its own employment practices when it
participates in federally assisted construcdon work: Provided,that if the applicant so participetirig is a State or Local Govemment,the above equal
opportunity clause is not applicable to any agency,inswmentality,or subdivision of such govemment which dces not participate in work on or
under the contract.
The Agency also agrees:
(1) To assist and cooperate actively with the State in obtaining the compliance of contractors and subcontractors with the equal opportunity
clause end rules,regulations,and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor.
2 To furnish the State such information as it ma re uire for the su rvision of such com liance and that it�tiill othenvise assist the State in
( ) Y 9 Pe P
the discharge of its primary responsibility for securing compliance.
(3)To refrain from entering into any contract or contract modification subjeet to Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, with a
contractor debarred from, or who has not demonstrated eligibility for, govemment contracts and federally assisted construction contracts
pursuant to the E�:ecutive Order.
(4) To carry out such sanctions end penalties for violation of the equal opportunity clause as may be imposed upon contractors and
subcontractors by the State,Federal Highway Administration,or the Secretary of Labor pursuant to Part fI,subpari D of the Executive Order.
ln additioa the Agency agrees that if it fails or refuses to comply with these underlakings,the State may take any or all of the following
actions:
(a) Cancel,terminate,or suspend this agreement in whole or in part;
(b) Refrain from extending any further essistance to the Agency under the program with respect to which the failure or refusal
occurred until salisfactory assurance of future compliance has been received from ihe Agency;and
. (c) Refer the case to the Department of]ustice for appropriate legal proceedings.
XUI. Liquidated Damages
The Agency hereby agrces that the liquidated damages provisions of 23 CFR Part 635,Subpart 127,as supplemented,relative to the amount of
Federal particiQation in the project cost,shall be applicable in the event the contractor fails to complete the contract within the contract time. Failure
to include liqu�dated damages pro�ision will not relieve the Agency from reduction of federal participation in accordance with this paragraph.
DOT Form 140-039 EF 4
Revissd 03/2014
XN. Termination for Public Convenience
7be Secretary of the Wachington State Departrnent of Transportation mey terminate the contract in whole,or from time to time in part,
whenever:
(1) The requisite federal funding becomes unavailable through failure ofappropriatioa or othenvise.
(2) 7'he contcector is prevented from proceeding with the�vork as a derect result of an Executive Order of the P�zsident with respect to the
prosecutioo of war or ia tlx intaest of national dcfense,or an Executive Order of the President or Govemor of the State with respect to the
preservation of ecrergy resources.
(3) The contractor is prevented from proceeding with tLe worfc by reason of a preliminary,specisl,or permanent res�aining order of a
court of competent jurisdiction where the issuancc of such order is primarily caused by the acts or omissions of persons or agencies other thaa
the conVactor.
(4) The Secretary is notified by the Federal Highway Adminis4ation ihat thc project is inactive.
(5} The Secretary determines that such termination is in the best interests of the State.
XV. Venue for Claims and/or Causes of Action
For Ihe convenience of the parties to this contract,it is agreec!that any claims and/or causes of action which the Local Agency has against the
State of Washington,growing out oFthis contract or the prvject with which it is concemed,shall be broug6t only in the Superior Court for Thurston
County.
XVI. Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying
'Ihe approving authority certifies,to the best of his or her knowledge and belief,thaL,
(1) No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid,by or on be6alf of the undersigned,to any person for influencing or attempting
w inlluence an officer or employee of any federal agency,a member of Congress,an o�cer or employee of Congress,or en employee of a member
of Congress in conneetion with the awarding of any fede�al contract,the making of any federal grant,the making of any federal ban,the entering
into of any coopetative agreement,and lhe extension,continuation, renewal,amendment,or modification of eny federel coniract,grent, loan,or
cooperative agreement.
(2) If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to eny person for influencing or attemptu�g to influeoce an
officer or employee of any federal agency,a member of Congess,an otticer or employee of Congress,or an employce of a member of Congress in
connection with tliis federal contract,grant,loan,or cooperative agreement,the undersigned shall complete and submit the Standard Form-LLL,
"Disclosuro Fortn to Report Lobbying,"in accordance with iu instructions.
(3) 7'he undersigned shall require that the language of this certificaBon be ineluded in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers
(i�cluding subgrants,and contracts end subcontracts under grants,subgrants,loans,and cooperative agreements)which exceed 5100,000,and that all
such subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.
This certiflcation is e material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission
ofthis certification as a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352,Title 31,U.S.Code. My person who fails
to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalry of not less than S 10,000 and not more then 5100,000 for each such failure.
Additional Provisions
DOT Form 140-039 EF �
Reviaed 03Q014
��� �a,� Local Agency Federal Aid
�I/ Department ot TManspor�ion Project Prospectus
oate I 11/24/2014
�Prefix � Roube I( )
Federa�ad I I I DUNS Number I 092278894
Proied Number
Local Agency I � �wsooT 1 Federal Employer I 916001271
Proied Number Use OnryJ Tax ID Number
Agency CA Agenc,y Federal Program Title
City of Renton I �Ye, ❑No � 2o.2os ❑ oa,er
----- - -- — ----- --- ---
ProjectTitle S����� N 47°29'19"
Start Longitude W 122°9'23"
Duvall Ave NE E��� N 47°29'58" �,d Longitude w 122°9'24��
__
Projed Termini From-To Nearest City Name Projed Zp Code(+4)
NE 4th St to NE 10th St Renton I98059
–---- - - -
-- -- - -
-- ---
From To Length of Project Award Type
NE 4th St NE 10th ��m� � Local ❑ Local Forces ❑ State ❑ Railroad
__ _-------- ----__- --
-— — --- ---
Federal Agency City Number County Number County Name WSDOT Region
� FHWA ❑ Others 1070 17 King _ Northwest Region __
Congressional Distrid Legislative Districts Urban Area Number
9 11 I PSRC
I Tctal Local Agency I I Phase Start
Phase Estlmated Cost Funding f Fedenl Funds ��
(Nearest Hundred Uollar) (Nearest Hundred Doda� � (Nearest Hundred Doilar) Maith Year
P.E. $241,000 $99,000 $142,000 02/2015
R/VU
-- - - -- - - ----- - ----------- ' -- -------------
Const $1,856,000 $761,000 $1,095,000� 02/2016
Totat - - ---- ------ -$2,097,000 $860,000i ��_ $1,237,OOOI
Description of Existing Facility(Existing�esign and Frese�t condition)
Roadway Width I Number of Lenes
Varfas-4B-66 �VaHes-4-5
Duvall Ave NE is a minor arterial with 4 to 5lanes of traffic and daily volume of 13,000 vehicles. It is classified as a T-2
truck route.
Description of Proposed Work
Descrip6on of Proposed Work(Attach additionai sheet(s)if necessary)
This project witl resurtace Duvall Ave NE,from NE 4th St to NE 10th St.
Local Agency Contact Person TiUe Phone
Juliana Fries_ __ __ Pro ram Development Coordinator _ 425-430-7232 _ _ __
Mailing Address City �State Zip Code
1055 S Grady Way Renton �yq 98057
-------------- -- - — --- ----- �
By -------
Project Prospectus Approval � ""9 A"�10"�
Tide Transpo�tation Design Supervisor Date / �
���— --
DOT Form 140-101 EF p��af 3 ♦Prevlous Editiona Obsolete♦
' Revised 04/2014
�Agency I Project Title IDate `
City of Renton Duvall Ave NE �
Type of Proposed Work
Project Type(Chedc all that Apply) Roadway Width Number of Lanes
❑New Construc�ia� ❑Path/Trail �3'R 48 to 66 4-5
�Reconstrudion ❑Pedestrian/Faalities ❑2-R
❑Railroad ❑Parking ❑Other
❑Bridge
Geometric Design Data
Description � Through Route Crossroad
❑Prinapal Arteriai ❑Principal Arterial
Federal �Urban �MinorArterial ❑Urban ❑MinorArterial
Functional ❑Rural ❑Collector ❑Rural ❑Collector
❑Major Coiledor ❑Major Collector
Classification ❑NHS �Minor Colledor ❑NHS �Minor Collector
❑Local Access ❑Local Aocess
Terrain � �Flat ❑Roll ❑Mountain + ❑Flat ❑Roll ❑Mountain
Pasted Speed �35 mph �
Design Speed �N/A �
Existing ADT �13,000 �
Design Year ADT �N/A �
Design Year �N!A �
Design Hourly Volume(DH� �N/A �
Performance of Work
Preliminary Engineering Will Be Perfortned By Others Agency
Consultant 99 % 1 %
ConsVuction Will Be Pertormed By Contract Agency
Contract 100°� 0�/,
Environmental Classification
❑ Class I-Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) � Class II-Categorically Eucluded(CE)
❑ Project Involves NEPA/SEPA Section 404 � Projects Requiring DocumentaGon
Interagency Agreement (Documented CE)
❑ Class I II-Environmental Assessment(EA)
❑ Project Involves NEPA/SEPA Section 404 ,
Interagency Agreement
Environmental Considerations
DOT Form 140-101 EF Page 2 of 3
Revised 04l2014
�Agency (Projed Title �Date �
Right of Way
�No Right of Way Required ❑Right of Way Required
'All construc�ion required by Uie ❑No Relocation ❑Reloca6on Requir�ed
contrad pn be accomplished
within the e�asti�g cight of way.
Descripbon of Ud�ity Relocation or Adjustrnents and Existing Major Strudures Involved in the Projed
�FAA Involvement
Is any airport located within 3.2 kilometers(2 miles)of the proposed project?❑ Yes � No �
Remarks
This project has been reviewed by the legislative body of the administration agency or agencies,or iYs designee,and
is not inconsistent with the agency's comprehensive plan for community development.
Agency City of Renton
-- -- ------- -
Date By
�' - - -- - -- --
MayodChairperson
DOT Form 140-101 EF
Revised 04/2014 Page 3 of 3 ♦previous Edltions Obsolete♦
d�1'3N�^d„��Q
�a��s Ssa�\�`
• �,��`�''� �
�� �! �
. �G . ��
�'�l � �. � �'�
. �► �
��j� ?,.�a� \�
rG�
�
�ir�i
�r 1
� y
��� ����d
i\1�� ♦
�
i3
/ �
JuHsdiction: Rerrton
ProJect Number. REN-34 County: King 7'itle: Duvati Ave NE
Phase Progremmed Year Oblig.Date Furxling Source Federal Funds Stete Funda Lxal Funda Phase Total
P/E-Design 2015 3/1H5 STP 3142,000 30 SO 3142,000
_ __
P!E-Design 2015 3/1/15 Local SO 30 599.000 599�000
Construction 2016 2l1/16 STP 51.095,000 $0 SO 51,095,000
Constnx;tion 2018 2H116 LoCal SO $0 5781,000 5781,000
WSDOT PIN: Totals: 57.237,000 SO 5860,000 52,097,000
Federal Aid/FTA Cirant Number(s�:
Functtonal Class: Minor Arterial-Over 5,000 Improvement Type: Resurfacing
Locatlo�: Duvall Ave NE From: NE 4th St To: NE 10th St
Total Cost 52,097,000 Regtonally Stgniflcant:No Envlronmental Status: CE
Year of Expenditure for Total Cost: 2014
MTP Status: Exempt MTP Reference(s): N/A
Description:
This project will resurface Dwall Ave NE,from NE 4th St to NE 10th St.
10/30/14 A• 216 Appendix A:Pro�ect Descriptlons
City of Renton
Duvall Ave NE-NE 4th St to NE 10th St
1. Estimate for Consulting Services 12/01/2014 ,
Average Rate Estimated '
Item Discipline Manhours of Pay Cost
1 �Project Management � 120 $ 70 � $ 8,400
2 Geotechnical Exploration/Design � 120� $ 50 � $ 6,000
3 �Environmental/Permitting � 100� $ 70 $ 7,000
4 �Survey � 120 $ 50 $ 6,000
5 �Plans,Specifications and Estimates 520 $ SO $ 26,000
Totals 980 $ 53,400
Overhead Cost 200% $ 106,800
Fixed Fee � 30% $ 48,060
Reimbursable
A. Reproduction Expenses $ 4,000
B. Plotter Mylar $ 2,500
C. Other $ 1,240
Total $ 7,740
Total Consultant $ 216,000
2. Estimate for Agency Services
Average Rate Estimated
Item Discipline Manhours of Pay Cost
1 Project Management 140f $ 50 $ 7,000
2 Plan Review 60� $ 45 � $ 2,700
� Totals 20Q $ 9,700
Overhead Cost S00% $ 9,700
Reimbursable
Other $ 600
Total $ 600
Total Agency $ 20,000
3. Estimate for State Services $ 5,000
� Grand Total $ 241,000 �
H:\Divlslon.s\TRANSPOR.TAT�PLANNINGuuliana\Duvall Ave\WSDOT\Design Estimate_Duvall.xlsx
�~ ���f _ � '`� E ' t. i'� f ; , r yt a � • y�,. a . ��` .+ � .� .t� � '►;
.
�.1 �..����+ t; . � �� ' ��y �'�', x .w " ~�` ✓'` t � �. 1 r:�'��.
. r .. ` �. t ' 1
-� w r i� k 1�' _ �3� �. ��rA� < < ,� :� 'yy • 3 •� �,� :
� 1 �LjjF :''�' Y � �i�a}� 6 �
�•t \, ,1 % ' ' qA, �j'+vti'+dwr'}< . � 'f..�� ��'.� ` t� Z.' }l r�
,�. t..� F; s.y �,4 .i .'� � . . . 4 , r a ,c� �y_� �y
,�r .�� �''`'��'� . . 1:' ,y�. �if�r�� ^ . . , . � «� � _.
�4 ��7 ! -`, rL. ���• �.i+ . . � yi��i`•
�a i °�`�'•"� n 'e� � "r
i
:+' . � \'.'. . ,.� . . ".f � r t �,t^ . , �" ,,. . w, -
'. It �.. �, t �� � .�t ��"w � ' �_ �r "+'`1t� �. : st„�.
,.
Y�`�. ..� sa`ti _ �,.�- --' z `4 w-.-l-; r�.: '.�ti . � ��� ,�Q����.
; �:
'�r r""+� X- + +r t, � s • ,�j�� �.- 4 , ��
.��±,.- . . ,t=µ, s..t� - ��; f �•�..:.�:.� � . � !-_r * .r� " � �r.� ,
` r� '� %.� i'� ` "`• � ���� `� - - s- E ` ' �.a
�� • ^`�5... ' �' � �'��'.',Zi`.r":t.�`{w/��� r"'�'t�'�"��' ; . � �`6`y`�� _��".'�'
^' ,/ �S t y ' ..� � �y r, �,.•�. ` l ` •• ..... � ' � ` �- i_.
J ♦ .'I � 'r • R . 1
.'r �� .' . �--t, �+�! � � .'4i i'.,',ff'1�'s E fy .- f•'i y � a : �',. . .M.,,.�..,�ir 7.,'N � . '•' , � w ,�. «,
�.L yr FYt ; a'�',� t ���; ����.. 2�:�+� � ....�3'j ` '•i. .G�;1 k�;� `. �; � ,�,;�:. �-�µira. 7��� r� ♦ a; Yl
� � ) ... a 1 x.y� t'4. 2.� . �,.y.�.,_.. * �, ���, � �It� .71 � . +;Y t
� i �a �
�� ��i-405��- �w.�r �^r �.� i �-.� ��:�,F'.�; . ',. : ��•t ��� ''�x".�3{�'3?+A.�t sT� � ,� i��
,� � 1 �. � ♦'�� �+7""ii �•��� t _ 4�`�.s ``�° 1 ` .e. � � < �,�s � '"�"•
r s M ;,1. � .�` '��" � y 3: .:s�j y � � i
..A x . �, � jF i � 1 i�"�tS 1 . �`.� �J���'+��1C r�'` E4}}. i.`�.�r�'`� rf �,y 'F ';j
is . j r,� �iT I�S �;� ' � �s �' y �..t t ��r ;���,•� �.���� �.���� ! i� �.ti`.
� i ..�i.' R�,�� . . � ,�"'~E r �:'It• .;.f .tr_ }"�r�. .�•,�r,..at.�Ci,r .�,•r.*� '� �. t•�t�.� •� '_� :
�.�T 2 S I �, r _ ; , -� � � �� '}� • ' i`: .�, a f ...� �tit • . � ..
S ti�• � r '� � .4:• t �C s' i a t}��f3'�sI� � fx�3 � ��t�'°b�� irr ��r<
��n .`e � �, ,�y�ii M�� 7► .f.'i �,t T�^'r��� � �.�_�+�t� 3 A�.. "'' ..•-.a,°�' i�
� � �' �'�� .. �� ^# �7 f-�� � , ...i� r �'��. �Y �.��' �..t' �•� y�+ E- ��7�' .�r�.�T � i .a►
� �^� , j •r �,ks: 3r' � . r �t#44•ja tY� t� ".e+'.ri. : •�i�
.�''�' � ,# i�+t .`�i�' " �' ,� y ,.�. �i � d� , J .:1��. �ti� ��r ��� r t,-���. =a • � � :.v
. ' F _ x Y► s v,, , .,.:�p� :�' a y: � i t' � . , , .
�a �'�i� IQ ,,''�' +� �P rt �,:� .f, i' � �,� S. �� .
t'� � �' 1_� �� � ", 'L= 4 �� # { _ .�L. L,N, , `�T t+^`, . rti
F ! / , • '�y at�,I` �� y» �� s• a i�( # Y�Q � }` ,rl r,,, y ♦ .
y-;� �4•t �' �,'��� 3r�� w I� �a i .. , � �i� s �t K��fhh�'h� �s� �y i1
•it i. �� s -�� :���ae���.���" if� ���.7r,r��. -� . T� ' r -4• V��11 �
* , 1.. .�� �<, tS _y.��� �i .'7 �.t ... ny,r i .�1 ��} � ^ `�j��>� i ���
} Z J
-t ���d��},� �:.>'�' � � F� r �� �^ - .A: �'�Fr �. .�...
., i ;y. .��F���„�-j� i r ��,}��+�. � . . � � !'rt y�. Y `1�,`� � . �� _ � .Y . �i�� ..
� �j -; �e�
:'l �� Ct-'i� � t� , `�r r ..� � .i. t%. � � � � J � �� r.a�f •t E.�.,'....'. F`�y� !»�.e_ ;.7}'
� �� _ ^,�I � •:.`� . 1 t�� .� �' 1 :xq
R �` �. J� .r. r
'R�� ,, a,"r ��t - "'R ._ ,1' ` •`� �; �� ��•r� � �+.
� ,
�•.t wr• x; wi . T♦
� y. L 7 n..... v . � " w��. �` ��.-��.
� '� , ��'C` }'c.�� ;3^.'_..y� ;v:f..,` �,- f.� . �4*..�•i i,� s ?�.,�i�[ fi��..� ����. ;f .:i
,�� .�.�,;
` ., t'� . � �,+ �. � �. ti r, t<fi• � ;`� �� #f�� '�
�-4�� ,,,,t�� .yr'"�! �� �� j�,� ` r ' �.^ :# ..t,' � : ,�.. �
,��� �,ts`!� ' ����;i' !, �t �»F'C`����,,''4tr • �y��!!, �; ! �*.
���":I ��( �1•�-s�l4.-�. f '� . s,� • �:, �;�r�� j��
tyk 'J� > �� M . ,.�' i�S' aMi� �i
.�,�..�, t � 4� .� . �+,� "�'> Ii ae`�":� yt � �� � �'l�w y f"� !i. .' :
I-405; �r t•� .��'y-E+ ri's:�� :� , 'm�; ,' � �t ••�.„, � f,�,,,[� a ♦..t �: � ;
<� 1 � LL �`���ta....S i �s� �t�r ��� ti�-... � :v ,.s �,.,: :i+t-y.�,,�4-'���� :S", �,�'` �
��� t,'� F�s��ti',:��� :�r`( ��'�+i' � T ��f'���lr ��' �" '� �i"}r;,;� r� ±�il
5' �,t �.. .�..,j' s. ; �x , t 1 .a -�'wy,F��j'`'� .. C.eC:.' �.."rt4 j3 w' { �c¢IJ
��s f+.�T ,r r
� �M � �Sr . •T '�j•� f i�. F+w-+—�r���;f�'Y�. �� F� -: f
i
'.+ .:, . ..•
���A Y je�+i �„s� '; ��' � �� � S�. }r'„r s ;' � tS t"+�III'*'!:.' " �Kt �: , r* -
! " i C a = ' �t :�'�.�� , e , % l. *��
. ,
+ , .
. ,.
.
d . �; � � 1A rt �- � t f�� i '
. �E. . ;'iat�'� � r,�'' S- • •�s' "` �'#r 4; 4 r ..
�`'�< �`�. ...r�:'� �-'s "x`` �r �;."". Y� ,� :,�k�t p, 't I�'! .�..�� , '�� . .."��.,�„'t �.^��E' �: ; r`� � �� '
.r,i� t \S �1 +r � ;i� �h ..c. ' �. `r ....��a.. } -' � � .4fa .. • r,���
��'{ � ^�� !�,..._ 5���„Z �1' 2 "t�`i�, .�� ;f�T ��r� • t�.+`�, . a � yj�:_ `w•: �jt � a
,.� '+�� r .���Y-��£y s�`4 ,�?,� .�t .+c�.'. . �� ��•�'w�R r r�� ��r..a•� ry"W^�+C��.{i�y''�
� r�"�`,: �r�y��,.��_� ''rt�j;�h✓'~�''�a� �*, ..r,._ ; �'"; f�`,'� �%� c,, ., � �:. ,r -� �t4�.tu' ;.�'.)i� l
��'' �� . �` �. �ita�t '�"�b'1 .! �".�„� " ��� i t�E�+ .,.-y�- �� .E. � y r
'�� 'r� �:�� I t y- L.. _:.5��`-. _+...�.._ �� , ,I� .x j'" �
� �.- � �' , ,• s�:, '" ;;
e� �t,'� �, � - • • ;� i�i� �.�
�� . „ .L x �� i•ti}� 4 ..� *� �+f� :3' � f, ..�}�f'
� y lwr7t`'�: � �:, :t., s's +- ' `�'"fi�
�I �- . � �' N ti 4L.
� . r ����,,,/ �� � ' �� � "�t.� � . S� K M?�
.1�� F 7�i �...F . } E z y i �' �•
: .
v .
,
.._. - , � .,� * s +^' ' `� �!� �.�^' � + .
. � ��:F
� r :
�.�.r. ., . i
.�� r �=� t. , .+ � ` ..� X��'� ..�Lr�' .i+{.. ^. � .. .`l;�.
. � � �
`,�l�r�L��+���.i,�# ��� r �� v��~�.� �l,�:. ^ w �r'rt -� N�+ Y �� � �.
R )♦ J.}. X *+� 3 � _
� .. l. ��4 � 3 ♦..�y h F � a r 2 y` 'r�,.: f �l "` .
.�yil' f � "'� ��i2'� f Y���;.�� � �r �! � • '.,...{� . " ... k�� - 1
��.,,, ��itv ��v ��"( b `a,,=.."� .�:;' �� � R �,/.. S � �_ i,:
�` _ ., �,5.1:�i�t�. -,j �� _ V'� t �' �� � : ; :� � �� r.��}'
i �
- 4,i � ' . : ' k„ �
.
� r : t't;� `" ' ' .�
' 4' .
• .:r""'^` ,� ' � • z� , � ,�< ^
�.,_;, ';,... .... .sa s t
Y 7:, :�., �,_ � tb,r, �..a2 r ��ti � • ��Y �r W a��� w� ��. r r• � �� T ���•; •
� !j'�:. � i . ' ..`. t�t ���' i i.
*:�� n •.I-405 '� ' '' ,�' ` �� �' ;
� r � �i+u ��"�
�, . �, .- ,_,} ,�
t.� ` .. ... �"�"1;. � `" ��& f; .li �..1! a^ �, % }+`�•e�• 1
't �,,� 4 � c i' �1' z r a .,� 'A Tr ���� °,:9
�.�„�'-... '-:� y _ �; ,�� : ' •. , }.. � ,-
��._ Y s�:''`� .�T :' ♦F 'y� r�,.� �i , f.� N� s�4t,._j _.
,�"N:��ifi�`-.a..�._--,.:.C'^...s �__•'. ._` �• ��`" �• �' S �t� � ��Z r.. ��.s�.��Y�'h�3.� � -+.w�^` *�F�:"r^?��lu : .,►t�.�sr�+Af 5��
.� ,."�� �C� �. � �
� ' • � � ' ' � �
• � • - • • _ •
�
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
7. m .
Subject/Title: Meeting:
116th Avenue Southeast (Southeast Petrovitsky REGULAR COUNCIL- 05 Jan 2015
Road to Southeast 172nd Lane- extended)
Sidewalk Project
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Local Agency Agreement Public Works
Local Agency Federal Aid Project Prospectus
Map Staff Contact:
Juliana Fries, Program Development Coordinator, x
7232
Recommended Action:
Council Concur
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ $118,000.00 Revenue Generated: $ $707,000.00
Total Project Budget: $ $818,000.00 City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The 116th Avenue Southeast(Southeast Petrovitsky Road to Southeast 172nd Lane- extended) Sidewalk
Project was selected under the countywide selection process for a federal Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality(CMAQ)grant of$707,000.
This grant will provide for the design and construction of a 5-foot sidewalk on the east side of 116th
Avenue Southeast.The project includes a vegetated buffer separating the sidewalk from the traveled
roadway. Plans and bid documents will be prepared in 2015 and construction will take place in 2016.
This grant requires a 13.5%match. Local funding for the match is from the Sidewalk Program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the Local Agency Agreement with the Washington
State Department of Transportation for the obligation of grant funding and all subsequent agreements
necessary to accomplish this project.
��
�.
T Q_'"�°"� Local Agency Agreement
Agency City of Renton CFDA No. 20.2os
(Catalo9 of Federal Domestic Assistance)
address 1055 S Grady Way project No. �_____ _._
Renton,WA 98057
Agreement No. _________ _
For OSC WSDOT Use Only
The Local Agency having complied,or liereby agreeing to oomply,with the tertns and conditions set forth in(I)Title 23,U.S.Code Highways,(2)
the regutations issued pursuant ther�to,(3)2 CFR 225,(4)OtTioe of Management and Budget Circulars A-l02,aad A-133,(5)t6e polic'ies and
procedures promulgated by ihe Washingwn State Department of Transportstioq and(6)the federel eid project agreement entered into behveen the
State and Federal Government,rels6ve to the above project,Ihc Weshington State Department of T�ansportafion wil!autliorize the Local Age�y to
proceed on the project by a separate nodfication.Federal funds which are to be obligated for the project may not exceed the amount shovm herzin on
lioe r, column 3, without written authority by lhe Stste, subject to the approval of the Federal Highway Administration. All project rnsts not
reimbursed by the Federal Govemment shall be the responsibility of the Local Agency.
Project Description
Name 116th Ave SE Sidewalk Le�9� 0.2 mi
Termini SE Petrovitsky Rd to SE 172nd Ln(ext)
Description of Work
This project will design and construct a missing link 5-foot sidewalk on the east side of 116th Ave SE.The project
includes a vegetated buffer separating the sidewalk from the travelled roadway.
Proposed Advertisement Date: N/A
Estimate of Fu�ding
Type of Work --- {��-- I �2�- -- I �3� -- -
Estimated Total Estimated Agency Es6mated
Project Funds Funds Federal Funds
PE a.Agency 15,000� 2,025� 12,975
86.5% % b.Other Consultant 97,920' 13,220 84,700
c.Other Non-participation 80 80 _
Federal AId d.State . ---`- 5,000 - - --675� 4,325
ParlidpaBon -- ----— --
Ratio tor PE e.Total PE Cost Estimate(a+b+c+d) � 118,000� 16,000� 102,000
RigM of WaY E Agency-_-_--
---- ------- -- ---
o�a - --- --
----- a Other__- -- --
-- -- - -
h.Other
Federal Aid --- -- - ----------- -
-- — - --- ---
PeAicipeUon _i`State -- -- -- — � -- ' - —
RaGo tor RW j.Total RIW Cost Estimate(f+g+h+i) � �
Construction k.Contract �
-----_�___._._. - ---
- ------ -
I.Other
m.Other ...- -- -------�-
n.Other . - -... -- i -
- - ----- -- . --
-- �-
% o.Agency
Federal Aid --- - -- --
I ---- --------
Particlpatlon P•State
_ --- — - -'
Ratlo tor CN q.Total CN Cost Estimate(k+l+m+n+o+p) �
r.Total Project Coat Estimate(e+j+q) � 118,000.00� 16,000.00� 102,000.00
Agency Official Washington State Department of Transportation
By By
T�1e DE1115 LdW, Mayor Dlrector of Local Programs
Oate Executed
DOT Fortn 140-039 EF 1
Revlaed 03/2014
�
Construction Method of Financing �cncarMentodse�eaed�
State Ad and Avrard
❑Mefhod A-Advanoe Payment-10.gency Share of total canstrudion cost(based on contrad award)
❑Method B-Withhold trom pas tax the Aqenclls share of tutal conshuction oost(line 4,aolumn 2)in ihe amount of
a at a per month Tnr monUis.
Locai Force or Locai Ad a�Award
�Method C-Aaencv oost incurred with oarlial reunbursement
The Local Agency further stipulates tfiat pursuant to said Title 23,regulations and policies and probedures,and as
a condition to payment of the federal funds obligated,it accepts and nn'tl oompiy with the applicable provisions set
forth below.Adopted by offiaal action on
, ,ResolutioNOrdinanoe No.
Provisions
I. Scope of Work
Tt�e Agency shail provide all the work,labor,materials,and services necessary to perform the project which is describcd and set forth in detail in
the"Projed Description"and"Type of Work."
When the State acts for and on behalf of the Agency,the State shall be dcemed an agent of the Agency and shall perform the services described
and indicated in"Type of Work^on the face of this agreement,in accordance with plans and specifications as proposed by the Ageocy and approved
by the Stete and the Federal Highway AdminisUation.
When the Stete acts for the Agency but is not subject W the right of control by the Agency,the State shall have the right to perform the work
subject to the ordinary procedures of ihe State and Fedetal Highway Administretion.
il. Delegation of Authority
'ILe State is willing to fulfill the rcsponsibilities to ihe Federal Government by the edministration of this project.The Agency egrees thet Uu State
shall have the full audwrity to carry out this administration. The State shall review, process, and epprove documents required for federal sid
reimbursement in accordance with federal requiremenu.If the Statc advertises and awards the contract,the State will fwther act for the Agency in all
matters concerning the project as requested by the Agency.If the Local Agency advertises end awards the project,the State shall review ihe work to
ensure conformity with the approved plans and specifications.
III. Project Administration
Certain types of work and services shall be provided by the State on this project as requested by lhe Agency end described in the Type of Work
above.ln addition,the State will furnish qualified personnel for the supervision end inspection of the work in progrcss.On I.ocal Agency advertised
and awarded projects,the supervision and irupecrion shall be limited to ensuring all work is in confortnsnce with approved plans,specificafwns,and
federal aid requirements.The salary of sueh engineer or other supervisor end all other salaries end cosfs incurted by State forces upon the project
will be considered a cost thereof.All costs rolated to this project incucred by employees of the State in the customary manner on highway peyrolls
and vouchers shall be charged es costs of the project.
IV. Avallabllity of Records
All project records in support of all costs incurred antl actusl expenditures kept by the Agency are to be mainlained in accordance with loca!
govemment accounting procedures prescribed by the Washington State Auditor's Office, the U.S. Departrnent of Transportation, and the
Washington State Department of Transportation.The rswrds shall be open to inspection by the State and Federal Government at all reasonable times
and shall be retained end made evailable for such inspection for a period of not less then three years from the final payment of any federal sid funds
to the Agency.Copies of said records shall be fumished to the State and/or Federal Govemment upon reques�t.
V. Compliance with Provisions
7'he Agenc�+shall not incur any federal aid participation costs on eny classification of work on this project until authorized in writing by the State
for each class�fication.The classifications of work for projects are:
I.Proliminary engineering.
2.Right of way acquisition.
3.Project construction.
Once written authorizetion is given,the Agency agrees to show condnuous progress through monthly billings.Failure to show continuous progress
may result the Agency's project becoming inactive,as described in 23 CFR 630,and subject to de-obligation of federal aid funds and/or agmement
closure.
If right of way acquisidon,or actual construcdon of the road for which proliminary engineering is undertaken is not sterted by the close of the
tenth fiscal year following the fiscal year in which preliminary engineering phase wes suthorized,the Agency wiU repay to the State the sum or sums
of federal funds paid to the Agency under the tertns of this agceement(see Section IX).
If actual construction of the road for which right of way has been purchssed is not started by the close of the tenth fiscal year following the P�scal
year in which the right of way phase was authorized,the Agency will repay to the State the sum or sums of federal funds paid to the Agency under
i the terms ofthis agreement(see Section IX).
DOT Form 140-039 EF 2
Revised 0�/2014
I
The Agency agees that all stages of coostruction aecessary to provide the initially planaed complete faciliry within the limits ol'this project will
conform to at least the minimum values set by appruved statewide design standards applicable to thu class of 6ighways,even t6ough such additional
wodc is fu�anced widwut federal sid participation.
The Ageocy ag�ees that on federal aid 6ighway construction projecls,the current federal sid regulations wbic6 apply W liquidated damages
relative to the basis o!federal participation in the project cost shall be applicable in the event the contractor fails to compkoe the cootract within the
contract time.
VI. Payment and Partial Reimbursement
Tbe total cost of the project,including all review and engiceering wsts and other expenses of t6e Stete,is to be peid by Q�e Agency aod by the
Federal Govemmenk Federal fwding s6e11 be in accordance with the Fede�al Transportation Act, as amended, 2 CFR 225 and Office of
Management and Budget circulars A-102 and A-133.The State shall not be ulGmately nesponsible for any of the wsts of the project T6e en
shall be ultimately responsibk for all costs�ssociated with t6e project which are aot reimbursed by the Federal Govemment Nothing�in thu
agreement shall be construed as a promise by the State as to the amount or natiue of fede�al participation in thu pmject.
The Ageacy shall bill the stau for fedeia!aid project�incurred in conformity with applicable federal and stste laws. 7'he agency shall
minimae the time elapsed between receipt of federal eid funds and subsequent payment of incuRed costs. Expendihues by the L,ocxl Agency for
maintenance,general admin'�stration,supervisroq and other overhead shell oot be eligible for federal participation unless a cuvent indirect cost plan
6a5 been prcpared io accordance with tt�e regulations outlined in 2 CFR 225-Cost Principles for State,Local,and Indian Tn'bal Govemment, and
retained for audiL
The State will pay for State incurted wsts on the project Following paymen;the State shap bill the Federal Government for reimbursement of
those wsu eligible for federal participation to the extent that such wsts are attributable and properly allocable ta this project.The State s6all bill the
Agency for that portion of State costs which were not reimbursed by the Federal Government(see Section!}q.
1. Project Coastnctioa Costs
Project conshvction financing will be accomplished by one of thc three methods as indiceted in this agreement
Method A—The Agency will plaa with the Stete,within(20)days after the execution of the construction contract,an advance in the amount of
the Ageocy's share of the total construction cost based on the conUact award.The State will notify the Agency of the exact amount to be deposited
with the State.The State will pay all costs incurred under the contract uponpresenta6on of progress billings from the contractor.Following such
payments, the Smte will submit a billing w the Federal Covemment for the federal aid participetion share of the cost When the project is
substantially wropleted and final actual costs of the project can be detertnined,the State will present d�e Agency with a final billing showing the
amount due the State or the amount due the Agency.This billing will be cleared by either a payment fmm the Agency to the State or by a refund
from the State to the Agency.
Method B— The Agency's share of the total construction oost es shown on the face of this agrcement shall be withheld from its monthly fuel tax
allotrnents.The face of this egreement establishes the months in which the withholding shall take place and the exact amount to be withheld each
month.'Ihe extent of withholding will be confirmed by letter from the State at the time of contract award.Upon receipt of progress billings from the
contractor,the State will submit such billings to the Fedecal Government for payment of its participating pofion of such billings.
Met6od C—The Agency may submit vouchers to lhe State in the format prescribed by the State,in duplicete,not more thaa once per month for
those costs eligible for Federal perticipadon to the extent that such wsts are directly attributable and properly a(locable to ihis projecL Expenditures
by the Local Agency for maintenance,general administra6on,supervision,and other overhead shall not be eligible for Federal perticipstion unloss
claimed under a previously approved indirect cost plan.
The State shall reimburse the Agency for the Federal share of eligible project costs up to the amount shown on the face of this agreement.At the
time of audit,the Agency will provide documentation of all costs incurred on the project.
The State shal!bill tbe Agency for all costs incurred by the State rolative to the project The State shall also bill the Agency for the federel funds
paid by the State to the Agency for project rnsts which are subsequently determined to be ineligible for federal participation(see Section IX).
VII. Audit of Federal Consultant Cootracts
The Agency,if services of a consultant ere required,sha(1 be responsible for audit of the consultant's cecords to determine eligible federel aid
costs on the project The report of said audit shall be in the Agency's files and made available to the State and the Federal Government.
An audit shall be conducted by the WSDOT IntemaJ Audit Office in accordance with generally accepted govemmental auditing standards es
issued by the United States Generel Accbuoting OfTce by the Comptroller General of 1he United States; WSDOT Manual M 27-50,Consultant
Authorization,Selection,end Ageement Admin�stration;memoranda of understanding between WSDOT end FFiWA;and Of�ice of Management
and Budget Circular A-133.
If upon audit it is found that overpayment or participation of federal money in ineligible items of cost has occurred,the Agency shall reimburse
the State for the amount of such overpayment or excess participation(see Section IX}.
VIII. Single Audit Act
The Agency,es a subrecipient of federal funds,shall adhere to the federal Office of Management and Budget(OMB)Circular A-133 as well as all
applicable federal end statt statutes and rcgulations. A subrecipient who expends 5500,000 or more in federal awards from all sources during a
given fiscal year shall have a singk or program-specific audit performed for that year in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A-133.
Upon conclusion of the A-133 audit,the Agency shall be responsible for ensuring thst e copy of the rcport is 6ansmitted promptly to the State.
IX. Payment of Bllling
The Agency agrees that if payment or arrangement for payment of any of the State's billing relative to the pro�'ect(e.g.,State force work,project
cancells6oq overpayment,cost ineligible for fcderat participation,etc.)is not made to the State within 45 days after the Agency has been billed,the
State shall etl'ect reimbursement of the total sum due from the regular monthly fuel tax allotments to the Agency from the Motor Vehicle Fund. No
additional Federal project funding will be approved until full payment is received unless othenvise directed by the Director of Local Programs.
00T Form 140-039 EF
Revlaed 03/2014 3
X. Traffic Control�Signing,Marking,and Roadway Malntenance
The Agency will not peimit any changes W be made in the Q�ovisio�for parking rcgulations and hretiic coatrol on this project without prior
approval of the State and Federal Highway Administration. The Agency will�rot instail or pertnit W be iastalled a�ry signs,signaLS,or markings not
in conformence with thc smndards approved by the Federal Highway Adminishation and Ml1TCD. T6e Agency will,at its own expense,mainiain
the impmvement covered by lhis ag�eement
XI. Indemnity
The Agency shall hold drc Fedeta)Government and the Sta6e harmless from end shall procxss and deFend at i�ovm expense all claims,demands,
or suits,whether at law or equiry brought against the Agency,State,or Federal Govemmeny arising from the Ageocy's executioq performance,or
faihus to perfortn any of 1he p�uvisions of this agreement,or of any othe�agoeement or contract connected with ffiis agreement,or arising by teason
of the participation ofthe State or Federal Govemment in the pmject,PROVIDED,nothiag herein shall require tt�e Agency to reimburse the State or
the Pedewl Governmeot for damages arising out ofbodily injury to persons or damage to property caused by or resulting from the sole negligence of
the Federal Government or the Stste.
XII. NondlscNmtnatlon Provlslon
No liability shall ettach to the State or Federal Government except es expressly p�vided he�ein.
T6e Agency shall not discrimioate oa the basis of race,color,national origin,or sex in the award and performance of any USDOT-assisted
contract end/or agreemrnt or in the administration of ifs DBE program or the requirements of 49 CFR Pari 26. The Agency shall take all necessary
and reasonable steps under 49 CFR Parl 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of USDOT-assisted contracts and
agieements. The WSDOTs DBE program,as�equired by 49 CFR Pert 26 and as epQroved by USDOT, is incorpo�ated by reFerence in this
agreement Implementation of this program is a kgal obligation and feilure tn carty out its terms shall be tmated as a violation of this ageeemenL
Upon notification to the Agency of its failure to carry out its approved program,the DepaRment may impose sanctions as provided for under Part 26
and may,in appropriate cases,refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C.1001 end/or the Program Fraud Civil Rcmedies Act of 1986(31 U.S.
C.3801 et seq.).
The Agency hereby agrees that it will incorporate or cause to be inrnrporated into a�ry contract for construction work,or modification thereo�es
defined in the rules and reguleNons of the Secretary of Labor in 41 CFR Chapter 60,which is paid for in whole or in part with funds obtained from
the Fedecal Govemment or borrowed on the credit of the Federal Government pursuant to a grant, oontract, loan, insurance, or guarantee or
understanding pursuant to any federal program involving such grant,oontract,loen,inswance,or guarantee,the requued contract provisions for
Federal-Aid Contracts(FH WA 1273),located in Chapter 44 of the Local Agency Guideliaes.
The Agency furttrer agrees that it will be bound by the above equal opportunity clause with respect to its own employment practices when it
pacticipates in federally assisted construction work: Provided,ttiat ifdhe applicant so perticipating is a State or Local Govemment,lhe ebove equal
opportunity clause is not applicable to any agency, insdvmentelity,or subdivision of such govemment which does not perticipate in work on or
under the contract.
The Agency also agrces:
(1) To essist and cooperate acrively whh the State in obtaining the compliance of contractors and subcondactors with the equal opportunity
clause and ruks,regulations,and rtlevant orders of the Secretary of Lebor.
(2) To furnish the State such infotmation as it may require for the supervision of such compliance and that it will otherwise assist the State in
the discherge of its primary responsibility for securing compliance.
(3)To refrain from entering inlo eny contract or contract modification subject to Executive Order 11246 of September 24. 1965, with a
contractor debarred from, or who has not demonstrated eligibility for, govemment contracts and federally essisted constniction contracts
pursuant to the Executive Order.
(4) To carry out such sanctions and penalties for violation of the equal opportunity clause as may be imposed upon contractors and
subcontractors by the State,Federal Highway Administration,or the Secretery of Labor punuant to Part li,subpart D of the Executive Order.
in addition,the Agency agrees that if it fails or refuses to comply with these undertakings,the State may teke any or aU of the following
actions:
(a) Cancel,tertninate,or suspend this agreement in whole or in part;
(b) Refrain from extending any further assistance to the Agency under the program with respect to which the failure or refusal
occurred wtil satisfactory essurance of future compliance has been received from the Agency;end
(c) Refer the case to the Department of Justice for appropriate legal proceedings.
Xlll. Liquidated Damages
The Agency hereby agrees that the liquidated damages provisions of 23 CFR Part 635,Subpart 127,as supplemented,relative W the amount of
Federalpart�ciQetion in the project cost,shall be appliceble in the event the contrector fails to complete the contract within the contract time. Failure
to include liqu�dated damages provision will not relieve the Agency from reduction of federal participation in accordance with this paragraph.
DOT Fortn 140-039 EF 4
Revised 03ll014
XIV. Tertnination for Public Convenience '
"[be Secrctery of the Washington State Deparhnent of Transporistion may terminate the cooUact in whole,or from time W time in pert,
whenever:
(l) The rcquisite federal Funding becomes unavailable t}uough failurc of appropriation ar otherwise.
(2) The contractor is pievented from pmceeding with the�r•oric es e direct result of an FxecuNve Order of t6e President with respect W the
prosecution of war or iu the interest of national defensc,or an Executive Order of the President or Govemor of the State with respect m the
p�escrvation ofenergy rssources.
(3) 1be contractor u prevented fmm procceding wilh the work by�tasoo of a preliminary,special,or permanent restrainiag order of a
court of competrnt jurisdiction whe�e thc issuance of such order is primarily caused by the acts or aoissioos of persons or agencies other then
the conhactor. �
(4) The Secretary is notified by the Federal Highway Administration U�et the project is insctive.
(5) The Secretary determines that such urtnination is in the best interests of the Stste.
XV. Venue for Claims and/or Causes of Action
For the coavenience of the paRies to this conhact,it is agreed that any claims and/or caLLses of actioo which the Local Agency has against the
State of Washington,growing out of this contract or the project with which it is concemed,shall be brought only in the Superior Court for Thurston
County.
XVI. Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying
The approving authority certifies,to the best of his or her knowtedge and belief,that:
(I) No federal appropriated fundv have been paid or will be paid,by or on behalf of the undersigned,to any person for intluencing or attempting
to influence an ofticer or employee of any federal agency,a member of Congress,an officer or employce of Congress,or an employee of a member
of Congress in connection with the awerding of an�federal coakact,the making of any federal grant,the meking of any fedeial loan,the entering
into of any cooperative agreement,and the extens�on,continuation,renewal,amendment,or modification of any federal contract,grant,loan,or
cooperative agreement.
(2) If any funds otlxr than federel appropriated funds have been paid or will be peid to any person for intluencing or attempting to influence an
officer or employce of any federal agency,a member of Congress,an officer or employee of Congress,or en employee of a member of Congress in
connection with this federal contract,grant,loan,or cooperative agreement,the undersigned shall complete and submit the Standard Fortn-LLL,
"Disclosuie Fortn to RepoR Lobbying,"in accordence with its instrucNons.
(3) The undersigned shall require that the Ianguage of this certification be included in the awerd documents for all subawards st all tiers
(including subgrents,and wntracts and subcontracts under grants,subgrants,loans,and cooperative agreements)which exceed S 100,000,and that all
such subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.
This certificadon is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transacNon was made or entered into. Submission
of this certification as a prerequisite for making or entering into this trar�saction imposed by Section 1352,Title 31,U.S.Code. Anypecson who fails
to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than 510,000 and not more than S100,000 for each such failure.
Additional Provisions
DOT Fortn 140-039 EF
Revissd o31201� 5
City of Renton
116th Ave SE Sidewalk
1. Estimate for Consulting Services 12/02/2014
Item Discipline Manhours Average Rate Estimated
of Pay Cost
1 Project Management � 60 $ 70 � $ 4,200
2 �Geotechnical Expioration/Design � 40� $ 50 ` $ 2,000
3 �Environmental/Permitting � 60� $ 70 � $ 4,200
4 �Survey ( 80� $ 50 � $ 4,000
5 �Plans,Specifications and Estimates � 200� $ 50 � $ 10,000
� Totais� 440 $ 24,400
Overhead Cost 20090 $ 48,800
Fixed Fee 30% $ 21,960
Reimbur5able
A. Reproduction Expenses $ 1,300
B. Plotter Mylar $ 1,000
C. Other $ 540
Total $ 2,840
Total Consultant $ 98,000
2. Estimate for Agency Services
Item Discipiine Manhours I Average Rate Estimated
of Pay Cost
1 �Project Management � 110) $ 50 ( $ 5,500
2 �Plan Review � 40� $ 45 � $ 1,800
Totals� 150 � $ 7,300
Overhead Cost 100% $ 7,300
Relmbursable
Other $ 400
Total $ 400
Total Agency $ 15,000
3. Estimate for State Services $ 5,000
� Grand Total $ 118,000 �
H:\Divislon.s\TRANSPOR.TA7�PLANNINGUuliana\116th\WSDO'f\Design Estimate_116th.Mlsx
� �a,� Local Agency Federal Aid
�� Depar6nent o#TY�ansporratioe Project Prospectus
oace I 12/01/2014
I Preta I Route I( )
Fede�ai aa I I I DUNS Number I 092278894
Projed Number
�or���genCy I � (wsooT� Federal Employer I 916001271
project Number \Use Onry Tax ID Number
ABency CA Agency Federal Program Title
City of Renton 1 �Yes ❑No �_2o.2os p_o�,er _ _ _ __ _
Projed Title S����� N 47 26 43
116th Ave SE Sidewalk � � �� Start Long'dude W 122°�1'�0"
End Latitude r1 47°26'55" E�L�g� W 122°11'10"
Projed Tertnini From-To Nearest City Name Project Zp Code(+4)
SE Petrovitsky Rd to SE 172nd Ln(ext) I Renton I98058
From To I Length of Project I Awatd Type
-_---� - _ - 10.2 mi ---- � Local ❑ Local Forces ❑ State ❑ Raiimad
- - - - ----
Federal Agency City Number County Number County Name WSDOT.Region
� FHWA ❑ Others 1070 17 I King �No�thwest Region
Con ressional Distrid L islative Districts Urban Area Number
9 9 I11 IPSRC
I Totai I Local Agency Federal Funds Phase Sfart
Phase Esdmated Cost Funding I I Date
Mearest Hundred Dollar) (Nearest Hundred Dollar) (Nearest Hundred Doflar) MoMh Year
P.E. I $ 118,OOOI $ 16,000� $102,OOOI 02/2015
� �
- �-- - ------- --- -- -- -----
Const $700,OOOI $95,000 $605,000 02/2016
Total I $818,OOOI $111,000( $707,000 I
Description of Existing Facility(Enisting Design and Present Condition)
Roadway VVidth Number of Lanes
varies-30-42(at intersection) 2 lanes
116th Ave SE is a minor arterial with 2 lanes of traffic and daily volume of 12,000 vehicles.
Description of Proposed Work
DescripUon of Proposed Work(Attach additional sheet(s)if necessary)
This project will design and construct a missing link 5-foot sidewalk on the east side of 116th Ave SE.The project
includes a vegetated buffer separating the sidewalk from the travelled roadway.
Local Agency Contact Person Title I Phone
Juliana Fries ; Pro�ram Development Coordinator 425-430-7232
Mailing Address City I State Zip Code
1055 S Grady Way `( ReMon j �yq ; 98057
By
��r���� - - -- --
Project Prospectus Approval '°`p�"°"i"8'4"�t,or�ri
Title T�anspoRation Design Supervisor Date
DOT Form 140-101 EF
Revised 0412014 Page t of 3 ♦Prevlous Editlons Obsolete♦
�Agency (Projed Title I Date �
City of Renton 116th Ave SE Sidewalk 12/01/2014
Type of Proposed Work
Project Type(Chedc all that Apply) Roadway Width Number of Lanes
�New Construc6on ❑Path/Trail �3'R 30 to 42 2
❑Reconstrudion �Pe�b�ian!Faali�es ❑2-R
❑Railroad ❑Parfdng ❑Other
❑Bridge
Geometric Design Data
Description � Through Route � Crossroad
❑Prinapal Arterial ❑Prinapal Arterial
Federal a u�� �M��a��a� D u�nar, O MinorArterial
Functionai ❑R��� ❑co��co� p ca�
D Rural
❑Major Collector ❑Major Colledor
Classification ❑NHS �Minor Collector ❑NHS �Minor Collec:tor
❑Local Acoess ❑Local Access
Terrain � ❑Flat �Roll ❑Mountain � ❑Flat ❑Roll ❑Mountain
Posted Speed �30 rnph �
Design Speed �N/A �
Exi�ting ADT �12,000 �
Desi�n Year ADT �N/A �
Design Year �N/A �
Design Hourly Volume(Dhl� �N/A �
Performance of Work
� Preliminary Engineering Will Be Performed By Others Agency
Consultant 99 % I 1 °k
Construction Will Be Performed By Contract Agency
Contract 100�/o I 0%
� Environmental Classification
❑ Class I-Environmental Impad Statement(EIS) � Class 11-Categorically E�cGuded(CE)
❑ Projed Involves NEPAISEPA Section 404 �■ Projects Requiring Documentation
Interagency Agreement (Documented CE)
❑ Class III-Environmental Assessment(EA)
❑ Project Involves NEPNSEPA Section 404
Interagency Agreement
Environmental Considerations
DOT Fortn 140-101 EF page 2 of 3
Revised 04/2014
�Agerx,y Projed Title Date
City of Renton I116th Ave SE Sidewalk (12/01l2014 �
Right of Way ,
�No Right of Way Required ❑Right of Way Required '',
'All construction required by the ❑No Re�ocation ❑Reiocation Required '
contrad can be accomplished I
within tlie existing right of way. ,
Description of Utilily Relocation or Adjustrnents and Existing Major SUuc�es Involved in the Projed
�FAA Involvement �
Is any airpoR{ocated within 3.2 kilometers(2 miles)of the proposed project?❑ Yes � No
Remarks
This project has been reviewed by the legislative body of the administration agency or agencies,or it's designee, and
is not inconsistent with the agency's comprehensive plan for community development.
Agency City of Renton
Date By
-- ---- - - --- --
-- - _� - - --
------ ---— —
MayorlChairperson
DOT Form 140-101 EF
Revised 04/2014 Page 3 oi 3 ♦previous Editions Obsolete♦
t � I
4
s 1
�
�
�r. �4
� �w+IM1`!'r�"""yM'�.w"'
;�ii.�..,.,���,wFCrr1:!•+'":F.�IW
, �I � x
' � ....__..,..
_ - '
� � � j width varies � 5' q
� � � , i
sidewalk shouider drive lane ' drive lane vegetated buffer sidewalk
existing Proposed improvements
RENTON - 116th Ave SE - Typical Section
p�����
5�040
L4��f� +�18.�
�`k s��$�u�� s19�y ��
R,�S'�S� �F+�$ �p se5.� ,
e �16th F� ��02.a0A �p Sd �18�
'�1t1 � gp Sp
$1q14�
� �
Aentor �o,�n�Y tun9 F�u� ��° s°
ion'� R�H. �.Date a
���-'�'�� S�p�� S�1'!Z'�Lt►
�u�tN m� 'p��15� � �11�" �� �"�� So��s' '��' �s�
p ptiase , .�-'' 24,+� �11115 Gt'�`Q e�tS11P�� �Ra 81K ��Vlt�hme��,g�
P�Oss2p15 y11�6 1rnP'ro�e gtco`n�'y
n M
p�w� 2fl�e F,ro�`'�aEY�9n�ca�r s�dev,,e�tc
G R�gto
�
G� .�p�N� ��tN�m��sl���5 apo NIA ��t�b�e��para�c�9
A�
�a
W� SA ec�S
�,RStece�cet8�� in�ud
F�d,°ca'�Aad C`a�'; Mi S� °i�
Func�a�: �16t1�P0� Co�t^ ���a . B oE�16�A�s�Tt,e PT
���E��ndtt��fa���, t g�$wa\k°n��g�st g�
.(e�$��s. �XetnP� o�sW�a m�sic►9�ink'�fo�
, op. �e�c
�� �,cc�P�'d����ro�y,
� .�p���Ued
\ �
�
�\
�
\ �,...
\ ����t1p��ng ,
\ PPPg��P Pro1 \
� �
\
'` = a.2�s
i;
�����,--
�=_''
10�A
.. j e. . :�� � .. �. �� . .
� � �•. x�.. _.:.F ...� .
� + iv.', ,��'.,.��`� y M �`�'� �s J'� t. �' �'iK'�tiii!M'�� .r�jr•�' 'o- � 7:._ :*� ��,y � R , . pQ�a„.
� { t� ' �� � � . >.� 4�� s i� ., �� �
j 'r... ' # , •" � �" ♦ ��t-^� ;•�' 1 Q
,r } �c. �.:, � ���1n 1.I s'�'� � �c�..,�w� _� �J� �
E �• �t'i �'� i,
...- .�.' .�% \ � �. �r �� ' _ � i�"�,i,l t ` . _ `
y�- A�. :,s �f � z s _-a �,,A �'. ��:-�.. .'� .. .� r�...
�� ' �� � .� �-.. :� r.��r t J a, , �. !.`.> F���. �+y�� ..�:� �. � • �,��
y �E� �i {�
� � :� .�� �7id i` �y,��I T � �E.r�i � ` �
1 -� � , R � S :� � ,�T�' L" .~ 4 t� � �� �.1,�.I +,�:` ��s�` , ��1� .j � �.. 1.�",��_.
Y � � , ,.. � � - � ! ..1 4y �^�'� � [,�� � �'!y�;� . i . �t-� � .. � .�
T .�+�! �' `';.a� � � .- ' .. j,�r , '� � � � ,1; � � .r � - ��_ - �. �r? .-.
,
1 ,2'? r�.tSi.� � .. _ ,i e .r ' .. �'° i�t:�' - �
._
F�� �- � ,� �.� s -� . .�+ Q .. .
� _�
t.t F ;,.:£�� T�J .:� ., „� ��j�i 3,3��' �.r.� �'� `'` ii; ,` ��.p +s�'
'S �� lI 'c "�".� , •'� �`�- '` .�i' i 1� �•�..�ir,/y��`}•� •� '� � 3 j� ,�
'�� ..�'; 1Ei c . I � . ' � 1 . _; � { `1 _iyf .-2' ♦ '�:4
�. 1r•� * . .. .� - � �!z' i}��I�!� � � i -v�
'+ . �.,"��r-� i •� � 't> � !` �t� .� j� ��;. �'.y' .:��;
.
� ` �` ��:'�' �: �� v'.�"w"•4�.r �:_��� �" _� ' �' .
i, :�.� `` '.,; , ,':E�. x r�a'�yry+� . ��,2� �;m : `� .'�t { �w,,- -� �r r 'ra . =.
4.'� %;'�. w _ -- �„ „', .`�` t �ti.�J ,i� ' `�r�� �� i . _ • �__�:' t' ` —F�,�'ti �9 i.� 'v
�. r� �` '' ��+� ��� : '�O � F�:..� � .
�7r V •?� ,.1...?- �- ,. � '�'�-��. 1�..'`-� "°``:..�.,l��L. � .�M�L �y r'.`� .�e �� �} � � �,
E,� ,.. . �.�'.' ��S u .:L .. � „ �y � y
'�4 x.�. �'.P'.`' .� "'� vJ! S[i`� r,�,.. . �� «t�l 5...�.-_�.S
F
tl � � r�' �;t= `+i. �a�,Gr� � ��"�T�� °�g�� ! �}�L��° f y ! '�'��`�� . .�,� �' _ � .t''�. 3
.1� �- '
� �1., l� • + �:
��� _r/.. ' �i✓ r� ' . �'1 - ' � 'y .... �, f .4�� � �" tr � �s. � �
eS� �� � .� ��� ��` ���Av�r p�� �'t�, r � �y,� ��.: „ ,JI
` ' �! r �' ! � M,e" .,�i t�i+�,♦ i�. t .:�_ . I �� � '" �'. i
� �! �.G
Yfi,�� ,,� �'�S�'.�"' � ;<',�r� � „ � t '.<� �'i�'��j'1r , ��,; : �' ,� i � �:,�.j
:. _ .'�i� W.�� - �' - .� , y �',• �';: * "�`-' ,rW.: ;�..•'` Jf 7 � ;s��- .�,, ..f -
4 f,.
` '' � f,,,�, y� u � ��, �' f "��h "y ,�,�, `Y ,'i' 4W" �' � ,� .�..;� �
5 �[ � . • . _ �`. �: F ��_ •
I''` . s.• l� y �t ,� �,1. •r't ' � �1 �w�. �� �
, . ,
, �. . �;... I + 5�-r � x;. .. � ,,.._. �.:i�e .
.�s �� " " ; ' ,� >w�� .�� �'��� a..._ . .;:�
- - r . � � ��n. � � • .., k���Y:� ... E�
A � � ��
: ;��, _�!y _, < i �' -- �_. 1. '�' `���, ;.r • �.��,, � ,
� _. - _. �. .� , a,� . �!f .F � ��_
5 �:..�1 L�. �
�;� x ' ' . .. � .y� �> 'f i*s.�'' �:. �`'�'
' j _ � ' ��.�' 2_�`��"_ ;s�, �"� � i�. ;; � � �' , �
� �:3�r"'T;)J • , '� ,�:, _ 4. � � -�� '• � �. • �-� .
, .
z�...�..s.::.• � '� • �`
.
.
. , � . .e-�. �
.� ..,.:• ���,.- �= • • � �
< < `�f,7-.� � � �
� _ t �, , , _ f ` ..
f T T �:.�. ��. k � .-.,. - ' � . _� p,,� y� � ���t� .
, �`; ,���t � '",". � < ' • y � } ��a'�: �
. ,�,�
� � ad�. e �i. .r:-_�t.. � -.` *.•. _1
.,. � �� ��-,. , �'. _ _
. -� .. ., ., , - ,
� , . �-�'y� � t . � _ . . ' �
�, 't � 'f*3'� M�r �..� � .� ��.�
�A � �.�
`.k`� * . . � f At� r, ���. .i � �} �' • fi�. �:- ;� - .
� ' ��,��� : . ��y,' �� � . - .
`�> �.�,�� ��� .. � ��� ,�. € -�, � ��
,y, ��-.11' c i�� `t.' rM1 � C`�!�ss Y�, L�£v t's� '} , 1� '
'�IF3 `�.� � � �.�< � .:.�. �. .i;, L��?c•`�tr ���v,,.l�.`� ' .. . . .'f'
��: � � �y 4� ;� < _ _
5 � ? �;ti� � +�
.;��'S:Sk:y't�ii�.�.r� ��� &:i., �!�E ��=— .��' � .` � e, .'' ��-r
�'�_�_ � �.% ��' �t�, ,.�� �� � a � ,
; , � . �� , : ;
? �Sh i.• - ', � - ; - ._-- � . ,'�� ,�
. �-. � - ., i�;y�, � • � �
�L , � �.` ` �.: $ — • _._ _ -
k ,. r- .,,� t. . ' .
c
�y, �. �, �{. � : J � � � s
.w�j��tis +� u . ,... :�, , , 1 _ fr �.i �.t'i! t'-t
rM �
,
o r;' w..,-^K ��`�'��� p�' t • ` •� t�` t
� .. � . • • ,
� r}��� �.._..It --a. : ur;�;�;: 4'. . � 'r�9 � .'�"Y ' ' � . �_� � .
�S`,�'•'s�'� 7 r y
,! n1�4�"r ' J_�■. ` �r C ` �� - - � � - , � . . . r � .
f � •-T��'j_�� �. ; �{ j _f t.� i ! '� ^ a��
�.i�' �1 *C :1 '' L.-r tiL?5 1'.,y . '4�1 �, ji .t- 4 � � ��. .r�.•....-.+.
.'
r
. �
'...,.-.»--.....-,�.J�.-'�-;,<' -5�...�.j..� :...-t...S.=r .�. � - ....J. . . . ..
..
� 4 .� .: . ,,.. �.... .-.... .. . .ti „ _ .i ���'�+ _..--. ..__.. �
�
��.t'�. _ �r �€" _ - , t � ' � • _ '
, �c `.��
, r�t�• F�."h:���`::�. ���' . k � �� -�`=,�� „���� .. „�� �'y� �y�j.�'.. �
'rrn_ �.�4�.�'� R
�1 rj� t,�.l , �F' � :^Y�.+� � . ��;� � t
-: . '��a. � , ��£ ' 1 � ,.,,;., t%' j -�� �.•
.�..y'i� y� ..
�e3i..C.#: . ' �. ' �� � �t-.r ��, ' � - - ' J ' C:. i .� �_;. } t�'.
��2.i �2 . . `, ��. ._. r�;" �-� �'� . . . �� 4 ��F•Y f ' 1.' ' -
' �' j ,. }f r �`i.. i't
� 1►V.�• �-�. '.� � �j. �• l'`!-.j � a��.. ••�� ,�.. •.� �� � . . . - ,�..
;i .�'�°. t�� � f; � :! ' .= 1�; �i�.# �`��' � '� �.
� t: • � :-� s �1 : � �
� dr. �, :';- R � '� ■ �, � _ • �
41 L._L .JL� � y � � • �
�L�� � t:y t _ x� �-� `- ' ' �• � �, � ..
��` !�i �' , �. . �� �. _�-i .�RT�� -t'�'� ,.� - $* '�r. =� + � -�� ���
�;t- s ..'z .
,. •p . . �
-, �� . � ..._ _ ,� �
ntiY4:kt•i��"' �-�-��-i a.a.�: � . :�.. � .. tl . . ._ '- �._ �4 .._. 1.� .�...L.� � -�_s4,'r+��::�;;�-...�
� � • � � ' � - • • • � ' • ' •
� • - • • . •
.
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
7. n.
Subject/Title: Meeting: ,
Main Avenue South/Downtown Circulation (South REGULAR COUNCIL- OS Jan 2015 I
3rd Street to Mill Avenue South) Project '
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: '
Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement Public Works �
Staff Contact:
Juliana Fries, Program Development Coordinator,
x7232
Recommended Action:
Council Concur
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ $850,000.00 Revenue Generated: $ $1,024,750.00
Total Project Budget: $ $2,024,750.00 City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Main Avenue South/Downtown Circulation (South 3rd Street to Mill Avenue South) project was
selected for a Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) grant in the amount of$1,024,750.
This grant wilt provide for a new traffic signal system at Main Avenue South/South 2nd Street/Bronson
Way South, an additional illumination system and urban design elements that will enhance a
pedestrian-oriented environment and create a gateway to the east entrance to the downtown area. The
required match will be provided by the City funds already budgeted for the Main Avenue South project.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreem�nt with the
Washington State Transportation Improvement Board for the obligation of grant funding and all
subsequent agreements necessary to accomplish this project.
�
/"�
Washington State Transportation Improvement Board 8-1-102(036)-1
� Fuei Tax Grant Agreement
Citv of Renton
8-1-102(036)-1
Main Avenue S
S 3rd Street to Mill Avenue S (SR 900)
STATE OF WASHINGTON
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD
AND
City of Renton
AGREEMENT
THIS GRANT AGREEMENT (hereinafter "Agreement")for the Main Avenue S, S 3rd Street to
Miil Avenue S (SR 900) (hereinafter "Project") is entered into by the WASH(NGTON STATE
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD (hereinafter"TIB")and City of Renton, a political
subdivision of the State of Washington (hereinafter"RECIPIENT").
1.0 PURPOSE
TIB hereby grants funds in the amount of$1,024,750 for the project specified above, pursuant
to terms contained in the RECIPIENT'S Grant Application, supporting documentation, chapter
47.26 RCW, title 479 WAC, and the terms and conditions listed below.
2.0 SCOPE AND BUDGET
The Project Scope and Budget are initially described in RECIPIENT's Grant Application and
incorporated by reference into this Agreement. Scope and Budget will be further developed and
refined, but not substantially altered during the Design, Bid Authorization and Construction
Phases. Any material alterations to the original Project Scope or Budget as initially described in
the Grant Application must be authorized by TIB in advance by written amendment.
3.0 PROJECT DOCUMENTATION
TIB requires RECIPIENT to make reasonable progress and submit timely Project
documentation as applicable throughout the Project. Upon RECIPIENT's submission of each
Project document to TIB, the terms contained in the document will be incorporated by reference
into the Agreement. Required documents include, but are not limited to the following:
a) Project Funding Status FoRn
b) Bid Authorization Form with plans and engineers estimate
c) Award Updated Cost Estimate
d) Bid Tabulations
e) Contract Completion Updated Cost Estimate with final summary of quantities
f) Project Accounting History
4.0 BILLING AND PAYMENT
The local agency shall submit progress billings as project costs are incurred to enable TIB to
maintain accurate budgeting and fund management. Payment requests may be submitted as
often as the RECIPIENT deems necessary, but shall be submitted at least quarterly if billable
Fuel Tax Agreement Page 1 of 5 November 2012
.�"`�
Washington State Transportation Improvement Board 8-1-102(036)-1
�� Fuel Tax Grant Agreement
amounts are greater than $50,000. If progress billings are not submitted, large payments may
be delayed or scheduled in a payment plan.
5.0 TERM OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall be effective upon execution by TIB and shali continue through closeout of
the grant or until terminated as provided herein, but shall not exceed 10 years unless amended
by the Parties.
6.0 AMENDMENTS
This Agreement may be amended by mutual agreement of the Parties. Such amendments shall
not be binding unless they are in writing and signed by persons authorized to bind each of the
� Parties.
7.0 ASSIGNMENT
The RECIPIENT shall not assign or transfer its rights, benefits, or obligations under this
Agreement without the prior written consent of TIB. The RECIPIENT is deemed to consent to
assignment of this Agreement by TIB to a successor entity. Such consent shall not constitute a
waiver of the RECIPIENT's other rights under this Agreement.
8.0 GOVERNANCE& VENUE
This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the state of
Washington and venue of any action brought hereunder shal( be in the Superior Cou�t for
Thurston County.
9.0 DEFAULT AND TERMINATION
9.1 NON-COMPL.IANCE
a) In the event TIB determines, in its sole discretion, the RECIPIENT has failed to
com I with the terrns and conditions of this A reement TIB shall noti the RECIPIENT
P Y 9 , fY ,
in writing, of the non-compliance.
b) In response to the notice, RECIPIENT shall provide a written response within 10
' business days of receipt of TIB's notice of non-compliance, which should include either a
detailed plan to correct the non-compliance, a request to amend the Project, or a denial
accompanied by supporting details.
c) TIB will provide 30 days for RECfPIENT to make reasonable progress toward
compliance pursuant to its plan to correct or implement its amendment to the Project.
d) Should RECIPIENT dispute non-compliance,TIB will investigate the dispute and
may withhold furthe�payments or prohibit the RECIPIENT from incurring additional
reimbursable costs during the investigation.
9.2 DEFAULT
RECiPIENT may be considered in default if TIB determines, in its sole discretion, that:
Fuel Tax Agreement Page 2 of 5 November 2012
. . �ti
Washington State Transportation Improvement Board 8-1-102(036)-1
�„`� Fuel Tax Grant Agreement
a) RECIPIENT is not making reasonable progress toward correction and
compliance.
b) TIB denies the RECIPIENT's request to amend the P�oject.
c) After investigation TIB confirms RECIPIENT'S non-compliance.
TIB reserves the right to order RECIPIENT to immediately stop work on the P�oject and
TIB may stop Project payments until the requested corrections have been made or the
Agreement has been terminated.
9.3 TERMINATION
a) In the event of default by the RECIPIENT as determined pursuant to Section 9.2,
TIB shall serve RECIPIENT with a written notice of termination of this Agreement, which
shall be served in person, by email or by certified letter. Upon service of notice of
termination, the RECIPIENT shall immediately stop work and/or take such action as may
be directed by TIB.
b) (n the event of default and/or termination by either PARTY, the RECIPIENT may
be liable for damages as authorized by law including, but not limited to, repayment of
grant funds.
c) The rights and remedies of TIB provided in the AGREEMENT are not exclusive
and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law.
9.4 TERMINATION FOR NECESSITY
TIB may, with ten(10)days written notice, terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part,
because funds are no longer available for the purpose of ineeting TIB's obligations. If
this Agreement is so terminated,TIB shall be liable only for payment required under this
Agreement for performance rendered or costs incurred prior to the effective date of
termination.
10.0 USE OF TIB GRANT FUNDS
TIB grant funds come from Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax revenue. Any use of these funds for
anything other than highway or roadway system improvements is prohibited and shall subject
the RECIPIENT to the terms, conditions and remedies set forth in Section 9. If Right of Way is
purchased using TIB funds, and some or all of the Right of Way is subsequently sold, proceeds
from the sale must be deposited into the RECIPIENT's motor vehicle fund and used for a motor
vehicle purpose.
11.0 INCREASE OR DECREASE IN TIB GRANT FUNDS
At Bid Award and Contract Completion, RECIPIENT may request an increase in the TIB funds
for the specific project. Requests must be made in writing and will be considered by TIB and
awarded at the sole discretion of TIB. All increase requests must be made pursuant to WAC
479-05-202 and/or WAC 479-01-060. If an increase is denied, the recipient shall be liable for
costs incurred in excess of the grant amount. In the event that final costs related to the specific
project are less than the ini6al grant award, TIB funds will be decreased and/or refunded to TIB
in a manner that maintains the original ratio between TIB funds and total project costs.
Fuel Tax Agreement Page 3 of 5 November 2012
. . .�""'.�
Washington State Transportation Improvement Board 8-1-102(036)-1
�� Fuel Tax Grant Agreement
12.0 INDEPENDENT CAPACITY
The RECIPIENT shall be deemed an independent contractor for all purposes and the
employees of the RECIPIENT or any of its contractors, subcontractors, and employees thereof
shall not in any manner be deemed employees of TIB.
13.0 INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS
The PARTIES agree to the following:
Each of the PARTIES, shall protect, defend, indemnify, and save harmless the other PARTY, its
officers, officiais, employees, and agents,while acting within the scope of their employment as
such, from any and all costs, claims,judgment, and/or awards of damages, arising out of, or in
any way resulting from, that PARTY's own negligent acts or omissions which may arise in
connection with its performance under this Agreement. No PARTY will be required to
indemnify,defend, or save harmless the other PARTY if the claim, suit, or action for inju�ies,
death, or damages is caused by the sole negligence of the other PARTY. Where such claims,
suits, or actions result from the concurrent negligence of the PARTIES, the indemnity provisions
provided herein shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of a PARTY's own negligence.
Each of the PARTtES agrees that its obligations under this subparagraph extend to any claim,
demand and/or cause of action brought by, or on behalf of, any of its employees or agents. For
this purpose, each of the PARTIES, by mutual negotiation, hereby waives, with respect to the
other PARTY only, any immunity that would otherwise be available to it against such claims
under the Industrial Insurance provision of Title 51 RCW. In any action to enforce the provisions
of the Section, the prevailing PARTY shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attomey's fees
and costs incurred from the other PARTY.The obligations of this Section shall survive
termination of this Agreement.
14.0 DISPUTE RESOLUTION •
a) The PARTIES shall make good faith efforts to quickly and collaboratively resolve any
dispute arising under or in connection with this AGREEMENT.The dispute resolution
process outlined in this Section applies to disputes arising under or in connection with
the terms of this AGREEMENT.
b) Informal Resolution. The PARTIES shall use their best efforts to resolve disputes
promptly and at the lowest organizational level.
c) In the event that the PARTIES are unable to resolve the dispute, the PAR7IES shall
submit the matter to non-binding mediation facilitated by a mutually agreed upon
mediator.The PARTIES shall share equally in the cost of the mediator.
, d) Each PARTY agrees to compromise to the fullest extent possible in reso{ving the dispute
in order to avoid delays or additional incurred cost to the Project.
e) The PARTIES agree that they shall have no right to seek relief in a court of law until and
unless the Dispute Resolution process has been exhausted.
Fuel Tax Agreement Page 4 of 5 November 20I2
./..--;,
� Washington State Transportation Improvemenf Board 8-1-102(036)-1
��% Fuel Tax Grant Agreement
15.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement, together with the RECIPIENT'S Grant Application, the provisions of chapter
47.26 Revised Code of Washington, the provisions of title 479 Washington Administrative Code,
and TiB Policies, constitutes the entire agreement between the PARTIES and supersedes all
previous written or oral agreements between the PARTIES.
16.0 RECORDS MAINTENANCE
The RECIPIENT shall maintain books, records, documents, data and other evidence relating to
this Agreement and performance of the services described herein, including but not limited to
accounting procedures and practices which sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and indirect
costs of any nature expended in the performance of this Agreement. RECIPIENT shall retain
such records for a period of six years following the date of final payment. At no additional cost,
these records, including materials generated under the Agreement shall be subject at all
reasonable times to inspection, review or audit by TIB personnel duly authorized by TIB, the
Office of the State Auditor, and federal and state officials so authorized by law, regulation or
agreement.
If any litigation, claim or audit is started before the expiration of the six (6)year period, the
records shall be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have
been resolved.
Approved as to Form
Attorney General
By:
Signature on file
Guy Bowman
Assistant Attorney General
Lead Agency Transportation Improvement Board
Signature of Chairman/Mayor Date Executive Director Date
Denis Law, Mayor
Print Name Print Name
Fuel Tax Agreement Page 5 of 5 November 2012
��� Transportation Improvement Board
j' Project Funding Status Form
Agency: RENTON TIB Project Number: 8-1-102(036)-1
ProjectName: Main Avenue S
S 3rd Street to Mill Avenue S (SR 900j
Verify the information below and revise if necessary.
Return to:
Transportation Improvement Board
PO Box 40901
Olympia,WA 98504-0901
PROJECT SCHEDULE
II Target Dates �
IConstruction Approval Date I May 2015 1
fContract Bid Award I Jun 2015 �
IContract Completion May 2016 �
PROJECT FUNDING PARTNERS
List additional funding partners and amount.
IFunding Partners I Amount I Revlsed Funding
I RENTON I 1,000,000 I
I WSDOT I 0 I
IFederal Funds I 0 �
I I I �
� � 1
I I I a
I � � �
I I I 1
I � � �
I I I 1
I TOTAL LOCAL FUNOS I 1,000,000 I l
Signatures are required from two different agency officials. Return the originally
signed form to the TIB office.
Mayor or Public Works Director
Signature Date
Denis law Mayor,City of Renton
Printed or Typed Name Title
Financial Officer
Signature Date
Printed or Typed Name Title
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
�� � '
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Rainier Avenue South Corridor Improvements REGULAR COUNCIL- OS Jan 2015
- Phase 4 (South 3rd Street to NW 3rd Place)
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Local Agency Agreement Public Works
Local Agency Federal Aid Prospectus
Map Staff Contact:
Juliana Fries, Program Development Coordinator,
extension 7232
Recommended Action:
Council Concur
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ $1,200,000(2015) Revenue Generated: $ $2,600,000
Total Project Budget: $ $3,006,000(2015-2016) City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Rainier Avenue South Corridor Improvements—Phase 4 (South 3rd Street to NW 3rd Place) Project
was selected under the regional selection process for a Federal Surface Transportation Program (STP)
grant of$2,600,000. ,
This grant will provide for the design to extend improvements from South 3rd Street (State Route 900) to
NW 3rd Place. Improvements include extending a southbound Business Access and Transit(BAT) lane
from South 2nd Street to South 3rd Street, pedestrian improvements with street-scaping, installation of a
, pedestrian actuated traffic signal (HAWK), pedestrian-scale illumination, access management and a
new traffic signal. Design completion is anticipated for 2016.
This grant requires a 13.5% match. Local funding for the match is in the approved 2015-2016 budget.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the Local Agency Agreement with the Washington
State Department of Transportation for the obligation of grant funding and all subsequent agreements
necessary to accomplish this project. ,
_ �i��u ,,���� . � ��
� Q:r.: ,., �:t��.,�.,� . ,. �� . . Locai Agency Agreement
Agency City of Renton �A�- � �
(C�Ralog arFe�alOo�ne�A�,oe)
Address 1055 S Grady Way
Pn°jectN°- — ------ �___—
Renton, WA 98057
A. _� , .a.��Na
.. r�orosct�or u�o�
'Ibe I.ceal Agenci'�'��,W����8 a��P�9,uit6 the tams and ooa�rt,ions set fath m(1)Td6e 23,US.Code kGgh�roays(2)
���P��,C31 2 Q�R 22�(4)OEl'iac of Ma�ganeat aad Bud�et Ca�s A-lat,�d A-133s(�tLe Poticcs and
����r� �w�s+�o�orr���,�a��w�r���a�a�a�o tec��
S�te�d Fedaal Gos�t,�ne�ffie above pro,jocl,the V1'ashingAoo Stale DepmrOm�t of T�orl�no aill aolhor�t6e Lo�l Agpsey to
pcooced�1be projad by a seper�e aari5cation.Fedual faads vehich me to be obl'�Cor dm projed may not ereeed�e�i s6owo ha�in on
1'ine r,oolumn 3,asithout�srite�o�ority by thc S�, svbj«t w the appcovat of the Fede�al ifigh�ray a:,.,';:�"�.,:'.,. All projed oosis oot
�imburxd by!he Fedaa!Gm*emmmt sbatl be the�ility of ihe l.a�l AgcrwS.
Project Description
N� Rainier Ave S Corridor Improvements-Phase 4 �, 0.5 mi
Termini S 3rd St(SR 900)to NW 3rd PI
Description of Wortc
Phase 4 wiN exlend the improvements trom S 3rd St(SR 900)to approximately 1,000 feet north of Airport Way.Improvements inGude extending a
southbound BAT Lane from S 2nd St lo S 3rd St,pedestrian improvemenls with street scaPing,segrnent of a regional pedlbike path trail(Lake
Washington Loop Trail)from Airpori Way to 1,000 feet north oi Airpori Way,installation ot a pedesVian actuated traffic signal(Hawk).pedestrian scale
illumination,transft faatity upgrades,access management.new traffic sig�al and upgrades oi existing Iraffic signais
Proposed Adverfisement Oate: N/A
__ Estimate of Funding_ _ _
Type of Work Estim i�To�ai ` Estimated Agency I Est�mated
Project Funds � Furxis Federal Funds
PE a.A�enc�r 130,780 17,655 113,125
— - - -
86.5% % - -- --- ---- ---- -------- - -
____ b.Other Consultant __ ____ _ 2,860,000 386,100 2,473,900
-- -- ---- -- -- - _ __ _
a Other Non-participation __ 220 220
Federal Aid ----- — _. - _ _ __� __ -_ ---
- - - --
Partiapation _d.State --- --- 15,000 2,025 12,975
Ratto tor PE e.T�tal PE Cost Estimate(a+b+�+d� 3,006,000 406,000 2,600,000
Rtght of Way f. ency _ _ �
o - - -
-- — -
- -- �.Other_ __
h.Other - -- ---
Feaerai aa , -- - - -
Participa6on 4 S�� }
---- - - - - I ------I- --- _�_ -- __
Ratto tor RW i.Total R/W Cost Estimate(f+g+h+i)
ConstrucUon k.Contract � �
------ - --
- -- -
_------
I.Other �
----
_ --- - --- ---- - --
m.Other i
---- -. - - -
- --
n.Other
- � - --____- -- - - - --- -
% o.A�ency
-- - �
Federal Aid - - - - - - + -- - -
Participation �TState- - - - --- t� - - I
Rauo for CN q.Total CN Cost Estimate(k+l+m+n+o+p} I �
r.Total Project Cost Estimate(e+j+q) � 3,006,000� 406,000; 2,600,000
Agency Official Washington State Department of Transportation
By ey
Title Dlrector of Local Programs
Date Executed
DOT Form 140-039 EF �
Revised 03l2014
Construel�o��af F�eanca�g �cr�ar�,od�
�aa�a w�,a
❑t1�odA-Adranae PaSmaeit-�nq str�e of bota{oo�trucGon ao9t�emeu m aa�rat a�
❑tJe�odB-ll�tddi�amqasl�QieA�ncy�sstrr�eafio�!,.� .,��.:�. �oost(6ne4.uoaam�inII�eaiaountaf
i at S per mon�br mo�s_
Local Fo�e or L�ui Ad asid Arvasd
�NeQiod C-/Moencv oost eiaared w�dt oar6al�t
The Local A�ge�finit�si"�aAa�es firat pa�b said T�e 2.3,�aid poicies ard p�ooedwes,and as
a oond�on fo pa�merd of the feder-af iunds o�6gabed,it aooe�ls and wdl oompl�t wdh 8�e appGc�le prwisia�s set
�beaow.�ldopted by oRicial ac,Tion on
, , No.
PI�OVISIO[IS
i. Scope of Work
The Age�r sba0�sovide ali thc cwrk,lebor,materials,mmd services neccssazy to puform�hc project whic6 is dacn'bcd and set forth in detail in
Ihe"Pmjed DesQip�on"and"fype of Work."
Whrn the Smte ac�for and on bchalf oF thc Ageocy,lt►e State shall be deemcd an agent of the Agcnry and shad perform thc scrvias dcscn'bed
and indicafed in"Type ot Work''on tbe face of this agrecment,ia accordance�vith plans and specifiwtion5 as PToPo���AB��Y�ePProved
by U►e State and ihe Fcderal Highway Administration.
W6en Ihe Stafe�Ls for the Agency but is not wbject to the right of control by the Agwc�.t6c State shall have the right to perfortn the avrk
subjed w the ocd'urery procedura of the Statc and Fedecal Highw�ay Administration.
If. Delegation of Authority
TLe Stabe is w�'lli�to fulfill tho rcsponsibilities to the Federal Government by the acLuinisdatioo oPthis prvjed.71ie Agency agrees Ihat the Statc
shall have the full mrthority to carry out this administration. 7he State shall n,wiew, p�ooess, and apprvve documents required 1br fede�al sid
reimburse�oent in accordancc with federal requi�ments.If the State ed��ertises and awm�ds tl�e co�tract,the State will further act for the Ageocy ia all
maners concerob►g the project as requested by the Agency.Lf the Local Agency advertises and awards the projed,the State shall�eview the work to
ensvre cooformity wilh the approved plans and specificadons.
III. Project Administr�ation
Certain typcs oC�wrk end services shall bc provided by the State on this project as requested by the Agency and described in the Typc of Work
above.In addition,ttie State will furnish qualified personnd for the supervision and inspection of the work in progreu.Un L.ocal Agency a�v�rtised
and awarded pro�ects,the supervision and inspection sha11 be limited to ensuring all work is in conformancc�vith approved plans,specifications,and
federal aid requ�een►ents.T6c salary of such engineer or other supervisor and all other salaries and rnsts incurred by State forces upon the project
will be cons�dered a cosl thereof.All costs related to this pcoject incurred by employees of the Slate in the customary manner on highwap payrolls
and vouchers shall be charged as costs of the project.
IV. Availability of Records
All project reeords in suppoA of all costs incurted end aclual expenditures kept by the Agency ere to be maintained in accordanee w�th Iceel
govemment accountmg procedures prescribed by the Washinglon State Auditor's Office, the U.S. Deparlment of Transportation, and the
Washington State Departrncnt of Transportation.The records shall be open to inspec6on by the Slate and Federa)Govemment at all reasonable times
and shall be retained and made availab]e for such inspection for a period of not less than three years from the final payment of any federal eid funds
to the Agency.Copies of said records shall be fumished to the State and/or Federal Government upon request.
V. Compliance with Provisions
7'he Agenc�shall not incur any federal aid participation costs on uny classification of work on lhis project until authorized in wTiting by the State
for each classification.The clessifications of worl:for projects are:
1.Preliminary engineering.
2.Rig6t of way acquisition.
3.Project conshuction.
Once written suthorization is given,die Agency agrees to show continuous progress tfirough monthly billings.Failure to show continuous progress
may result the Agency's project becoming inactive,as described in 23 CFR 630,and subject to de-obligation of federal aid funds and/or agreement
closute.
lf right of way acquisition,or actufll construction of the road for which preliminary engineering is undertaken is not sterted by the close of the
tenth fiscal year following the fiscal year in which prcliminury�engineering phese aas authorized,tl�e Agency will repay to the Stete the sum or sums
of federal funds paid to the Agency under the terms of this egreement(see Section IX).
If actual construcdon of the road for Hhich ri�ht of��ay has been purchased is not started by the close of the tenth fiscal year following the fiscal
�ear in which the right of�vay phase wns suthor�zed.the Agenc� �tiill repa� to the Statc the sum or sums of fede�al funds paid to thc Agency undar
the terms ofthis agreement(see Section 1X).
DOT Fortn 140-039 EF 2
Rwised 032014
7Le Aga��es t�an�oroansu,na;oo�m�idc t�e m�r�naea�rx�y.r�m the rm�oruiss p�a A�
Wal'am��o�In�t6r m�i�al�s se!6S appm�ed�ide design st�ds app�te to tlos das oFh�g6v►ays,cnn tUoagh mcL ad�oml
a�rl�a f�od niQbaai Pederal aid,,r�,�'.'y,..,�.
iLc ll�cag�a�sa6lh�vn frdaal aed hig6v►ag ooas�a�tion Qmjeds,�e c��6��ad is�ioos a�ic6 aq�pfS to�d�
eda�c b�e 6r�s o!fcda-al patid�ioa m Ihe Pcojxt Wst s�aII 6e�m ILe c��t d�c ca�aclnt fa�io amepJde the ooahad a�hm thc
aoiolt�d Gme.
1A. Payment and Parfial Reunbursement
1bC 10��Sl Or�IG pIpJGC��YIC�LLI��iCY1C���.�.�y�:.�:;, s n C�S�S�O�!E�Of dfC S�C 6 10 bC��I�IC�'80d�f�fC
�c. ,�,:,.,�,,. F� � �n � in aoou�danae x�eW 1hc Fale�al T..�..,�� ,�::� nd, $�a�a, s c� us �a oa-�or
L,;...,:,y..,�,..: �d Bodget ea�adats A-IQ2 and A-133.7'6e St�e sln0 mt be ntl�t+dr�oa��le far aay of Ihc aosis ottbe ProJeet-The A�ea�
shall 6e s�y rtspmm'61e fur all ca�s ssocia�ed�sit6 the p�oject aF6icb ae oot t�d blr Ue f�od�xal Gov�a�!_i�otl�iqg m thes
�sfi�6a oonstruod as a paomise by ffie State as to 1be�H w oalwe of Cadaal patixipa6o�o m th's project
The Ageacy shaU biU the staie fot federa)sid projod aosts inc�od m omttcam�ailh appli�abte fedaal and sfa6e�vs 7Le agency sldl
mm��c 6me dspsod 6d�rcocipt of federal aid fimds md svbsaqirffi pay�oF�ned oori�. F.xpeudihues by t6e[.ocal Ageac�for
��.1�,�,.�:, . �� _ e6g�ble, partic�atioolmlea8Wnentindtrctoust
geaaal adm'm�n,supemsroq m�d othu o�zri�ead shaII oot be far fed�a] pl�
retamed��m a000rdanoe��th We cegulatrous outfined'a�2 Cflt Z25-Cost Panc�Cor Smte,Local,ead indiaz►Tnbal C. ,:,�,.....,�, and
7Le Siate cv�pay 1'a St�inamed cos�on the pcoject Followm8 PaY��the State sha11 Wl thc Federal Govcmmem for rcim6�usanwt of
those oosts eligibk for federa)participntion to the extent that such costs are aunbulaMe and propedy aflocable to this projed.'[he State s�ll WI the
Agcn�y for drat portion of Sl�e oosts w6ich u�ere not roimbiused by l6e Federal Govrnuneat(soe Sedion 1J�.
1. Projeet Constrodion Costs
Pmject oons�uction finaocing�w'U be accomplished by�onc of the thrw methods as mdic�ied in ihis agrcemenL
Mst6od A-T6c Agency will place with thc Slate,within(20)days after the execution of lhe conswction contracl,an advance in t6e amowt of
fhe�'s share oCthe total aonstruclion oost based on the oonhact award The Sfele will ootify Ihe Agency oFthe er.act anmunt to be deposi�od
�rith Stale.The State will pay all costc incurred under the mntract uponprcsentstioa otprogress bitlings from the contractor.Folb«�in�such
payvients, the State will submit e billing lo the Federal Govemment fw the fedecal aid paeticipation shue of the wst Whcn the pm�ect is
su6stantially eompleted and final actual costs of the pr�ject can be detem�ined,the State tviU present the Agency with e fmal billing showing thc
amount due the State or the amount due the Agency.This billing un'll be ckared by either a peyment from the Agency to the Stste or by a mfund
fmm the State to thc Agency.
Methad B- The Agency's s6are of the wtal constniction cost as sho�vn on the Face oCtivs agreement shatl be withheld trom its monthly fuel tax
allotmeots.7bc face of this egreement establishes thc montbs io which the withhold'mg shall take place and the exact amouot to be«�thheld each
month.The extcnt of withholding will be conf irtned b�•Ictter from thc 5tate et ihc time of contracl award.Upon�ceipt of progress billings from the
cont�acto,the Stale will submit such billings to the Pederel Government for payment of its perticipating poAion of such billings.
1ltethod C-The Agcncy may submit vouchers lo the State in the format ptescn'bed by the State,in duplicate,aot more fhan once per month for
those rnsls etigble for Federal participation to the extent that suc6 costs ere directly ettributable and properly allocable to this project.Expeoditures
by the Local Agency for maintenance,general edministration,sapervision,and other overhead shell not be eligible for Federel participation unless
claimed undcr a prev�ously approved indirect cost plan.
The State shail reimburse the Agency for the Pederal share of eligible project cosls up to the emount shown on the Face of this ag�ement At the
time of sudit,the Agency���11 provide documentation of nll costs incurred on the project.
Thc State shall bill ihc Agency for ell costs incurred by the State relative to the projec�The State shall elso bill the Agency for Uie federal funds
paid by the State lo the Agency for project costs which are subsequently detertnined to be ineligiblc for federal participation(see Section 1X).
VII. Audit of Federel Consultant Contracts
The Agency,if services of e consultant ere required,shall be responsible Por audit of the consultant's records to determine eligible federal eid
costs on the project The rcport of said audit shull be in the Agency's files and made available to the State and the Federel Government.
, M sudit shall be conducted by the WSDOT Intemal Audit Off'ice in accordance with generally eccepted govemmental auditing standards as
issued by the United 5tates General Accounting Office b� the Comptroller General of Ihe United States;WSDOT Manual M 27-50, Consultattt
Authorizatioq Selec6on,end Agrecment Administration;memoranda of understanding beh��een WSDOT end FHWA;and Office of Management
and Budget Circular A-133.
If upon audil it is found that overpayment or pnrticipation of federal money in ineligible items of cost has occurred,the Agency shall reimburse
the State for the amount of such o�erpuyment or excess participation(see Section 1}Q.
VIII. Single Audit Act
The Agency,as a subrecipient of federal funds,shall udhere to the federal O�ce of Management end Budget(OMB)Circular A-133 as��•cil as all
appGcable federal and state statutes end regulations. A subrccipient wfio expends SSOO,OOU or more in federal a«ards from sll sources during a
grven fiscal year shall have a single or program-specific sudit performed for that year in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A-133.
Upon conclusion of the A-133 audit,ihe Agency shall be responsible for ensuring that a copy of the report is trensmitted promptly to the State.
IX. Payment of Billing
The Agency agrees that if payment or urrangement for payment of an�of the State's billing relative to the project(e.g.,Stnte force w•ork,projcct
cnncellation,overpa�•ment.cost ineligible for federal participation,etc.)is not made to the Stale within 45 days aRer the Agency has been billed,the
State shatl effect reimbursement of the total sum due from the regular monthly fuel tax allotments to the Agency from the Motor Vehicle Fund. No
additional Federal project funding will be appro�ed until full payment is received unless othenvise directed by the Director ofLocal Programs.
�T R�eviaed 03/20t4F 3
X. TraA'tc Ccnbnol,Sign�n9.Marbn9,and Roadruay!�,;.�u..� �:��,..
Thc l�gmc.y a�eot PamA au�eh�s b bc aiade m�ie pave�o��'o[�g�md tra�x oa�os�d m IL's pojad wtifwol prior
appcvval o�8�e Staue�d Fedeal H"e�af A:I,.��,-,,,. :'�.. 7Lc Age��m�ll odt asfaD or p�rmit to be�iled ms�si�s,sig�s,a�oo(
n am6arm�ce er�fbe s�ada�s appioved by Oe Fid�al�A:�:��'�;�..,:�a md MATPCD Th AgmcS m"0,at ds oau a�pasG�ao
d. �",r�. �,.,�.�taoeacdfr�'Qi'sagv'ee�m-
Xl. ltld@lI1D�y
The Ageocy shsll 6old die Fcdeta!Cosana��d the State ba�mlcs from msd s�al!poarss mmd defead al�own e�pe�e aA cl�s.d�ands�
�s�s,afi�thQ at la�►or equitY Irra�t�de Ag�enc},Stao�ar Fe�8aa1 Corenmront,uisng Gom t6e ABea��s Qec�oq .,�',� ,.�.,or
6v7iae b pafocm�y of tGe p�m%�ms of tL's ag�eanem,arof�y ali�er a�emeot or oo�t ooaa�d nith ttr"s sgraamad,or�bs Kason
oft�ee p�nw' 'on oC td�Smfe or Fede�al Go�+am��We p�ajad,PROVIDI'D�ootlim�g 6aein�aD ioq�rire dieAg�c�6�rambaots�tbe State or
dic Fedecat Go�t or the�St�c.��art of 6odHs icj�a}•to pnsons or dam3@e to p�upe�ty cau�ed by or�eg- �ao t6e suk oegl'igence oI'
X0. Nonds�'„�:', �:�'on Provlsion
1�'o(iaWity stmll�to the S�or Federal Goe�mnent eacce�rt as a�p�sl��pwided herain.
The Agiency s}m0 not fiisc�"voio�e on the�is oC�,colo,t►a�ocml origin,or so:in the award�d perl'om�m�oe oF�y USDOT�ed
1K
en
conhact midlor ag�eemrni or m the admiaistration of ils DBE program or 16c�equuemrnts of 49 CFR Pari 26. The Agcnc��sim0 tala�all noor�y
aad reasonabk �ps unda 49 CFR Part 26 to ensme oondi,��..'..,�,;'.�•„� u� the awaed md admiaisUation of USDOT�d conhac�s and
�nx�rts. The WSDOTs DBE pragtan�,as Rqtrined by 49 CFR Patt 26 and as apQmved by USDOT,is inoorpotatod by �sfiaence in lhis
agreen►ent_ Impkmenlatioo of this progiam is a k�l obligation and falure to carry out rts teims shall be treated as a violation of d»s sgeacent
Upon notiticatioo to il�e Agency of its tailure to�ry oul"ns appmved progran�,lhe Depa�vneat may impose senctions ac prorided for�mder Pmt 26
snd may,in appropriate cases,Rfcr the matter for cnfo�aane�rt under 18 U.S.C.1001 and/or the Prog�am Fraud Civil Rcmcdies Ad ol'1986(31 U.S.
C.3801 et seq.).
The Agency hereby agrees thet it will incorporate or cause to be inooeporated into eny contract tor construetion wvrlS or modification theruoS as
dcfined in ihe rules and reguletions of lhe Secrelary of labor in 41 CFR Chapter 60,ufiich is paid for in�vhole or in part wilh fimds oblsined from
the Federal Govemment or borrowed on the cralit of the Fedcral Govemmcnt puisuant w a granl, conhact, loan. +�+a�*�+ce, or guarantee or
uaderstanding pursuant to any fede�al program inwlviag such grant,contract,loan,insurance,or guarantee,the mquired rnntract pro��isior�for
Federsl-Aid Contrads(FHWA 1273),located in Chapter 44 oP1he Local Agency Guidelines.
7be Agency further agnes that it w�"11 be bound by the above equal oppoAunity clause with respect to its o��m employment pactioes when it
participetes in federally assisted conswctionµork Provided,that if thc applicant so participating is a 5tete or Local Govemment,the abovc cqual
opportunity cleuse is not applicable to eny agency,instrumentality,or subdivision of such govemment which docs not pazticipate io work on or
nttder the contract.
Tlie Agency also egrees:
(I) To assist end cooperate actively wilh the Slste m obtaining the compliance of contracton and subcontractors with the equal opportunity
clause and rules,regulations,and relevant orders of 1he Secietary of Labor.
(2) To fumish thc State such info�mation as it may�equire for the supervision of such compliance and lhat it will othmvise assist the State in
the discharge of its primary responsibility for securing complience.
(3)To refrain from entering into any contract or contract modification subject to Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965,�vith a
contractor debarred from, or who has aot d�monstrated eligbility for, govemment contracts end federally assisled construcUon contracts
pursuanl to the Executive Ordcr.
(4) To carry out such sanctions and penalties for violation of the equal opporiunity ciause as may be imposed upon contractors and
subcontractors by the State,Federal Highwuy Administration,or the Secretnry of Lebor pursuant to Part II,subpart D of the Executive Order.
!n addition,the Agency agrees that if il fuils or refuses to comply with thcse undertakings,ihe State may take any or all of 1he following
actions:
(a) Cancel,tcnninate,or suspend this egreemenl in whole or in part;
(b) Refrain from extending any further assistance to the Agency under the program with respect to which the failum or refusal
occurred until satisfactory assutance of future compliance has been received from the Agency;end
(c) Refer ihe case to the Department of Justice for appropriate lega!proceedings.
XIII. Llquidated Damages
The Agency hereby agrees thut thc liquidated damages provisions of 23 C�R Pert 635,Subpan 127,es supplemented,relative to the amount of
Federtil articipalion in the projeci cost,shall be eppliceble in the event the contraclor fails to complete the contract wilhin the contract time. Failure
rt
to inclu e liqnidated damages provision will not relieve the Agenc}•from mduction of federal participation in acco�dance H�ith this peragraph.
DOT Fwm 140-039 EF
Revisad 03I2014 4
X!1/. T.�, ,.� �':�� , for Pubtic Conveoience
'ILe Seae�y of[he�'a�State DeperEme�[oC Tc�oriafioo may i�the coa�met u�abolc,aa�m time m tmx m p�7.
R�IIRlT_
���TbC f'0��f��I[I��1BO�@6lm'3��1�C��t Of�lOa QO�[fN'ISiC
m 7�1C C00�6�fRLi��Om�1l'OR4��R"Q111hC i�'O!{C�8�IGSII�Of m�AQfliY 0(t�GT O}�QIC pR9�[itlL�l tt'S�GQ 16 d7C
,,.�..,:�,;:.Of�tg Qt m 1��OI��I�Of 8a E7�11�C OItkT Of fIC PIC�GOI W GO��Saf Yf B1C Sf�C�q�i R'S�CCI�[�C
�,�a� ...i,..OftO[Ygf/60010[i
�� 1bG OD�iaC�f 6 QICN�[�OIO(HOOW��R{�tbC WUik�It2900 Of a�OI8ly S�EC�,� Q+d[f Of 0
�n or��►�a������or��;��,-iy�a�w��W�:�ot��a�c�
m��
�4� n►�s�a�y��r�a���F�ir�na��v�,d�n��x a�a.�.
(s� n�s�a����a►���m�n��oru�sr�.
XV. Venue ior Ciaims andlor Causes of Ac6on
Por ihe comznienec of Ibc parties to this contiad,it is agroed that any claims and/or causes of adion ahid�fLe I,ocal Ageocg 6as ag,ainst the
State of Was6ing,ton,growiog out oF tbis oonUad or t6e projoet with«fiich it is oonasood,shall be bmughi onl�in ibe Saperior Caat for Thntston
County.
XVI. Certification Regarding the Restrictioris of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying
'�e approving authority certifies,to the best of his or her{:nowiedgc and bclief,thal•
(I) No fede�al approprialed funds have bcen paid or will be paid,by or on behalf oCthe undersigncd,to any persoa for ioflueacing or attempting
to intluence an o1}icer or employce of any federal agency,a member of Cong�ss,an o�cer or cmployee of Congress,or an employae of a mcm6er
of Congress in connection with the awarding of any federal contract,the making of any federal grani,ihe making of any federal loan,t6e entering
into of any caoperative ag�eement,and the exiensioq continuatioq rene�val,amendment,or modificatioo of aay fc�deral cantract,p,rant,loan,or
coopera6ve agrcemenl.
(2) If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have bcea paid or will bc paid to any persoo for influeocing or attempting to influeoce an
ollicer or employee of aay federal agency,a member of Congess,an ofticcr or emptoyee of Con�s,or an employee of a member of Congrcss in
rnnnection with this federal contracl,grant,loan,or coopctative agreement,thc undersigned sha 1 compktc and suMnil the Standatd Fortn-LLL,
"Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying,"in accordance with its inshuctions.
(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all svbaK�ards at all tiers
(including subgrants,and conlracts end subrnntracts under grants,subgants,toans,and cooperative agreemeats)which exceed 5100,000,and that all
such subrec�p�ents shallcertify and disclose accordingly.
This certification is e material represeotation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction��ac made or entered into. Submission
of this certification as a prercquisite for making or entering into this hansaction imposed by Section 1352,TiUe 31,U.S.Code. An}•person who fails
to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil pcnalty of not less than 510,000 and not morc than S100,000 for each such failure.
Additio�al Provisions
DOT Form 710-039 EF
Rehsed o3nou 5
City of Renton
Rainier Ave S Corridor Improvements-Phase 4
1. Estimate for Consulting Services 12/03/2014
Item Discipline Manhours Average Rate Estimated
of Pay Cost
1 Project Management 1,000 $ 70 $ 70,000
2 Surveying and Base Mapping � 800 $ 50 $ 40,000
3 Project Design Criteria 600 $ 55 $ 33,000
4 Traffic data Analysis �^ ` 400 $ 55 $ 22,000
5 Outreach 500 $ 50 $ 25,000
__ _ _____ _.�__..___----______.. ---- ---�--__��
6 Alternatives Analysis 600 $ 55 $ 33,000
--- -- - - - - -- - - ------ --- -____-- ---
7 Geotechnical Exploration 500 $ 50 $ 25,000
8 Environmental/Permitting 400 $ 70 $ 28,000
9 Design Development 2,200 $ 55 $ 121,000
10 WSDOT Coordination 600 $ 55 $ 33,000
11 Constructability 600 $ 55 $ 33,000
- - ---- -------- - - - - ------ --- - -
12 ROW Plans/Legal Descriptions 800 $ 55 $ 44,000
13 Utility Coordination �� 900 $ 50 $ 45,000
_.._ _ -------- -----------_- - - -- -
14 Plans,Specifications and Estimates 3,200 $ 55 $ 176,000
�^� �v � Totals 13,100 $ 728,000
Overhead Cost 200% $ 1,456,000
Fixed Fee 30% $ 655,200
Reimbursabie
A. Reproduction Expenses $ 4,000
B. Plotter Mylar $ 6,800
C. Other $ 50,000
Total $ 20,800
Totai Consultant 2 860 000
$ , .
2. Estimate for Agency Services
Item Discipline Manhours Average Rate Estimated
of Pay Cost
1 Project Management 900 $ 50 $ 45,000
2 Plan Review 400 $ 45 $ 18,000
Totals 1,300 $ 63,000
Overhead Cost 1009'a $ 63,000
Reimbursable
Other $ 5,000
Total $ 5,000
Total Agency $ 131,000
3. Estimate for State Services $ 15,000
� Grand Total $ 3,006,000 �
H�\Division.s\TRANSPOR.TAI�PLANNINGVuliana\Rainier Phase 2\WSDOT�Design Estimate_Rainier_4.�IsM
T �� Loca�Agency Federal Aid
�/ ospat�a��rae�sporta�n Pr+nject Prospectus
oama'12/03/2014
1� I � Ic �
�� , � f ���I092278894
�� � � ���� F���916001271
�City of Renton BY Or�o �� ou�
----- -- ---- � - --- -- ---- — -- - �
��T� N 47°28'47"
SlaztLab3�de -_ Startln�de W 122°13'2"
Rainier Ave S Corridor Improvements-Phase 4 N ,q7�2g��q��
��„a� �� W 122°13'S"
Pro�ed Temura From-To Nearest City lJame Projed Zp Code(+4)
S 3rd St(SR 900)to NW 3rd PI Renton 98057
- - - - -- ------..._ _.--- - -- - --------_ _�. -- - -- - -
---
From To Length of Proj� Award Type
oj
0.5 mi __i ----- � Locat ❑ Local Forces ❑State ❑ Rahoad
-- _ -
--- --- -
Federai Agen�y City Number County Number Courriy Name WSDOT Region
------ ---
0 FHwa ❑ Others 1070 17 King , Northwest Region
Cangressional Dishid -- - Legislative Distrids Urban Area Number -
9 - j�37 - I PSRC
Phase Esti ated Cost �F'ages Federri Funds P Date �
(Nearest Hundred Ddiar) (Nearest tiundred Dotla� (Nearest Hundred DoDair) Month Y�r
P.E $3,006,000 $406,000 $2,600,000 02/2015
-- - -- - ----------- -- - - --- -- -
R/W $1,500,000 $200,000 $1,300,000 02/2017
Const $ 14,800,000 $ 6,900,000 $7,900,000 02/2018
i --- -- - - ----- - -- - — ---------- - - - - -
Totai $ 19,306,000 $7,506,000 $ 11,800,000 .
DesCripti011 Of EXistin� Flcility(Existing Design and Prese�t Condition}
Roadway Width Number of Lanes
varies-68-76 varies- 4-6 lanes
Rainier Ave S,from S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI is a principal arterial with 4 to 6 lanes of traffic and daily volume of 40,000
vehicles.
Description of Proposed Work
Descrip6on of Proposed Work(Attach additional sheet(s}if necessary)
Phase 4 will extend the improvements from S 3rd St(SR 900)to approximately 1,000 feet north of Airport Way.
Improvements include extending a southbound BAT Lane from S 2nd St to S 3rd St,pedestrian improvements with
street scaping, segment of a regional ped/bike path trail(Lake Washington Loop Trail)from Airport Way to 1,000 feet
noRh of Airport Way, installation of a pedestrian actuated tra�c signal(Hawk), pedestrian scale illumination,transit
facility upgrades,access management, new traffic signal and upgrades of existing traffic signals.
Local Agency Contact Person 'Title I Phone
Juliana Fries Pro ram Develo ment Coordinator 425-430-7232
--..- -- --- ---�-------p.. .- - -- ----. ._.. . - -
Mailing Address �City !State Zip Code
1055 S Grady Way � Renton ��p ' 98057
By - - ----- - - -___ _- ---...
Project Prospectus Approval � Approving Authority
Title Transportation Design Supervisor Date
DOT Form 140-101 EF Page 1 of 3 ♦Previous Editlona Obsolete♦
Revised 04/2014
��� ��r� �o-� �
City of Renton Rainier Ave S Corridor Improvements-Phase 4 12/03/2014
�ofF, ��� �.�:.�Work
R�T7P�����APP�I Road�nray Y� �Number ot Lanes
�I�vC.�,;� ,C.� ❑PaihlTrad ❑3�R
�F,��. �� .��� �Pedesfiram I Fac�7iiies 0 2-R 68 to 76 4-6-- - --- --
❑Ra�road ❑Parldn9 ❑06te�r
❑Bridge
Geometric Design Data
Deser$�6on � Thruugh Route � t�rosaroad
Federal �urn� 0 P��� p u� O���
M'mor Arterial
Functiunal ❑Rural ❑CO� ❑Ru�al ❑��
Classification ❑NHS �Manor Collector ❑NHS Q Min�or Cotlector
❑Local Aocess ❑Locat Aocess
Terrain �Flat ❑Roll ❑MouMain ❑Flat ❑Roll ❑Mountain
--- ------ _ �---- -- - -- -._.....- - -- - -- — --------- -- - -
Posted S�eed - 30 mph--_
----- ---- - - - -- - --- - --
- -
�' n S 30 mph _ _
..-. —_ -- --- -----_.. --- - - - - -- -
Exis6n�ADT_ 40,000
-- — --- __- -- -- - -- -- - --- -- - --- -
Desi n Year/iDT N/A
------- - ------- ----- - ---
Design Y�r N/A -- - - -
---- - - - -- --- - - -
--- - --- - --- -- -
Design Hourty Volume(DFI� N/A
Perfotmance of Work
Preliminary Engineering Wil{Be Performed By Others Agency
Consultant 99 "� 1 °�
- _ -- -- -- ------ -- - - - - -- - --- --- --- -- - -
Construction Will Be Performed By Contrad Agency
Contract 100 % 0%
Environmental Classification
❑ Class I-Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) � Class II-Cateyorically Excluded(CE)
❑ Project Involves NEPA/SEPA Section 404 0 Projects Requiring Documentetion
Interagency Agreement (Documented CE)
❑ Class III-Environmental Assessment(EA)
❑ Project Involves NEPA/SEPA Section 404
Interagency Agreement
Environmental Considerations
DOT Form 140-101 EF Page 2 oi 3
Revised 04R014
��► E Pco�#T�be �Data �
City of Renton �116th Ave SE Sidewalk 12/01/2014
Rigtrt o�Way
❑tro�a�wa7r� ����►�1�
`As aon�a�;an�eq�ea t�r tne �No Refoca� ' ❑RelocaGon Reo�ed
corebad can be�o..., w u�,;.3 �
w�Eim�toe�lb�g right of v�ray.
Qes�on of t1�ty Retoptio�or A�and Exisfrrg Majo�Struchrres Imrt�lved'm ihe P�ject
At this time no relocation is anticipated.
�FAA involvement
Is any airport bcated within 3.2 kilometers(2 miles)of the proposed pmject?� Yes ❑ No �
Remarks �
This project wiii have no affect on the airport operations
This project has been reviewed by the legislative body of the administration agency or agencies,or ifs designee, and
is not inconsistent with the agency's comprehensive plan for community development.
Agency
Date By
Mayor/Chafrperson
DOT Form 140-101 EF
Revised 04/2014 Page 3 ot 3 ♦previous Editions Obsolete♦
Typicbrl Cross Sect�ons
�a,�s��r w%r�c�as�a��r�c,�
- :. ;..
,�' , �
i
�- -
� t��� �
_ '�� �` �� �� �
�_ , � ,_ , , � � _,
� S- I s � �r � �r 1 �r � u� � �r 1 g � �r �
S�dewa9r Pla+eer 7mr.d tm+a Trrne!ta� N1t�anf Tinvel La�e T�avd Lnne Piaiec Loke
Turn La� Waslvgtw�
toap Trofl
R�av�n�s from s z�d srreer tc A;rporr woy►
� �x �' ,y
� � v
�� � =� �i �R #
, � , , � � , , � �
I e� I s I �2• I �r I ir I n� I �r I s I a• I
Sidewalk PlaMer Travel lane Travel lane Medlan/ Travel lane Travel Lone Plonter S�dewolk
Turn Lane
Rainier Avenue S/rom S 3rd Sireet to S 2nd Street
�
�Y 1�I t •�
• t b,•r �„cj t a:
.
" ti
i
�.,� "�` � �
i i i i � i i � i i
I s• � s� I ta� � n� I >>' I i�• I n' I iz' I s• I e' �
Sidewolk lantx Business Travel Lane Travel Lane Madion/ Travel lane Travel Lane %antor Sidewalk
Access and T�rn Lane
TransN
II
�
Jurlsdictton: Rentan
Gounty: Ki�9 TiUe: Rainier Ave 5 Go�ridor lmprovements-Phase 4
Projeat Number. REN-36 Federei FurKts Stste Furxls l.ocat Funde Phmse Totai �
� Fundin Source _`._.�._ �-_._--- __ �� �2,880�000
ate S _.�..__
! programmed Year Ot�luj.� ..__._.._ .__ $Z.�,� � SO
Phase STP _. - ----- -------� _—__ $� "" $4t��000 �409�OUt1 �
3l1115 _ -
PIE-Des�9n 2015 _-. SO y
2015 3l1115 Lacai
�I P/E•Oesign Tatais: �2.8��Q00 Sa $408,000 53,009,U00
� WSDOT P113:
i
� Federal AidIFTA Grant Number(s}: MaJ4r Wldeni�9--HOV
i impravament Type:
�� Functio�ai C►ass: Principal Arterial-OVER 5,00� Tg• NW 3rd P1
Fram: S 3rd 5t{SR 904? `
I'i Location: Rairner Ave S/N ��$�analiy 5ignifkant. Envlronmentai 8tatue:
Total Cost �19.3Q6.D00
Year of Expenditurelor Yeta�C°gt= 241`� MTP Reference(s): '�3�
�ITp gtatus: Candidate
1)BSCTi�tion:
Phase
4 will extend the imProvements from S 3rd St tSR 900)to eP t sc P n9�segQ40 feef aQ�{onA pedlb ke path�tta I(l.eke w�ifaolll up9�apdes,�a icae gA� ��y
Lane from S 2nd St to S 3rd St,pedestr�an improvements with stree e��rlan sca(e itturrtinat4on,tra
to�1n000meeet n�traffic signal andiupgr�ades of exist�ing treffic sig asd��c signal{Havvlc}.P�
m a9e
. _ Appendix A:Pro�ect Daearlptlone
_. .._ _ A_ 21?
10130114
f
--------------
--------------------
--------------
--------------
-_�--------------
--------------
. ,,.
�
�--.�
:,.-
t`. � #�: �*-�,��`-.-:���
����z�.�-.�, ..�-�-'
: � a°;t�`.�,:�s
3' �4 ��,�' ��
:L �Y,�.. � � ' ,,.
�. �!r $��.�'���t.r.,��� ''�:� � . �,�!i�'��y+�.
�;i ,s `u.
� v ���', +� ..E �} ' l }f�y
. � ".�"S^�>r� �r i �`' ,� �""X ._� , "-.�,�� WL'�i
'�y',Y r�►.,��,F f�jq� ��1 �� `... �' t ,��':;� ��"{R�.
,.,.,. ..s. "� .�,a�.�,_.,�„,,. _ y,' ti � 1� � � �
-� �a a "'�tt'"'��,�k-, 3` ` . .i -�: 't �ty� S � -
�t �, :'_....� 3 E � '�3.� � � +.�� '�a�,.�"2.t.�k.�r,.`.,,�r .
.�;� � ;�r..S'.-*+"6�,,,��� -��- 11�,�' �'� +`i i ���, ���n.
'.+...r`r� Mi i ,d'r;�;;�ac f z;., '�,� ,xy .�,1 .�.it � .� .�'�1 x ���; +''�"��
��'�� ' �; � {� '.`Y ��� ,,,t ' .,u, ��� . k"...� �'��' w�t
�' .w :cv M.,,.
��^'1%.ir �-'..q....E �k 4 '�� • c'�1 �, �����,�•+�.vt
; y
�,,��� �� ♦ ..�y� �.i .�� �� ,,�, .�U �e ' �-
+ t"�1�• .. � ' .7 k; ��i �. � ��' S 1� s'*�' ,.
�}`` �r`7MK"t* ���c ' ���� ��`� y'�. ' ;k �e',.. � �� � .�� k ��' .
i '"�.�
� .-.- Y-r; ! �. ,,.� z ^" ; � � £'� ����..,. i`, \ ��i'�r^
�a . y S� � � 1 a, '"�`.r-
G z"K�r."' f�.� ��� � ' r.
a „r ,���, Y � ;n'r`
,:----"" 7a. i" � �
?j^4 = 4-'��"�,. '�y�_ � . , -���. �..� � � ,� �i',.�°t,b�r` -.
� �`�'�* «�--a t«r ' c. � i �
a �a..,. z +y—y�.'�k a.r4 '� � �i; ��:��`�*�.
"� ' . wy'���f.*�'.� �..� -.:-0 +y,.,�.+� ., ��i"... ��.
�x, f. �',�j�a�ap� }`. F �t`,j„�r^ ' �.�, ..�r � f¢ �:,.
r ,x,c y�� 1„ . '�.
" *y, � � �.- ..-«.� -�� S�i �+ . � �Xw
y �s�! t".�+ •.� �r . ,� �'i �� �'
� � k. ..fa Ys3 yA� +Z.a � !�.` y �, 2 Y • J1
K � ,r ��m�= ,�,�.. �-} ^'....r�+"!'.''5.�� .r .:3- � Fy�
� �'��r .`� C � `�}�,iy�� : �,. 1 i .,� ��^ � �.�' T+ .yM,
� '�j '�SJ'S.w +j'� . �i' �'. ..�M. +�E"'€ f .,, '��+'+2'
�w+��Y'��,*,yy''"<z r s-�� � � s �S i ,•� � 'L }Z �'i� - ~~ ��Fr F `7,�''y� ���:
�� °- t'�� �� �%- . ��• � �_W� ���`,. � ':..
.k.:v • - -. � .� w T£ - �� �it .e
� � i .i i .��'+ ��b"�,`3 S ..x� -: . ; �� � '�r.
�► s ,-:jP . � [� S�y � t
�`'++ '{•, 1'�✓���Fj "r" f .�'{�.��l':�"i �r t�y �M���w �1�e ¢,i.r � < �� `t �x��}'.
i� .i . _ 3 z
t�s 'i � a,+"'; a r� (�r 4 .+`�• .. . '4M 1 La.�''',., ., �� �7i��
�� �,� Y1z`r� ,y.�+� Y��, =� ,��� t ; � �}7 i�`' '�• "�t?S? ,.'�'. S€s��.'ra.y�:;S
o! � ��''� � •�,.�.� ��j�.,. � �i r�l� $ ; � t� b �' ��5 j '��,T'�t a
����'' �� � e7y�� �.. t r �4 '` ` •\:1�, � �ti��� �, �;Z- '�x :� j_'�`..,.'r� �' 1� Y�� '��t.�,y.;'��
'�`� �� .51;� .�.''t �yr�'4 �y i� '�� �'�}�"�� '�" �y �r 1'� �` ti' �S�G '�T:-'f }�t n s irS }��' t,:,i.
.�� �g � ~,�+.' � 4 !�.�S _�r� ;� �p �a ?-[J �`�� r�+f .d� �',' �" T r'a,,�'`♦s.
�'4a,� ,"'�" "� ���9' r`�. a'`'!i'`Y " ` "�,. �`' LM p� � � .�r� '�� �. ,"�� '�`�! :+ � R�"'^�y�+./7
1 r.� t a
��t�� i` Y. .�� + � y� i ��♦ .�.� �Y y�� �4 Fy �..c .Jw� � :i� . j �
t'l� ,µ, s r. � a i : t l ��� � * � .7 .�� � #-i V'4s,y,� •'f k F�-P
..r ''t7 7t-�K-�.�y 1 Z :. y ��r �4'� r i .`3'i {L� . _:6=is t' C > � R�i�N
� ..,�, "r �i • .�� �Iv .�t. y r 3"JT � t�!
� �,#�� - "� :y,,.X` '��.; � v;�:� a � + �y,.�� ��� �f .l �}T� y.; ij��
. ' � �
..��,. t'.i�'�+�',��x�ry,J+, .�'�^^!s�'�![f�� s�i ,-� ��+��'-'� �:. . . .,. . ' r �k* ��t �` �� fy-�t� i.�i i�y�`!��y
�" r.`:V�- � S ,� � �•�7t St.`- 1y �,,,„,�- � � �y�. j P� f � h �,,� i s >. �
�; �yt 9'.K"tw. ��K:.r �' � y A �r+"" Lt� �� � � ,�, y �� �� '�J� � �*,. .f:��z,�w�-��� . .�:
r '�.'Fa�'} �. � � t "f ia:< �'7;� � `4r.�y`� � t+�`t '
°�+.r q �� �,,��4� � - � ��.e�"'�Y Y.� , }J1 � R'�,�a:,,-�`. �, G.�rw rs'.�
�'� s;�`�'s���'4 � „� -.�*.i..,. 'a�+�'r'i� ..�*t �{t,# � �a. `�;� j.^,����rl f # `�'``a t �a`�'' ,i
� '�.�„�'"' .� .+y'i1b��,.^�'y.�.iji� � �.jr :]ti♦ �• �,t. �� M1� vY£��f� �,,.`` '� �� ���.
x j /
���y��S„ i��r �! r"`y?s+x-r: ,r.'�+'..� i"y '��� ��_ � .U'�1 4 !r:� ' ;y♦ .4.�e
. . `���,�.�5�'�..�4� �� �� , � �e _��N; _ q'y,+ � .s�� �� �/�"`` .;�;.« ��}'► .-,f
�;~ � � � '{ �.- i:1� �
� {,� ~
��-/+Y p,��'�` —i.. �5�+� ����:'� �"Ai s � '�� '"_'�Y^ t�,Pr ��'�s�ik .'+i5 � � .�
� a
�`r �
ty Y f��i' ��,� `"�C.k.,j. .u"a � ;s�;,p�l, :...�f P „Zp' " + � ,e�l;��` -+i - '�i-.• ti r.�,�.."r.;; J� '�s� �5�
�
�"�",�+R.�t:• �„"k� ��T.}�l�F'.p h s..�x3�'y s� �: �P, �7T��. �t IMI►s� � � �'�� �� .;�„V, r"r�,."i�t� �.. .�,
�E1�._����,,�y h'r ... ��i n �, �{..{. i.� ���o�. ..+�.i �i��� �� . �k:. ;.1� _
! �
�i {i `."�a >S.S�s .�F�i� � +•,,�y�i13 ��e•F� .�- +�`� � . � �} v.. ( r
�Yf N."t�> f 3 r.�� � S'. � ro t.,�, w'"� .r ��w
���.,��f�� .i.� ��� �ri����'a{t�. 31� y�"� �,,f�� 'f,�1 � "' y.s��`� .
. t
�n��"y'�4'a� •t �l�k���y 7''� � �„ �..,„,,, ��/ �1: i*'i. �t �. i�� �a �l �� .� .4�,� . .. � . ".. '
}i��}, Fa [
' ��x'.�2'�;��^::i'�{f!^«3�yf5'_�.9c�a-� 1� i r�r a, r. '1� � � S ��Jp {�..t�1�� �=�� i fs�;�'Tf . . . .
.
..N ,'�'v. �i bsJ .,,,,.»� � `` r . . "4i �'� a t �iPt "�„� 4\*n�. .
, y� d i \ 4 ♦ ^
� • � ��r� .�-^'-_...��j��. - � 'k {� ��� �� ��, '� � --�;b ► .r .
�� � fiR...Y•�^k.�S.��„r�.�S"rt,! r Y �� ."- ���C' i �:� �� �w~t�?�i'-�� � �� �. �'r,'-
k� ', x �,r.,••. ,+�i`} .� ..... �" p� � � ��,� �. y }} �Cr ",'3•`r ��_-5�sccse� :se„ ,.L
'���t�+.a�+� � ��.�i��r"aFy#-�fyI+''��i�-��,'.,l*4� .*�.`'�'�}y��,{�..a '� ' y [j[� � �t.. r � :�-�a r.�.,swti Rt�'• �tr` t1„s .4� � a v :
,
�"ti���f �t.'ij%'a f�v�S""�'ir,'��_�b� {.4�`"t+� � +i� ���li f,f �T �r�J. ��Q. �fi 4';�h� *t�*�~t�� � -r*s
�„r'�yir'�*"'�,6?'f.��-. �� �, t .',if ��> �`4�S'` '
�� . T"" .,..� ..'� � ., �", t
,,�ai'�"'""'��'w�, ;.Y. .._ _ �+,� _ ."': ' +� � . `� : � y�S."�y �.
.
� � �y�� � r .. . ,_�oY^' f� •i� � �Yi ..v���r�:.�'� `^„�i
�. -: t... .�: � �.� t . ��" ".. '� ��.. ..'+L„�'.
}p' � ���p��y�� _ �c r� � ��� �� � ,.j ,r` � 'iY�
{� , �Yf..:3.`"' '�• � , � � �tj i'� ' `;� ��».��R���t �,�' 1C �`,s.�
}� ..+n^,..�^S. f � S' � �3'k ._-�yr�?7 y +� `r a � .
t �� �t� �'+( i� "� :I� � ��j�p�.,� T r� �+���"` � * i` t.�"1•L�i�' ��r:
����A � 'i� �. y'���.-. ."'�, t "�r� ��:4�1.� l���N���+,:r. � 4s Yf . + "�-
�-� :•• ������r � s S.�'-•a t�y ,+ `jQ ��. ;�',�'i� � f ,�
{r,4,! ; .tii. x � iti �"► �"' +�t,
��•.. ' � ��fet ..,,+k.y�� °^ c�'F y�Il :.�I,S �� vW���*'i .. �� 'L x y
- ��'` ..-•,�-..�":"��� �;�;,� =r � .�N::.� �z� �'�'
fG7�r� 7'w;f/' � � � 3 w ¢. �� � � " :}r�.
�f �+ �'� 9 . � �4 i-* �- i
�t ��*K� ,;..+ t'��'" • •� a"'�S a,-� `tz L , f= .�'
e+yr- y( � 'y'�
t, ��'�`' �(4'"���� � 1"�..,�,,,!!''�1����x � r''.'��_(�p5 ��'...•,4'`� � �,.c.,ri r�.� . ��� ..:t '�"�.C'Ji^� ���.
� ' � +}r �y ��..r� �.y��,y "'' . '�j,,'�r '�...-?,�r',�,,. '�`. .� �`y, X b� �,' r'� '� fi '� {L. .
� � �i � �- � � -
�`�' �-i , y�,�'����~1� � � t''�41��T� ° �-���° �' \ �, i ,. "�� l �S .
{ ��' ` S o *f�t q . 5 . z7 y a� ,� .d.:,. G�r' .�. ����.
�� ,�iF `��N���,����-,"�.' '�"` :" ,� y};h {� ��€:. .�' i '�,�, T ��St e �T,se d ," •d�.
"",•./` y.�•`'.,:'R!..j'�.-'' � �`� � < �. .�'. �Yt .. �'�...,t�a ",�. � t?.r; .. . ._r ,e:
a• � � 'r i
. .`� �� v� � `�. +,.rw �- � y�` . �-�..� � . F �z��*[y,��r'. �
♦ �� ";�. »--���Y _>�-.t� �'r-�x'��i4* 5�'iy}{AF�t'�ti.i{ ���'"" kr . S ��'�4 � '��+x� �'}`+
r _
� x � �
.: _ �, � . . , �t,,
_�y��a�� . � � t i� t�lF ���$ ��� `t � .--,�..�. � • 4
-�"_ � Q�J �„ �'� F�� .�'.�� � �'�+,,'' '�a�a�� i�,� . _L.t�
it�� -.`.�. .-- _ � +�� ��"y x�+ � a ��„, r�..� '`"
j. .,�r+�.�.. .e- y;.r f� ��3�..--.r z 'h-.� x� t r ��
�'i��"��}��t � � �. '�'" J�.'' '46's"�` � i'.y�; ` �_�•'`.K.�.`.j���`�»�""�'rl� �`� i � i� !
�t� S'"'" �,�_'�"�c1 �j'������,��������3,�1�� --�' '�=ri•• a�
����� W j L�z �'".'.!� •
��.� �_ � t ..�y y, �
, ;�` �;,� .
� � .
.
.
\J
, •
�
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
�� P�
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Amendment 01-14 to Rainier Flight Service LLC REGULAR COUNCIL- 051an 2015
(LAG 14-005)
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Issue Paper Public Works
Amendment 01-14 to LAG 14-005 Rainier Flight
Service, LLC Staff Contact:
Map lonathan Wilson, Airport Manager, x7477
Recommended Action:
Refer to Transportation/Aviation Committee
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $
Amount Budgeted: $ Revenue Generated: $ ($2,271)
Total Project Budget: $ � City Share Total Project: $
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Rainier Flight Service, LLC leases the 800 Building for flight instruction and aircraft maintenance
operations. Rainier Flight Service has agreed to allow the use of part of their 800 Building for storage of
Airport equipment, with a corresponding monthly leasehold reduction. An amendment has been signed
by Rainier Flight Service allowing the Airport to use three separate storage areas, each with a different
lease period. Hangar Bay Space 1 terminates on April 1, 2015; Hangar Bay Space 2 terminates on
January 31, 2015; and the Northwest Corner Room will continue on a month-to-month basis. Their lease
terminates on September 30, 2024.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Amendment 01-14 to Rainier Flight Service's lease (LAG 14-005)for the use of a portion of the
leased area for Airport equipment storage with a corresponding monthly rental reduction, and authorize
the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the lease amendment.
.�
�
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT p ����0� ^�
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 16, 2014
TO: Ed Prince, Counci) President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Denis Law, Mayor
FROM: Gregg Zimmerman,Administrator
STAF� CONTACT: Jonathan Wilson (ext. 7477)
SUBJECT: Amendment 01-14 to Rainier Flight Service LLC(LAG 14-005)
ISSUE:
Should the Council approve Amendment 01-14 to Rainier Flight Service's lease (LAG 14-
005)for the use of a portion of the leased area for Airport equipment storage and a
corresponding leasehold reduction?
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Amendment 01-14 to Rainier Flight Service's lease (LAG 14-005) for the use of a
portion of the leased area for Airport equipment storage with a corresponding leasehold
reduction,and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the lease amendment.
BACKGROUND:
Rainier Flight Service, LLC leases the 800 Building under lease LAG 14-005,with an
expiration date of September 30, 2024. Rainier Flight Service LLC has agreed to allow
the Airport to store snow removal equipment in the 800 Building on a month-to-month
basis, and other equipment for a defined term. Rainier Flight Service, LLC will receive a
reduction in their monthly leasehold for the square footage that the Airport uses.
There are three separate storage areas in the 800 Building being used to store Airport
equipment. Hangar Bay 1 has a termination date of April 1, 2015 and a leasehold
reduction of$91.74 per month; Hangar Bay 2 with a termination date of
lanuary 31, 2015 and a leasehold reduction of$59.86 per month; and the Northwest
Corner Room with a mooth-to-month term and a leasehold reduction of$161.33 per
month. The three combined storage areas will result in a revenue reduction of
approximately$2,271.00 in 2015. The materials in Hangar Bay spaces 1 and 2 will be
.,
�
Ed Prince,Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
Page 2 of 2
December 16,2014
moved into the Northwest Corner Room as soon as an exterior roll-up door is installed
in early 2015.
The Airport has spent the past few years acquiring a fleet of snow removal equipment.
In order to keep the equipment in an operable condition, indoor storage is needed. The
Airport shop at the 790 Building does not have sufficient space for storing the larger
snow removal equipment.
At some point in the future if Rainier Flight Service, LLC's business grows and they
request use of the Northwest Corner Room, the City will have to find an alternative
location for storing the snow removal equipment. This is not expected to be for at least
three years.
cc: Iwen Wang,Administrative Services Administrator
Doug Jacobson,Deputy PW Administrator—Transportation
Jonathan Wilson,Airport Manager
Hai Nguyen,Finance Analyst
Josef Harnden,Transportation Administrative Secretary
. `
. LAG 14-005
Amendrnent 01-14
AMENDMENT TO BUILDING LEASE AGREEMENT
City of Renton to Rainier Flight Service, LLC
THIS AMENDMEN'�No. 1 to Lease Agreement LAG 14-005 is entered into as of
November 1, 2014 by the City of Renton, a Municipa) Corporation (Landlord) and
Rainier Flight Service, a limited liability company(Tenant} and amends that certain lease
agreement LAG 14-005,dated November 1, 2014.
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, under BLAG 14-005 dated November 1, 2014, the City of Renton
(Landlord) had leased to ftainier Flight Services LLC(Tenant)certain land area and
building space on the Renton Municipal Airport, Renton, Washingtan, until September
30, 2024; and
WHEREAS, Landlord has requested and Tenant has agreed to allow Landlord to
use three (3)separate storage areas in the building(eased by the Tenant for the
purpose of Airport equipment storage, as shown on Exhibit "B" (800 Building),which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, the three (3) spaces are defined as: Hangar Bay Space 1, consisting of
754 square feet; Hangar Bay Space 2, consisting of 492 square feet; and Northwest
Corner Room,consisting of 1,326 square feet.
NOW,7HEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATtON OF THE TERMS AND CONDITION5 HEREIN
CONTAINED AND FOR OTHER GOOD ANO VALUABLE CONSIDERATION,THE RECEIPT
AND SUFFICIENCY OF WHICH IS HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGED, LANDIORD AND TENANT
AGREE TO AMEND THE LEASE AS SET FORTH BELOW:
W ITNESSETH:
Landlord and Tenant agree to amend the Lease, in the following respects:
Three new paragraphs, a.1., a.2., and a.3., are added to Section 4 of the Lease as
follows:
4. RENT/FEES/CNARGES:
4.a.1. Rental Offset for Han�ar Bay Space 1: In consideration of Tenant permitting
Landlord's use of Hangar Bay Space 1,as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto and
Amendment Ol-l4 to LAG 14-005 p R I G I N AL �
City of Etenton to Rauuer Flight Service LLC
LAG 14-005
Amendment 03-14
incorporated by this reference, beginning on November 1, 2014, and ending on
April 1, 2015, Landiord sha(I apply a credit of Ninety One dollars and Seventy Four
cents($91.74) per month toward the Minimum Monthly Rent paid by the Tenant
under the Lease, as amended herein, .
4.a.2. Rental Offset for Han�ar Bav 5pace 2: In conside�ation of Tenant permitting
Landlord's use of Hangar Bay Space 2, as depicted in Exhibit B, beginning on
November 1, ZOi4, and ending on January 31, 2015, Landlord shall apply a credit of
Fifty Nine dollars and Eighty Six cents ($59.86) per month toward the Minimum
Monthly Rent paid by the Tenant under the Lease, as amended herein.
4.a.3. Rental Offset for Narthwest Corner Roorn: In consideration of Te�ant
permitting Landiord's use of Northwest Corner Room, as depicted in Exhibit B,
beginning on November 1, 2014, and continuing on a month-to-month basis unti!
one party give5 the other party at least thirty(30) days'notice to terminate,
Landlord shall apply a credit of One Hundred Sixty One dollars and Thirty Three
cents ($161.33) per month toward the Minimum Monthly Rent paid by the Tenant
under the Lease,as amended herein.
All othe�terms and conditions of the original Lease Agreement and Amendments
thereto, insofar as they are not Inconsistent herewith,shall remain in full force and
effect,
Rainier Flight Services LLC CITY OF RENTON
a Washington Limited Liability Company a Municipal Corporation
���� �� �
Denis Law
Mayor
1�'•�--�-�-
Title Jason Seth
City Clerk
Date
Amendment 01-14 ro LAG 14-005 ?
City of Renton to Rainier Flight Service LLC
� LAG 14-005
Amendment 01-14
Approved as to legal form
City Attorney
EXNIBIT B
Amendment 01-14 to LAG 14-005 3
City of Renton to Rainier Flight Service LLC
� e'��� �u�ldang" EXH16fT B
800 West Perimeter Road
Renton,WA 98057
North --y
U � u — -
rJ
.L �•�tr 1�1-.�c.�t
PILOTS �. i� G'c---.��r..
� �2c-c�M -}��
MECHANfCS
� (UPSTAIRS) OVERHAU!ROOP�t
. �� �� ! �
� �.' � . . _ - .�
� �
�1`' (UPSTAIRS) �
( ` SPARE �
� p OFFICE ❑ Y
�� �
(' f+� \
� v[►mu� `�
_ _� �� �
MEN'S WOM� '� '7 I I I I I I 1 I I �
o ' �illilllll�� ' ;
� �Z
CONf � �
z4�
O
� ❑ ` .
i ` �
MAP Zy I � s
I _ i `�` �C
OFFICE RECEPT �- - �_
� O
_ 7
FIRE �
ROLL !
-UP
_ _... �L_ �"�\ � LZ 1
HANGER DOOR �/ HANGER DOOR
/
Renton Airport/Clayton Scott Fieid
l4- II
!3 LAG ,
� . 05E W.M. � ----- - , + II
F 7 ALL IN TN'P. 23N. RGE .
7 0 S..C ,
N 2 .
- - ��- � r � � I
.�,.,� �r7i: n t,� IOj, ?O(: _ - �V - 'I
y� � � / `��.-_ , � -�y--_'�'►� �}.y '��
* f-=__=_�____" ��� �I I�i I
' �1,�' ( �;-,- ) � '� � 'I
� +f , - +
� m i (� w ,
JNl:I II()fl i _. . X ,
r . .___ ... ., ti - ( . .
'� --- . - � - - . �--- ,:po:i,'sa'e--,,---- - ' --�_ _. _ " 'ya :�;� ; .
,_. _ tr•.�.. _ � .� - - - . - ' _,..c- . -�� - 7"'v;"'_ 'n',�.t� ... _ '�`�', -. t:, � , . �Y. .°�, ii
- - '��..t=-._ tc' '�� i'-' :fa�.i;, '�v ' .•
.._ . ,... . .
� .,.._...
� ,,,., �. - ` -_ - .- ---', � �.' 'i 0
�„ . �„ . . . - _'-,.__ - �\_..:a\k� -- , ... . 1''14 ' ,
� �'..? ' � -----' �- - ---- `.�� - .-. - _ -- _ -- _ -- -�---- t"�"1 --- vmu:�'_�n_r- ��I7� ��
_ '_ ,•. '- ...._:Y.�� . � _1,'+y 'T:= - � �
. z. .-:_.. - ._ - .'� �'" _ -' �'- - --.. . Y..._ �.. ,- .. . I
. . -.. . - "� _ . _ .
. " ._ �_.. " -'_
y.x' .ti"• -_"r"" �•�C.x �pr' �f-•� � � ,:. ii�tu� �f
. ... ___. . ...
��„ . _., . . _. .._. _ ,dn,1Y� ^f�_ ' _ --x .:.- " .�Q'tJ`� 7=:.'�_'�_t, v��vci�.n� ' �r�.:s_.�.,......�._ ,! � i
�} . _ � _ a � ''N13�9 j4,,`t'_ - h t f'. `',�`': �, - . .I
�i_ "u� -r .r - \� '7 ':;i� - .�� -- RS,� - � �;1,: ���� x , .
.:�, .. . � ..- ,. ',.�< . . . J„ e1 . . -, - 4 , . r L '. .. � i-- ---�- �, I'I
.-..,,,i:,y e, -r a -� I
a� . . _. _ .� . '
i. - . '.l� - i ,.
' . s. .r .'� � �M., �
+� � .
_ � �.,, �
- . - k, _
_ . n �r•. .. I
� : w
� r . - " - . .r- . {u � . ..
,�_........_�....�1...._ �--_ �✓_ :. ' . . � , 4� i
. � i �
w
�•
� �
l
_. . ... +�r v. � . �
_ .�
, .,_._ � . . .__.:' ,... ., . , ,� .� � �R p ... ,
._.
' _ ,- -��?'�t5'+1.��1_ ..:.,•=._ .��:��; ^5'i.s?,9,:r. 'I�''�`� `�in��r" _ _ iT :.{_.:t'i t^';._..I _
..L_ �5:��' i�;'t �r ,<;�a> �� ':=- y;t- �, ��R
< ^..p......_-.,.-. _ :1 :iy} , ' .;:�'vs .�n.Ki" - , ��.. �' �:t,. - � ' ' '` .
"� �Y. :af ..'�::m__.._ � i,� ,=�.; ,�." :�-iii'.��;..,. `�',
r ''r -- ' }r�' _. _''."�'Iu•' �,'YA•^'-!.'" . ,�t�� ` :q.?;:� �
+ �=� .��,Y. �_r-_ J�.'.�••r,.:� M1„_, �I �.,u k�,_ 'A
`'-' """' ' , :.� . ^i�_^�.-�-I10i'4�i�:.lY. ..��I.�.0 ,�Y.� „`(r.,��!'- � •:.�ia., .�I�l h
�`I '�"- __. ."_• r -�-���j, `-_ _..____ r�.;- . !ti j'4b:i- .t.f'- e.iaJ4'. • ��J' - ;�iAi���'��'��e y,�',�^. .�..� ��i .. O '`N I�
�• �� �S�� :✓M1 �-K,,..�y � :•ri��_" _ __qY �� .`I-r 1 _ fr'� ' � -
' . _a:_..._ . _ 11. 4'-''" - -` _-'� �!Yj.84r,'.y9;11' „ =� �.� �] -:.
� , . . . _ _
� . . , � __ '� _
.. �
� � --� � .�fY iC�"•
.
x . � 57
.. - �7_ _ .. !f'
� --. ' -- .a � -�-- . . 1 1 -'�ARC�'.'"'tiW,— -��-- `u -- �- /C urrua� ��* .e"�"f;� � _ `i ' 2 .� ' -: _ I
� ..r.t. , Ri:E!I-77:i �,.-:�r_-�' .., .:'•�. ,A _�' -n ,�-wt..l':�.:ic ._:•'R , �G U Q I �'�,:".
"i� _,P/,!rC,l_I ��fil - � --- - '8G.°;n.za.tt2--t�;--"-���:==:�•=� ��RR,CU1��9'ILT"'..-�.-� - �1� .. i,i„I '�'�,y, :1� i � .;,
Y �._.
� 76.�71 s it � �w ' ��.� "03�ur.res . . ,�r, ..a" �1 „ "
q ��i� 1_ oi��:s i c�� N~ R'i � � } . � a � m o �r,�*;�:o{,
, ti, ���«., __ _ u �t( - ��' ,,-:..4_, ..b �,.z � �` ��; 2 ��
}.' j � . , ,, I ° °- T �,.�,
, i� ...�� . ' i ' " �t i . �"w`� � � � .W �C iL;
� �
� �M I � -
� ' � U
. � . , _ .' U �•
.,- .ii �` , `
_ ' 1 , c
.. 1
Q
i . � . „
. �' �-
�I � r . �'A r . 'I� . '
i _+ �, �
I � � . _. .__ . .. {�.��. i, ' ' ,.. , , _.
- � i . �
f'
. t . '
i ' . ,� , . ., , . .
' � " .' '� _�:. �FT _ ,,,�- ,� � � ,�
_ .'fin_ - il-.- ,�. "!ii . �' •__'�.ety ."N:'l' . rM� "__�`:.__."J�'1J�_ _' i � � _
'� � 1 �1�.'"_:.'.`,_�'�,�__""- '__'_" -_ __"_ '" _ -_�i�, sQ�l'eR'SJ't'_�:-�•._._ �.S1a�..c_. �. .- " ' ., _ '
_' - �- " t �., ,kt-_� -!� !
.
_
, i _ '_ ' -__1�' _' ,,, -' 1„ � _ - ,._. _ _
= .., ....��y�.:�• �;;�,i;� , I��, � i .`�-.:,
° }�c _.
- ` ,
, • � �•�"��,-.'-- - . .__' . .
, .. . . � . . . . .. .
; ' . . ., --..4i . , . .._._..
.. . . .�,- -� �a-
' � N04'.111'�.f'IV '' � _ _ _ _._____ ".... __"" _" _"�.__...,_._.--..._.�-� --_._ - __.._ _' "'_ '_
,i,:
�i 7if� ,
, I .. � �'� ....._,_. . � _. ..,_.r �. . .. '—_"'_-
""". _. ._. ._. ."T"_ "' ._.__,_""_ '_' �
.
_ .
.
�`.. .'
' '_.'"_'"_ —'""' . - �...,
I . 2NJU 11)� . "..._.s`; , ri _ " _'��"'"__'___'_". __. _ " " _'""_"
. '
I ' ' _"... _ _' '- " __ _. . ... _
�- - - - ---�`�-. - - - -- � -:,.� i ��.�
p :,a�.i,:u��arz�Nr.;�;uon�..v��-��, ;�o:[�:rCn ut �k�re.�sr:�u<:���a r,nr�tC�:mri �;r!�7t'ci r,n„H� ,�^��i�Nrwu�.'!N�r, �' iI -
t 1EGAL DESGRIPTION: „r.��� `•�i c,.mn ;tcu c.+ ,i: r�:.r.��a:emro-.r�,�i.a<�. ., �:rnit�����rn:�'�-r�� ,.unuc i;ru•N� ��rnirr�+iri� �-::�.�+�
� vt�•:ir-�n, nivr,.�, 4' I
li = o .
�� ���nr��a�n�.v a-71/C N 7/7(Y'STCiIOf: :, 1fJn17.�'1�f� '_S;'1;•+''+ 17I�M1f,�-,��;':,�! I
W,U 1.�A!N(:CUUNTY WASIIINf:i(1N. ��+I'171f)7��.�,, r;Yil;tN� r!C!�I�i;•;'1r7f1A�N�S l'L� Ir�rS i� „rl;, n{1riC��r.1�� t:ti��.t cll". •?ill 1��tAI :!n�fY:irt"r�Y,+�(N�. '..��I.If!'��.' �____ - _I
� }, f.O�tAIFN('iNf.AT Tllf SOUiN f;llAiliFlt'f.`.�trrtfJ.'i�t �,Ni�`i�.7!(X: .', tl}�'f.1+�l('n!''�� ,Ci'i�n�ttJ!'.`;� L_U:;'J���i�+ ' ��r7.� _'_'I?I,���I I I ,
� �
:.1 .tiNA'!I'7a"1. 74N1..70 FfLTl�k011 71(F Srh!}if}KS1 IHInMllte !V- ';.N�i •�-CI'(J:: l. 'tyNCf p�i ,�f`ltf+i7"tlrit�t��"2F_Alr"!1 CCY/i!•!il'�77 �iif:l:Ff'. i.,:C li(Fl:�^l+t�n��F(1�+n�i�Af7.A1�i:t� �fJ � rJn1,IN1.1! l.If?I7?�1�i. ':I;RVi i
NN�'ll'!17"!. J?7S.'�FEI.i (n IHI�(:NTit�t`t� iN inkl�l'AY'n ilftl�f.i'rV(�n'A!!'ii-�Y t't,�l��r:M1l:l)i! ��ti:�L. ��":11�� �Mf t��-:i r7'Ah I :`•I�.i_�._I!I , ',.,.��'��;
�p� .1!(1Wf i�1f1 lAXIN'AY�A". /N/11�11�Et}' 7rfrNL'' •NS'Ii'f):'W :�,1.UU 1t_"T 'il ,-it'r ` � I� . ,
:i PqNl Oi OEGINNWC: ��:.....�fvx2�a�:-�n�l• .ti,�� r� � I I
' °t neNc� ronrfluwr�c sHo'rr.'i�'w. zu wi rr'ri. r�rrrirr e�n�v•r�.i-�r, uny,rti r i.EGc ND _ ,
� �riCNn"c'�'�YPY/'tU. i:'.t 5q f�C'. "N(tN.E NJ')A'JO'W, tA15.7 fCCT. Ti1FNCF - _ ._ __ __ �I}/., a� � � `�;:�� �I
� i a'Srr.zns�� eouNon�;, ti�r� I� �>'," " v j , I
n�xr�+r,r,�c_. .�.�"�rr.� ��eNr,r NY5'10'i%'f. .'%3.J+ffCT. IRNCf S.i•+
:cri;r.���,.vr ie�r,i,.,• +�/,,;• ,., �i 3' I�; I ;i;
� �. ��i' n - ----- -- �--- . lii i �`I�r �I - - ,f
,��"' r T lx CLIN \
OM! 0 NMG l •'t�
x' � I
, �r �
. ' __ _-"-- ,,,__7tChY,l... /� I .1 �I
� �. �'tAv�nnlr..�. .���i,,tastfJnlr�� Hrtnu7 tiCun1N'rfr-7 OR I07 nCRCS r,: i �{��4����/� p' '�t ��I -'-t - �
� LhAS��' (�` lf+� �...� J �' �� � I�tt_"_ �__ _�~�+
e. . �"Qy F(Y.l'Jn Ctlnl�icR c�,'7t i:i)R� , I • � ^yjh 1� '-t,:
LI� �I� y`y
'�t �, I��:�!�wr.';rn*`�.[� �� �,_.�_L'i..'_'�.1� ���'.:.
rC�.ttb ';LCu„,:r\�RN�r; �i ��.�u",-'......._...._�
•.� �N ......���. � �� i � __ ,.� r� I�i
. . . ����.. �, .� T-�_---� .. ��
LL'-ASL AGRECMLN'f ���
Ciry of Renron ro Rlinicr Plight Scrvicc. LC.0 I
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
7• �.
Subject/Title: Meeting:
Rainier Flight Service, LLC Lease Amendment 2-14 REGULAR COUNCIL-OS Jan 2015
to LAG 14-005
Exhibits: Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board:
Issue Paper Public Works
Lease Amendment 2-14 to LAG 14-005
Map Staff Contact:
Jonathan Wilson, Airport Manager,x7477
Recommended Action:
Refer to Transportation/Aviation Committee
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required: $ 0 Transfer Amendment: $ 0
Amount Budgeted: $ 0 Revenue Generated: $ 0
Total Project Budget: $ 0 City Share Total Project: $ 0
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Rainier Flight Service, LLC is undertaking a project to remodel existing office space and add new office
space within the hangar building. Financing for this tenant improvement is coming from Pacific
Continental Bank. Pacific Continental Bank, as a condition of making the loan to Rainier Flight Service,
has asked the City to sign a Landlord Subordination Agreement for certain collateral Rainier has used to
secure the loan. The City has agreed to sign the Landlord Subordination Agreement in exchange for
Rainier Flight Service agreeing to have their lease amended to include some additional language in
Section 18—Surrender of Premises. Rainier Flight Service has agreed to this request. Lease Amendment
2-14 revises Section 18—Surrender of Premises. Specifically, this amendment modifies one sentence in
that section. The existing sentence to be changed reads: "Tenant may remove from the Premises
movable office furniture or trade fixtures put in at the expense of the Tenant."The modified language
will read: "Tenant shall remove from the Premises, upon request of the Land/ord, movable office
furniture or trade fixtures put in at the expense of Tenant."
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the lease language modification to Rainier Flight Service's lease (LAG 14-005) concerning the I
removal of movable office furniture or trade fixtures and authorize the Mayor and Ciry Clerk to sign
Amendment 02-14.
.
.�
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT p �'��0� �
�e;
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 16, 2014 •
TO: Ed Prince, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Denis Law, Mayor
FROM: Gregg Zimmermab��ministrator
STAFF CONTACT: Jonathan Wilson,Airport Manager(extension 7477)
SUBIECT: Rainier Flight Service, lLC Lease Amendment 2-14 to
LAG 14-005
ISSUE:
Should Council approve modifying the lease language to Rainier Flight Service, LLC's
lease(LAG 14-005)concerning the removal of movable office furniture or trade fixtures?�
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the lease language modification to Rainier Flight Service, LtC's lease
(LAG 14-005)concerning the removal of movable office furniture or trade fixtures and
authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign Amendment 02-14.
BACKGROUND:
Rainier Flight Service, LLC recently signed a lease (LAG 14-005)to occupy the building
and associated ramp space at 800 West Perimeter Road.
Rainier Flight Service is undertaking a project to remodel existing ofFice space and add
new office space within the hangar building. Financing for this tenant improvement is
coming ftom Pacific Continental Bank. Pacific Continental Bank, as a condition of
making the loan to Rainier Flight Service, has asked the City to sign a Landlord
Subordination Agreement for certain collateral Rainier Flight Service has used to secure
the loan. The City has agreed to sign the Landlo�d Subordination Agreement in
exchange for Rainier Flight Service agreeing to have their lease amended to include
some additiona) language in Section 18—Surrender of Premises. Rainier Flight Service
has agreed to this request.
Ed Prince,Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
Page 2 of 2
December 16,2014
Lease Amendment 2-14 revises Section 18—Surrender of Premises. Specifically,this
amendment modifies one sentence in that section. The existing sentence to be changed
reads: '?enont may remove from the Premises movab/e office furnirure or trade fixtures
put in at the expense of the Tenant" The modified language will read: "Tenant shall
remove from the Premises, upon request of the Landlord, movable office furniture or
trade fixtures put in at[he expense of Tenant."
The language modification helps protect the City from possibly needing to expend funds �I
to clean out the inside of the hangar building once Rainier Flight Service's lease expires.
cc: Jonathan Wilson,Airpo�t Manager
Josef Harnden,Transportation Administrative Secretary I
Susan Campbell-Hehr,Alrport Secretary II
H:\File Sys\AIR-Airport,Transportation Services Division\03 Projects\OS Tasks�Agenda Bitls\2014 Agenda Bi11s�Ag Bill
-Rainier Flight Service Lease Amendment 2-14\issuepaper-Rafnler Flight Service Lease Amendment 2-14.dac
LAG 14-005
Amendment 2-14
AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT
(City of Renton to Rainier Flight Service LLC)
THIS AMENDMENT to Lease Agreement LAG 14-005 is effective as of the date of execution by
THE CITY OF RENTON, a Washington municipal corporation (hereinafter"landlord") and Rainier
Flight Service, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company(hereinafter"Tenant").
RECITALS:
WNEREAS, Landlord and Tenant entered into a Ground Lease dated November 1, 2014,
LAG-14-005 on the premises described in Exhibit"A";and
WHEREAS,Tenant is seeking financing from Pacific Continental Bank; and
WHEREAS, Tenant is requesting that the city execute a Landlord Subordination
Agreement ("Subordination Agreement") be executed among Pacific Continental Bank, the
Landlord, and the Tenant; and
WHEREAS, Pacific Continenta) Bank will not agree to remove, at their expense, Collateral
as defined in Exhibit 1 to the Subordination Agreement.And
WHEREAS, the Landlord and Tenant desire to have the Tenant take on the responsibility
of removing property, at the Landlord's discretion,at the termination of the Lease,
NOW,THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND COVENANTED BY AND BETWEEN THE
LANDLORD AND TENANT AS FOLLOWS:
WITNESSETH:
A:Section 18 of Lease Agreement LAG 14-005 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 18. SURRENDER OF PREMISES: Tenant shall quit and surrender the Premises at
the end of the Term in a condition as good as the reasonable use thereof would permit,
normal wear and tear excepted. Alterations, additions or improvements which may be
made by either of the parties hereto on the Premises, except movable office furniture or
trade fixtures put in at the expense of the Tenant, shall be and remain the property of
the Landlord and shall remain on and be surrendered with the Premises as a part
thereof at the termination of this Lease without hindrance, molestation, or injury.
Tenant shall remove from the Premises, upon request of the Landlord, movable office
furniture or trade fixtures put in at the expense of Tenant. Tenant shall, at its sole
expense, properly and promptly repair to Landlord's reasonable satisfaction any damage
Amendment 02-14 to LAG 14-005
City of Renton to Rainier Flight Service LLC
QRlGINAL
to the Premises occasioned by Tenant's use thereof, or by the removal of Tenant's
movable office furniture or trade fixtures and equipment, which repair shall include the
patching and filling of holes and repair of structural damage.
B. All remaining provisions of LAG 14-005, as previously amended, shall remain in full force and
effect, insofar as not inconsistent herewith.
Rainier Flight Service, LLC CITY OF RENTON
a Washington Limited Liability Corporation a Municipal Corporation
�'w-��- � �
GcQdon Alvord Denis Law
Mayor
��-��
Title
City Clerk
Date
Approved as to legal form
City Attorney
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
Amendment 02-14 to LAG 14-005 2 a f 3
City of Renton to Rainier Flight Service LLC
: S5.
COUNTY OF )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is
the person who appeared before me, and s/he acknowledged that s/he signed this instrument,
on oath stated that s/he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the
of , a , to be the
free and voluntary act of such for the uses and purposes mentioned in the
instrument.
Dated this day of , 2014.
(Signature of Notary]
[Print Name of Notary)
Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington, residing at .
My commission expires: .
Amendment 02-14 to LAG 14-005 3 0: 3
City of Renton to Rainier Flight Service LLC
1
. 5S.
COUNTY OF )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is
the person who appeared before me, and s/he acknowledged that s/he 5igned this instrument,
on oath stated that s/he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the
of , a ,to be the
free and voluntary act of such for the uses and purposes mentioned in the
instrument.
Dated this day of , 2014.
[Signature of Notary]
[Print Name of Notary]
Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington, residing at
My commission expires: .
Amendment 02-14 to LAG 14-005 3 of 3 .
City of Renton to Rainier Flight Service LLC
13LAG l4-
N 1/2 OF SEC. 7, ALL !N TWP. 23M., RGE: OSE. WM. � I
� ,.�,_ (
,,,_. � ir
.�.Wn �nr, r, �,o ,r„� �or. _ �V
, r'ti.i�,��L�''�. � `�'-=--� i C►�-.
� ' � r;-r- ) 1�� I ~ , i ..
,
� w�'� !!J(.i-i u tullr� .. . . ._ �_ ._ _ ��N I .
a __ _ ..� ... . ._ _ - _. - ._ _ ':'?0:14�5'E--=._:- . , .-�- - ._ ,�._ "�! . ,^`!�,�c
, � � - ��:::'.:-.:� � �/If' '7�rJ., . ��i_'. ti.J_'7'.�v - •' .. `-�' 7
., ;�� � - .__.--- ,�:-,-,,._ :_ -°�`�:;:-�"_� __-,--�:.-� "+-'ti5'; �,r; , �'1}°g
� __ - :-- - .. � _ �' _ -- '_`- ..�\�--�-�.'; _t�^':<<;,:-- nm��:�-,�'�- yyt{
- -- - '� ria- .�:� -- .�• _;-'\� ' -- ='T:'7;��,�,hrr',-- . �.�19 E
, __ _
�. ..} '.
f _, ...- - .. ..- - - _ _ . ._' -...:--.-�- 7-•�M ' n,. ...__�. ,.
-- . .._ ;`_ " _
„ ,_. .. - _ � -
- _.'. _ ., _.... .�t
'"' --- �� ,_ �_�;`�� _ -m - .. ._. . � .
_ �xl. �:� '� �r.� g�+,R"IJ..-._ ..}'�y.�t�dvivc�Ys• �-r_..c�:a"w,...,.. '.
;:'`., n73 � `�1 -- - � ._ ��� -'; � �
- _'� u`�..�...:�-'_',` - �_t a��,5-"' _'"^ '_ lL..1.�1'_ . r ' ' _
�,f y "M1..r-_ p,� .i., u�� �k� �
J`�+' __ _ ''- �.�':]:Z:'.,'.�1.i` ' - 4�• Rr -,n �'.i . � .. ..- , ' �_'__ '
.:',.. Y ,- _ � ` ' _�.X- -�r..:�..-;���;.'�� "-- _ :� " �q !� . � ' �r.� ---1-y
� ':1�7� � � �`�. ��_ -_ �IU p.'� , v '�.Y ��
; � . ._-�.- ' ' -r - I .;: • 1: ' S � ..
_- _ Myr�,,:r �r 7, r i ,+�I.�� . . R F'.�tt '}._
� ��Ii�f1l.1..V��_.._.�.-�, �c�}'- �Cn���i7;f� �,5 I� _Fy�l�'1'l�w "� �„ .���. :'�,•,{+:si.�. '^,.. �Y- 'p'
� f�.�.-.. .:.�.r..-
' ,�._�e.... ._ ' ea � �6'."_'._.. 'j �'Ya:"^.'�, . �, :'* - '��, � -•'," ' I`d .
-'.... '•r 1T`_, .-- _�_ r'r; -q`.�a`��'' _t�o�•.���:iv. ,��' :a•:x ::'ti��"' I. r'_.:;�j :-.'r,u:; r�i/ i'
�Y �+a-.�..�
r.ti ',+.�'�, -,--. .� -�; --: -�---_--��.-_^rr"�- �;� �i:r-� °,ie'e�' .,: w�� _ .:�~,.;a i�Vt -ir:"r��. � ���' Q �`� , �
�� �r, � �,.�'� '_ '_ ___. ,'' -. ' '.;i.:.r - - , N,`' `�..,i.nRC!_!:r '^�` 4 ^' ;�i , q �_ , .
,. . t,i �_. ... _ � _ --_ � -- _ .. ''F�..�v _ - _„-. _ ��, -_�.hi•Y•.s,8a. .a.li' , -
.o_:. .TT-, ..�j. , rt�: t�p_Y ;: .�,.. ��;r„ cJ,' v��';'„ r rl U j.
- - . . . a,. , .:�"-- . _�:•:: ,.,., ' � 'i�.; z
_� �•tNtil�-�)(�. . . _._;'�u;=�`' �'._ . oAR�.�'HIX)- -��a � '-t:-0"rcri,a . i t. ...�, 'rl . G J � ' .
°'�� _,i>>4Cr.l'+rU �. � � - �eL.94n.vnrn�--i},�-�`-�=�+;s.a=;.'��,�il.'_. rFR.GOf�v�qtLT�-"'"`-�^�M>• --- -,..-_ ,.-rr i`:"�:�� :... r,' ,t- U ,
. 5�,tits en.n ' t".�i .�''�r -_ - "D3eucrc^' , v . � '� �4" ' � a,� e w � ,
i . St n�-��e --"-'I`� 1� �nc��:s i!� e,:�� ti -'�:i ;4.;;", .,y �� �� T ..r,ti., � � `r
��,z' +' � �a', q 4
i. ,.,.. - - -- - " �'! �' � � 1 �' a �, � �� �
-�l + . � ' ;; . , i� � .tu U I.,n
,I;; , ; . • , ; `,� k � � , - .
.�' � �' �`
_ �.�., _. .._ 5_ _ � �I � ! . � I , � .,. , � Q (e�--
;,. ; , , _ _: ��,i,. . __i,, " . , t , . ; w, !
i � ,�� �ier . " ' " • i J i ,
�� - !an.15' � - al.-tor!�Pl 1`���_ i,'i',_,.-�.iry' _N!�'l5' � .y'u.�v:r.'-:_�:�_.1'O�an.__ _' I � I
� '� ' '� ' ~ - - _
•:r,�, -'i- _ �_ 4., j ,
��_ "1rt_ ,i;,, so.,•,H•s�-F-- -- -;, �
I --,-- _ �-. -.� �---.-'-----__ --- :, _-� . = x�c- .. _ - - .- .: ,. - .- --�-„ i - _
� `�, ;;�;�f�. � �'
�. . ,
• ;,
� ,.. .. . , , _
: � . � ^F _. . _ ' • I , ,
� � ' ���' . - .. __ . . . ..
. ._ . _ �
,. . .. . .. . . .�r._.� -,.- , . ,
' � N09'1f1'1.1"Il' � '' ••"'. ',_._ '_ _..:__�- _ -,_'.,I�' '.. -_. _. _._-_•_-.,.,_'"__'__._.�_"' '_"_�,� "_"_ _' '_'_'_"' - �) ,
\1 1
J >: _ __-�_-_ _ ....... ' - ------- , -
.. ..,
- --'. - -•--•�---- �- `------- - --_�__� . _ �, .� A
_�
ZN/U7tl• - . .• ,f � ' ��
� �..��`<- r '. . ____ . _.__'_"_' _._____'.__ ' r
. i'_.' __ _ . _ _'' '=___'-,���_____ �_. '___. ' '_ __ ' _' ._ _ ._. .. .__.'_' � '
_ .� �
:1+ 1`:V':�X'n�.1R;r1t:5 1S r�(:n'rtY.��J`;'i::��'tVTt:�rr1 111! n'.5`_�rt�:rT(iN(:(�IXt�7!ft/1'1 '.1'S1;'N rvn()ll.t!i��'1!7 N(;rl1��:.'Nt�, 1 '
1.EGAL OESCR7PTION: a�aror. ,,u c+.rJrt_nu:rt w i�: rar.iur:nu;,�tv�t uuuwnr, n��t;rnir_�Sn�n nv-i�r,.unt+c v.r,eu�:n�rnrziui�u,;�u.rMt i
,�Uvn;''nl nINr,7y,: 4'
IIIA11`p'IION 0:TIIC N 1/7 O''$fCI70N ;. I(JMi1:��1lY:'S'lf:�!'�� 2h�fC i�5 i n,;i »
;�� IYII I.Y�fN(:CWNTYWASIIINl:T(1N. �fSi'i7ll7f;�n;, rrviriN� ��r:���F'.�:;::l�l'MCtJ��f:ti7 le�l�i�`I• .:�liL 1aFhi'��r��C� t:r,�}�.l �ll"!. 1?�11 'f.'!A' :TA!`f)f,�1r��.i�;L').�C(Ji '.!:f�I.ftf'lr�� � _� �
}' f.0lIAIFNCIH(:Ai *I1�SOUiH UIIAHTFl, r '•i:i'::�/��.�rl(';+ C_fi5����i�+ ` ��.n�� =-'.t_j-1-,
f,(N+rtfi'�` ��NIt:r�.71(x: ., pH;t��irfnrc ' � il � j�
�1 .tiNN:��'1�"t. 'l�A].,T�1 FELI I�MO�I Tf(F'S�;111Itt7ti1 /H/N�IiM !Jf �.Aril `:FCl�fl:� /. '�!INCC ,ti� .�l,'Itl.�il�tlk�1„Ii7f�If;J! c`Ctl�l��,�t.�ll r17i,17�f�I.:C t+f '�'' '
Ft:�'f`��nAI:F(I n/J!1 A11.A7'��If) IfJ� rlAi�fYl.t! t.(fH)%1!f. :I!i1N.i I �::I".-i.-�.�I '
�• Nfl�'tlY�7'4. .171..!'�FEf.I T(7 IHI�f:NTiR1�N! rN i4Xf�4'AY'n', ttIFlJCF N�A'AlI•,5.1`{5. �'�;1�!�I:ni�l��'.`S�:t::,, �5!',I:N �M!t"ti� ✓(�nx . ��� � '
r. AfONG ;AXI tAXiwAY'A`. !A/11�F1 FEtI� Llrric!-v�1'+t'D'',v, yppo r:Er '(l 'rH" : . I ' � , .
_ ..� I.�
•i POIM7 fX 17£L7NNWG: ,T..-z�i_��.^"' 1 .���;. +i( � .
�} Tt1FNCi CrJH11qIl7�C SNb'}O'17'W, tvor�r��.i. nr�Nr�No.v�rve-�•.. �i,���rrrr t.EG�ND -r
'riLM:i Sy'�'In'7/'�Y. t:3 S9'f'�'� ',�!7N.E Md'4A'JO'W, 7�15�fLCi. 711FNCE � ,� �:��� �6 j .: :'� 'I�
F� ... — _ __ - '_—. pWrv�nr,� ��ur ' }°„o '"� , ���.
� NtXI'IJ'rli"!. :i Ir,i�h:T� �11inH:!.NY�:'10'I%'I..�%:l.Jn�fCT. 711lt1Cf S�1'�H'SJ�i.?tl57` i� . '
�:CNii.lt irNl If4Ni'�.�" 1 I I �
J i�.t� tr� ���� I'OINT iX'C)l.C,lNN�NC �'_'_- _ —__._ I�c`� .\ (I ?::;' _ I_�_'_ � ,
� _ .__._'—_____ .�LC➢GV 1�NC ( �, I � � � �.
-3. CfRnAvll:+�. ni�n,;�la'IN4tt�v tl7f.e�N SCUAlN'rCtT OR 207 ACRCS '�. �• � ~ '"�'!'�-�' .
� tr as� 1 . .. �
:• �� FIXi'J!1 Ci�nl+1£R�.�r,�T'�'�^i��7r._ I��u i.,�� .1�. �I 'IJ �� �-�-j--' , '�
1,� �� at�.rin ;�cuo�:cnrwtr.� ti'._ '�- -� ����`'1 �
.`;"tin,mu tt '� '�.i_. L
I ' �, (' ._'__I .
_ r
�i . , . , . .:Ma.�c��rJ ��`� �r II
LL'-ASG AGRGCMCN"1� -'�� �
City of Renton to Rlinicr Flight Scrvicc. LC.0
�
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
WITH KING COUNTY AND THE CITIES OF AUBURN, BELLEVUE, FEDERAL WAY,
ISSAQUAH, KENT, KIRKLAND, MERCER ISLAND, REDMOND, SEATTLE, AND
TUKWILA RELATED TO THE FUTURE NEGOTIATIONS OF A PUGET SOUND
EMERGENCY RADIO NETWORK OPERATOR INTERLOCAL COOPERATION
AGREEMENT.
WHEREAS, the City and the Cities of Auburn, Bellevue, Federal Way, Issaquah, Kent,
Kirkland, Mercer Island, Redmond, Seattle, and Tukwila and King County (the "Parties") are
authorized, pursuant to RCW Chapter 39.34,to enter into an interlocal government cooperative
agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Council approved two interlocal agreements regarding the
implementation and the operation of the Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network System
("PSERN"); and
WHEREAS, the PSERN Operations Interloca) Cooperation Agreement has been revised
and is not in the form approved; and
WHEREAS, so as not to hold up the project any further, the Parties have agreed to enter
into a Memorandum of Agreement to negotiate in good faith to form the Operations Interlocal
Cooperation Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the current version of the Memorandum of Agreement contains provisions
requiring unanimity in voting and all Parties present to constitute a quorum; and
WHEREAS, the Parties continue to negotiate the terms of the Memorandum of
Agreement regarding those provisions; and
1
\
RESOLUTION N0. �
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Council to permit staff to continue negotiation on those
provisions;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The above recitals are found to be true and correct in all respects.
SECTION II. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into a
Memorandum of Agreement, which shall be substantially similar to the form attached hereto as
Exhibit A. This authorization shall be effective in the event that staff is able to negotiate either
a change in the voting from �nanimity to majority, or reduction in the quorum requirements, or
both.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2015.
lason A. Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of . , 2015.
Denis Law, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
RE5:1655:12/4/14:scr
2
� I
� I ,
RESOLUTION N0.
EXHIBIT A � '
Memorandum of Agreement Regarding Futtu�e Operation of
' The Puget Sound Emergency Radio Neiwork � •
This Memorand�un of Agreement Regarding Futiue Operatioa af Puget Sound
� Emargency Radio Networtc("MOA")is entered into pursuant to the Interlocal Coope�ation Ad
{Chapter 39.34 RCV�by and among King County and the cities of Auburn,Bellevue,Federal �
' Way,Issaquah,Kent,Kirkland,Mencer Island,Redmond,Renton,Seattle,and Tukwila,each a -
� political subdivlsion or municipal corporation of the 5tate of Washington(individually,a '
j "party")and,(colleclively,the"Parties").
Recftals
The Parties determiaed that it is in the pub�ic mterest thai a new public safery radio
system be implemented that will provide public safety egencies and oiher user groups in the ~
region with improved coverage a�sd capacity,and uniformly high-qua{ity emergency radio �
communications. This new system is referred to herein as the"Puget Sound Emergecccy Radio
i
Network System"or"PSERN System:'
I 'ftie PaRies are entecing into a sepacate egreement("Implemenmtion Period ILA")that
designates King County to act as the iesd agency for plariniag,procurement,finaneing and �
implementation of the PSERN System w9th the oversight of a joint board established by the '
Parties. ,
', I � ' . . , Parties aiso wish to_�create a new.non-proft----•-....{�me�Iseaoil:����nQc�+cy: �
corporation to assume the ownership aad control of the P3ERN 3ystem at completion of t6e �
' � aerivities under the Implementation Period ILA�d thereafter ttvoughout the useful life of tlze
PSERN System. �
The Parties mutually desire to commit to the formaQioa of the non-profit cocporadon,its
I governance stmcture,and other material terms regarding the fature operation of the PSERN •
System while aliowing the ftexibility to work in good faith toward a more complete agreement '
for the incorporatioa of the non-profit and the future operation of tho PSERN System. � '
NOW.THEREFORE,ir►consideration of the mutual promises,benefits and covenanu �
contained herein and od�er valuable consideratioa,the sufficieacy of wbich is fcereby � '
aclmowledgal,the Parties agree to the above Recitals and es follows:
Rage 1 of 5 • '
RESOLUTION N0.
1. EtYective Date and Term
This MOA shall be effective on the date it is last signed by an authorized represetrtative �
of each the Parties,and shall remain in effect until the earlier of the following events:(i)the
Implementation Period ILA is terminated or(u}this MOA is superseded by the lnterlocal
agreement described in Sections 3 and 4. ,
2. Incorporatioa of PSERN Operator
The Parties hereby agree W create a non-profit corporation,as suthorized under RCW
i3934A30,to be incorporated in Washington State for We purpose of owning,operating,
maintaining,managing and providing ongoing upgrading end replacerneot ofthe PSERN System
� throughout its useful tife. Thc future non-profit corporatioa to be created by the Parties is
referred to hereln as the"PSERN Operator". � -
3. Interlacal Agreement;Material Terms
The Parties agee to work in good faith and use best efforts to negotiate and enter into a . °
future interlocal agreemeat that will estabfish the terms and conditio�s applicable to the future
operation of PSERN�d the incorporalion of the PSERN Operator. The Pasties commit and � �
agree that the following terms and conditions are tnaterial to the future interlocal agreement and ,
� sball be included: �
� a. The affaus of the PSERN Operator shall be governed by a board of directors(the � � ,
; "Board'�that shall act ott behalf of alt Parties and as may be in the best interests of �
; public safety and the PSERN System. =
' � b. The governance and voting stnscture of the Boazd shail be substanE�al�-as provided •
i under Sectaons 4.1 through 4.3 of the Draft Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network
Operator Fnterlocal Cooperation Agreement("Draft Operations II.A'�attac6ed as
i ExEvbit 1 and made a part of Wis MOA. .
c. Agencies usic�g the PSERN System sha11 pay the PSERN Ope�ator user fees as
pmvided for in the Implerneniation Period 1LA and based on the cost allocatioo
. model attached as Exhibit 4 to the Implementation Period IL,A.
4. Additional Terms and Condi�ons of Interlocat Agreement , �
In addition to the material tecros and conditions in Section 3 above,the Parties s6a11 ` �
� continue to work in good faith to supplemen�neeotiate,-a�amend and finalize the Draft
' Operations I[.A to inciude additional mutuaUy agreed upon tecros rega�ding the incorporarion ,
and transfer of operations to the PSERN Operator,which ene anticipated to include terms '
regarding uahsfer of employees to PSERN,insurance and liability requirements,and service �
Eevels for the PSERN System user agreemenLs. With tt►e exception of the material terms and � �
" � conditians in Section 3 above;the DraB Operations�ILA attached as Exhbit 1 is not �
Page 2 of 5 �
�
`
RESOLUTION N0.
intended to,be le�lly binding until signed by an euthorized representative of each Party � ` �
following any sut6orization required by each Party's respective jurisdict�on. The Patties akE
cammit to working to finalize a�-p�eseAE-the Draft Operations IL.A in a timeframe ihat wil] , . �, • ,
aliow the fina!interlocat a�rcement W be oresented to the Parties'+�respactive authorizing bodies , ,
for aRproval in a time and manner that will enabla the PSERN Operator to be fWly functioning , '
no tater than full system acceptance as defined under the Imptementation ILA. � • `
,
IN WITNFSS WHEREOF,authorized re�resentatives of the Pazties have sigr,ed their namcs in _ .
the spaccs provided below.
� KIIVG COUNTY CITY OF Ai3BURN � ,
Name Name .
Title Title '
Date Date ,
Attest:
City Clerk ' , .
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form:
Deputy Prosecuting Attarney City Attomey
CITY OF BELL�WE CITY O�FEDERAI,WAX
, Nam� Name
TitEe Titte
Date Date ' •
Atbes�t: Attest: � �
City Clerk ` City Clerk -
Page 3 of 5 ' -
I
RESOLUTION N0.
Approved ac to F'orm: Approved as to Form: .
City Attorney City Attorney
i .
C1TY OF ISSAQUAH CITY OF I�NT '
; Name Name
i .
� Title Title '
Date Date
Attest: Attest:
City Citrk City Clerk • �
i
Approved as to Form: ApAroved as to Form: s •
City Attomey City Attomey '
CITY OF KIRHI,AND C1TY OF MERCER ESLAND
Name Name '
Title Title
Date Date
Attes� Attest:
City Clerk City Clerk
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: ,
City Attorney City Attomey
Page 4 of 5
� � .
RE�OLUTION NO.
CITX OF REDMOI�'D Cl'T'Y O�'I�ENTON ' "
Name Nama ,
Title Title
' Date Date •
Attest; Attest: ,
City Clerk City Cterk . ..
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Focm: . ; - -
City Attorney Ciry Attorney . . , �
CITY OF SEATT[.E CTTY OF TUKWILA
Name . Narne , . ,
Title TiNe
Date � D�
Attest: Attest:
I City Clerk • City Cler[c " .. ' '
Appmved as to Fortn: Approved as to Form: � . �
City Attomey City Attomey
Page 5 of 5
�
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING
SUBSECTION 4-3-100.6.1 OF CHAPTER 3, ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND
OVERLAY DISTRICTS, OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF THE
RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE, BY AMENDING THE APPLICABILITY OF THE URBAN
DESIGN REGULATtONS. �,s i O t
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Subsection 4-3-100.6.1, Applicability, of Chapter 3, Environmental
Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
1. Applicability:
a. The following development activities shall be required to comply
with the provisions of this�section:
i. All subdivisians including short plats;
ii. All new structures;
iii. Conversion of vacant land (e.g., to parking or storage lots);
iv. Conversion of a residential use to a nonresidential use;
v. Alterations, enlargements, and/or restorations of
nonconforming structures pursuant to RMC 4-10-050, Nonconformin�
, Structures.
1
ORDINANCE N0. R
vi. Exterior modifications such as facade chan�es, windows.
awnings, si�na�e, etc.. shall complv with the desi�n requirements for the new
portion of the structure. si�n, or site improvement.
b. Any of the activities listed in �ec�+e� RMC 4-3-100.B_1_a ^��
�+e�and occurring in the following overlay areas or zones shall be required to
comply with the provisions of this section:
i. District `A': All ^��*� ^� +"^ ��+�� areas zoned Center powntown
(CD) or Residential Multi-Family Urban (RM-U).
ii. District `B': All ^,�-*� ^{+�� r;+,, areas zoned Residential Multi-
Family Traditional (RM-T) or Residential Multi-Family (RM-F).
iii. District 'C': All ^,-�� ^{ *"^ ��*�� areas zoned Urban Center
North 1 (UC-N1), Urban Center North 2 (UC-N2), or Commercial Office
Residential (COR).
iv. District `D': All ^��+� ^{*"^ ��*,� areas zoned Center Village (CV)
or Commercial Arterial (CA) except for those areas included in the Automall
District, see RMC 4-3-040, a�-�-�v:�+� �� :�:�•; "^ ,m^^�'^a Commercial Corridor
Business Designations.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five (5)
calendar days after publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2014.
lason A. Seth, City Clerk
2
�
� �
�
I ORDINANCE NO.
APPROVED BY TNE MAY�R ihis day af , 2014.
Denis Law, Mayor
Approved as to form:
�awrence J. Warren Gt Attorne
� r Y Y
Date af Publicatian:
tJRD:1856:12/12J1�.scr
3
�
i '
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING
SECTIONS 4-2-010, 4-2-020, 4-2-060, 4-2-100, 4-2-110, 4-2-115, 4-2-120 AND 4-
2-130, OF CHAPTER 2, ZONING DISTRICTS — USES AND STANDARDS, SECTIONS I
4-4-080, 4-4-090, 4-4-095, 4-4-100 AND 4-4-110 OF CHAPTER 4, CITY-WIDE
PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS)AND SECTION 8-7-4 OF CHAPTER 4, NOISE LEVEL REGULATIONS,
OF TITLE VIII (HEALTH AND SANITATION) OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE, BY
AMENDING THE REGULATIONS RELATED TO MAXIMUM LOT AREA, BUILDING
COVERAGE AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA AND CREATING A NEW
RESIDENTIAL SIX DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE (R-6) ZONE. ��f �^
� `fi
WHEREAS, the City of Renton seeks to ensure that the character and the quality of life
in its neighborhoods are enhanced by new development; and
WHEREAS,. the City of Renton also seeks to ensure that urbanization, economic
development, and natural area protection are balanced; and
WHEREAS, the City of Renton further seeks to improve the correlation between
development regulations and the resu�tant development; and
WHEREAS, this matter was duly referred to the Planning Commission for investigation,
study; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 5, 2014, and
considered all relevant matters, and heard all parties in support or opposition to the matter;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Subsection 4-2-010.C, Zoning Districts, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts —
Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
1
�
. �
ORDINANCE N0. '
C. ZONING DISTRICTS: �
The City is�� divided into the following types of zoning districts and the
following map symbols are established:
MAP
ZONE SYMBOL
Resource Conservation I(RC) l
Residential-1 Dwelling Unit Per Net Acre I(R-1) I
IResidential-4 Dwelling Units Per Net Acre I(R-4) I
IResidential-6 Dwellin� Units Per Net Acre I R-6
IResidential-8 Dwelling Units Per Net Acre I(R-8)
Residential Manufactured Home I(RMH) (
Residential-10 Dwelling Units Per Net Acrel(R-10) I
IResidential-14 Dwelling Units Per Net Acrel(R-14) I
IResidential Multi-Family Urban I(RM-U)
IResidential Multi-FamilyTraditional I(RM-T)
IResidential Multi-Family I(RM-F) I
ILight Industrial I(IL)
IMedium Industrial I(IM)
IHeavy Industrial I(IH) I
ICenter powntown I(CD) I
ICenter Village I(CV) I
ICommercial Arterial I(CA) I
ICommercial Neighborhood I(CN) I
ICommercialOffice I(CO) I
ICommercial/Office/Residential I(COR) (
IUrban Center—North 1 I(UC-N1) I
2
• ORDINANCE N0.
Urban Center—North 2 I(UC-N2) I
SECTION II. Subsection 4-2-010.D, Zones Implementing Comprehensive Plan, of
Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the
Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
D.ZONES IMPLEMENTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan Designations are implemented by certain zones:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DESIGNATION IMPLEMENTING ZONES
Resource Conservation (RC)
Residential Low Density Residential — 1 DU/AC (R-1)
(RLD) Residential —4 DU/AC (R-4)
Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH)
Residential—6 DU/AC (R-61
Residential Single Family
Residential—8 DU/AC (R-8)
(RS)
Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH)
Residentiat— 10 DU/AC (R-10)
Residential Medium Density
Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH)
(RMD)
Residential — 14 DU/AC (R-14)
Residential Multi-Family Residential Multi-Fami►y(RM-U, RM-T, RM-F)
(RM)
Center powntown (CD)
Urban Center powntown Residential Multi-Family Urban Center (RM-U)
(UC-D) Residential Multi-Family Traditional (RM-T)
Commercial Office (CO)
Urban Center—North 1 (UC-N1)
Urban Center North (UC-N)
Urban Center—North 2 (UC-N2) �
Commercial/Office/ Commercial/Office/ Residential (COR)
3
ORDINANCE N0. �
Residential (COR)
Residential Multi-Family Zones (RM-F, RM-T,
RM-U)
Center Village (CV)
Center Village (CV)
Residentia�— 14 DU/AC (R-14)
Commercial Arterial (CA)
Commercial Corridor (CC) Commercial Office (CO)
Light Industrial (IL)
Light Industrial (IL)
Employment Area Industrial
Medium Industrial (IM)
(EAI)
Heavy Industrial (IH)
Commercial Arterial (CA)
Commercial Office (CO)
Employment Area Valley Light Industrial (IL)
(EAV) Medium Industrial (IM)
� Heavy Industrial (IH)
Resource Conservation (RC)
Commercial Neighborhood
Commercial Neighborhood (CN)
(CN)
SECTION I11. Section 4-2-020, Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts, of Chapter 2,
Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended to add a new subsection 4-2-020.E, Residential —6 DU/ACRE (R-6),
to read as shown below. The remainder of the section shall be relettered accordingly.
E. RESIDENTIAL-6 DU/ACRE (R-6):
The Residential-6 Dwellin� Units Per Net Acre Zone (R-61 is established for
sin�le familv dwellin�s and is intended to implement the Sin�le Familv Land Use
Comprehensive Plan designation. The R-6 zone will allow a maximum density of
4
�
' ORDINANCE N0.
six 16) dwellin� units per net acre. Development in the R-6 zone is intended to
be sin�le familv residential at moderate densitv. I
SECTION IV. Subsection 4-2-060, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards,
of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as shown on
Attachment A.
SECTION V. Subsection 4-2-100.B, Tables, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
B.TABLES:
There are four (4) separate tables dealing with the following general land use
categories and zones:
RESIDENTIAL (RC, R-1, R-4, R-6, R-8, R-10, R-14�i-A�4)
RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY (RM)
COMMERCIAL (CN, CV, CA)
COMMERCIAL(CD, CO, COR)
INDUSTRIAL(IL, IM, IH)
SECTION VI. Subsection 4-2-110.A, Development Standards for Residential Zoning
Designations (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures), of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts— Uses
and Standards, of Title IV {Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code is deleted
in its entirety and replaced with the following language:
4-2-110.A DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING
DESIGNATIONS (PRIMARY AND ATTACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES�
5
ORDINANCE N0. �
�. _ ;� � _ $ �,.,N`,.:..
,..�.:�==...����-,��,.� RC I R_1 R=4 R_6 .R 8 I � '�R-�10 �f �R-14
.-:,:w-;;w;k�.:�-:
�:�Mmimum�� 3 4
.,����-:
=,NetgD.ens�tlC. — 5 dwellin� 7 dwellin�
z ��r, None dwelling dwellin� 30 30
-g�..(pec� et�#>� units units units units
=��, 1�15`-�
.�;�acr.e����:.'
4 �..,,.«,,,,�,s�,�._
.11Aaximum:-.
;__.
'Ne�'t�Densi�fi(
a- ,�-j
�_. er�net��,� 1 1 4 6 8
tacr.e; xceptg dwellin� dwelling dwellin� dwellin� dwellin� 10 dwe315n� 14 dwe513�
':p r� et 0;=�: unit unit36 units units units
units units
_� '
���=�cr.es_i°�n k'.
`�, '�,�15 .
S,RC� �:.�.
Maximum"� �
� Detached dwellin�s: 1
.IV mbecbof�;: �
'�Dwellin�s`:_ 1 dwellin�with 1 accessorv dwellin� unit' dwellin�with 1 accessorv ',
dwellin�unit
���;"er e a �: Attached dwellin�s: n/a
�`���
r:�tlot- �y 1,'
' - �'�"�`; Detached Detached
- .,�.,
. - - •':.:4n-:. . .
� dwellin�s: dwellin�s: �
�_;��z���; 3, 9,000 4,000 sq. 3,000 sa. '
�Mintmum 1 acre l0 7,000 5,000
� ..��q;�:�s;31 10 acres 32 sq. ft. ' 3a 3a ft. ft. �
�, Lot�Size�=:� � 32,34 � �_
s s Attached Attached
rW�.�a,�,;�'-. .. I
_ �,�.:_-.-
`-���_<_=- dwellin�s: dwellin�s: �
,K.Y y-L
. - n:�'_.• �I
- M=.�;�.�;t= . n a n a
::Minim�:� 3z 70 ft.10�
i 150 ft. 100 ft. 32 60 ft. 50 ft. 40 ft. 30 ft.
;,Lo �VUi" t �
� ����, .,A �:_�.
�Minimum�,
`-Lo��A%idth�,� 175 ft. 110 ft.32 80 ft.32 70 ft. 60 ft. 50 ft. 40 ft. ,
�� �, ,
�(corne ots�,:_
' ;�Minim�i"m'�; 200 ft.3� 100 ft.10�
' ;��;,�� , �ai-: 300 ft. 32 3Z 90 ft. 80 ft. 70 ft. 60 ft.
_;�ot�D�atti�°
-� ro� ;�-� ��
t��� ' �<�> 15 ft.,
�;:
=;Minrmum'"i', lo except
~`_�`; .1',O t y��_ 30 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft;s3 20 ft.39 2O ft.39 d� ra�e
:��ffar - 25 ft' must be 20
�'._ �^�::_ ft-39
��IVlin`im`t�'m �"
����� �w� ����,���� 25 ft.10' u zi
�Rear�far��_` 35 ft. 30 ft. 32.33 25 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. 10 ft.
� ���=
-- r�-x.��<..
-��',
' -::� Combine Detached Detached '
v�lrnirnun►�
�,�,;� �„ , , �;��`. d 20 ft. Combine Units: 4 ft. Units:4 ft.
�:>S�de"�ar�d�;, 25 ft. 15 ft. 5 ft.
:,�� i,�.��;<:; with not d 15 ft. Attached Attached
� .. . �xa''� less than with not Units: 4 ft. Units: 4 ft.
6
' ORDINANCE NO.
':"���;`F':= " 7.5 ft. on less than for for
:�"M:'y �..:1 .
_ _::Ir.", '. - .
�v}'�-���=��"' either 5 ft. on unattached unattached
---���
�'�;���°�=== =Y;r-:� side. either side(s), 0 ft. side(s), 0 ft.
.::-;r.� :- .,,.�
- =�`` `n���«�<-r � side. for the for the
_�:� - ,
�x.��. �-=� z....<,
"��.�t�"��'"��°; �
:A���;�����y attached attached
-��:��� ��r:,�.��
=_-�;��� k��-��:-:= side(s).zs side(s).za ,
Y,;���.��.�,��
:=� .�:
��1Ainimum�;
,�;.�,.,�;•..,K q-:5; 10
�.Side�fard�.�.v:: 30 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. ' 25 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft.
-T�"�a�O�+3.�� 12,32,33
r� �:,; :
-� treet
_-�—��;�
�Maximum=�
�;�tB`uil�`diii'"�:
-� �.: =
,`��overa�e�:: 10% 20�� 35% 40% 50% 55% 65%
e� .
'(ine uding;'..
��:�
P�imarv�nd .
�^�Ac�cessorv�`
�.�.��,_:.�.,.��,_
�"=�Vlaximum
=1 per.vious
:;;,.•:.� k�;� 15% 25% 50% 55% 65% 7p�/ 80%
�.'�:Si�ir�ace:`;
�fi{' %..
-.,�ry rea�,���`.
'�,-�g.;u:` _ Residential:
-�Meximum 30 ft. 30 ft.
.'�'Hei�ht8�9:�
Commercial:
=����,'�, . 20 ft.
�-3,`=�:�- '_. <M�,�� No more
:=�Maximum - No more
_�� .� - than four than six (6)
=::Nu�'mbe f
,,,,.,;�d,��x: . n a 4 units
`'�Jt1itS�Der�_=. units qer
�% 9�J�I'4 � w� �
�uilc�in� - buildin�.
����.,� buildin�.
'�� �� Attached units: 4
���:..
�:�Min mum: 2 si�nificant trees per 5.000 sq. ft. si�nificant trees per
a�y�;. � ,, __-
-_ __ �rPe .;�`.�_ See RMC 4-4-130. 5,000 sa. ft.
�� E1a51�/,�,�����-�-i.:
��1 See RMC 4-4-130.
:�1111iaimt�"rr►�k°�
.�-
� �:
.� -�e a.v.�t�: 10 ft. landscaped setback from the street property line.
-� y��,-
_�" � -aae�,�`
��� �etbac�k��:.
-- --_.._ _ _---- _
�Y'4. li ,Il linl��
8���.11q1�,�
rre s � : See RMC 4-4-140. Wireless Communication Facilities. Amateur radio antennas
�:�Cao�n�� ca'� are allowed a maximum hei�ht of six feet (6') without a Conditional Use Permit.
�"- '' ' �o"n ' ��: Lar�er structures will have a maximum hei�ht determined bv the Conditional Use
`��.,ac I�ttes,��:-- Permit process, RMC 4-9-030, Conditional Use Permits.
-�`� � �u��^`-;
'-'�"He'i�ht�� .
7
ORDINANCE N0. •
��(includin�
g
- : ���,.
`��Ama eur�-:_
� �.:�._
r==Radio ��.�:
.t�._..
=.�Antennas��,�
�:� .:,;��;:��,�� I
= es� n .;�:y: See RMC 4-2-115. Residential Desi�n and Open Space Standards.
�•�=:
�Stan ar s��
Lan��' See RMC 4-4-070, Landscapin�. �
� � �g •�
� �.�a ��� �
�xtenor�_ (
,-�,� .,�,,�x�._ See RMC 4-4-075, Li�htin�, Exterior On-Site.
��Li_ ��tinas�r
Sc eenin`�" See RMC 4-4-095, Screenin�and Stora�e Hei�ht/Location Limitations.
� $�`� � �
;� �
�.tExcep ion=;- Nothin� herein shall prohibit the construction of a sin�le familv dwellin�and its
�T�for�Pre="� accessorv buildin�s on a pre-existin� le�al lot; provided,that all setbacks, lot
_::�::�.,�;.
:ExistinR.,: , covera�e, hei�ht limits, infrastructure, and parkin� reauirements of the zone can
�..-:�;�:,�,�,.,
Le�al Lots be satisfied and provisions of RMC 4-3-050. Critical Areas, can be met.
SECTION VII. Subsection 4-2-110.6, Development Standards for Residential
Development (Detached Accessory Buildings), of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
4-2-110.B DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
(DETACHfD ACCESSORY BUILDINGS)
_ . - _.. ._._ _ _ . .. __.... _. . . __ _ . . __ _
General
RC, R-1, R-4, Accessory structures shall only be allowed on lots in conjunction with a primary
R-6, R-8, R- use.
10, R-14 and The total floor area of all accessory buildings shall not be greater than the floor
RM area of the primary residential uses.
The lot coverage of the primary residential structure combined with all accessory
buildings shall not exceed the maximum lot coverage of the Zoning District.l'
IAccessory Dwelling Unit
RC, R-1, R-4, 1 unit per legal lot—800 sq. ft. or 75%of primary residence, whichever is
R-6, R-8, R- smaller.16
10 and R-14
RM n/a
IOther Types of Accessory Structures Allowed in Addition to Accessory Dwelling Unit
IRC and R-1 I2 structures —max. 720 sq. ft. per structure, or
8
�
� ORDINANCE N0.
1 structure—max. 1,000 sq. ft.
In addition, 1 barn or stable—max. 2,000 sq. ft., provided the lot is 5 acres or
more.
R-4, R-6, 2 structures—max. 720 sq. ft. per structure, or
and R-8 1 structure—max. 1,000 sq. ft.
R-10 and R- 1 structure per residential unit— max. 400 sq. ft.; provided, that they are
14 architecturally consistent with the principal structure.
Except greenhouses, sheds, or other similar accessory structures—max. 150 sq.
ft.
RC Accessory building—15 ft.
R-1, R-4, R- Accessory building- 15 ft.
6 and R-8 Accessory dwelling units—30 ft., except that the accessory unit structure
(dwelling space, garage space, etc.) shall not be taller than the primary dwelling.
Animal husbandry or agricultural related structures—30 ft.
R-10 and R- Accessory building— 15 ft.
14 Accessory dwelling unit—30 ft.
RM 25 ft., except in the RM-U District where the maximum height shall be
determined through the site plan review process.
, IMaximum Height for Wireless Communication Facilities (Including Amateur Radio Antennas) .
RC, R-1, R-4, See RMC 4-4-140G, �}��a���'� {^�c^^^����T„^^`e#Wireless Communication
R-6, R-8, R- Facilities. Freestanding vertical monopole amateur radio antennas are allowed a
10, R-14, maximum height of forty five feet (45') without a conditional use permit. Taller
and RM structures will have maximum height determined �•��+"� ��^�'�+�^^�' ���^ ~^~~��+
�eees�;pursuant to RMC 4-9-030, Conditiona) Use Permits.
General
RC, R-1, R-4,
R-6, R-8, R- 6 ft. from any residential structure. If sited closer than 6 ft., the structure will be
10, R-14 and considered to be attached.
RM
R-14 and For any lot that abuts and alley, vehicular access to garages and carports shall
RMU from the alley. When lots do not abut an alley, all garages and carports shall be
located in the rear yard or side yard.
Front Yard/Side Yard Along Streets
RC, R-1, R-4, Unless explicitly stated otherwise, setbacks applied to the primary structure also
R_6, R-S, R- apply to accessory structures; where the setback is less than 20 ft., any detached
9
ORDINANCE NO. �
10, R-14 and garage/carport (or structure that incorporates vehicular parking) shail have a
RM minimum 20 ft. setback.
ISide Yards for Accessory Buildings
RC and R-1 5 ft., unless located between the rear of the house and the rear property line,
then 0 ft. side yard is allowed.
R-4, R-6, R- 3 ft., unless located between the rear of the house and the rear property line,
8, R-10, R- then 0 ft. side yard is allowed.
14 and RM
Side Yards for Accessory Dwelling Units
I RC I 25 ft.
I R-1 (25 ft.
IR-4 I5 ft.
IR=6 I5 ft. �
I R-8 I5 ft.
R-10 and R- 4 ft., except when along a street,then 8 ft.
14
IRM In/a
IRear Yards for Accessory Buildings
RC 5 ft.
R-1, R-4, R- 3 ft., unless located between the rear of the house and the rear property line,
6 R-8, R-10, then 0 ft. rear yard is allowed.
R-14 and Except for garages/carports accessed�ia throu�h alleys: to ensure adequate
RM vehicular maneuvering area, garages and carports that are accessed �throu�h
allevs shall be set back-as follows:
1. 9 ft. garage doors shall be at least 26 ft. from the back edge of the alley, or
2. 16 ft. garage doors shall be at least 24 ft. from the back edge of the alley.
IRear Yards for Accessory Dwelling Units
RC, R-1, R-4, Accessory Dwelling Units that incorporate a garage/carport shall be set back as
R-6, R-8, R- follows:
10, R-14, 1. 9 ft. garage doors shall be at least 26 ft. from the back edge of the alley, or
and RM 2. 16 ft. garage doors shall be at least 24 ft. from the back edge of the alley.
RC Determined through administrative review, to be no less than 10 ft. and no �
greater than 35 ft. from the back ed�e of the allev. !,
R-1 and R-4 Determined through administrative review, to be no less than 10 ft. and no ,
greater than 25 ft. from the back ed�e of the alley.
R-6 and R-8 Determined through administrative review, to be no less than 5 ft. and no i,
10
� ORDINANCE N0.
Igreater than 20 ft. from the back ed�e of the allev.
R-10 and R- Determined through administrative review, to be no less than 5 ft. and no
14 greater than 10 ft. from the back ed�e of the allev.
' RM I n/a
ISpecial Setbacks for Animal Husbandry or Agricultural Related Structures
RC, R-1, R-4, Agricultural related structures—50 ft. from any property line.
h r animal husbandr related structures see RMC 4-4-010 Animal
R-6, R-8, R- Stables and ot e y , �
' 10, and R-14 Keeping and Beekeepin�Standards.
, RM n/a
�Clear Vision Area
RC, R-1, R-4,
R-6, R-8, R- In no case shall a structure over 42 in. in height intrude into the 20 ft. clear vision
10, R-14 and area defined in RMC 4-11-030.
RM
General
RC, R-1, R-4� Garages and carports must provide a minimum of 24 ft. of back-out room, either
R-6, and R- on site or counting improved alley�surface or other improved right-of-way
8 surface.
See RMC 4-4-080, Parkin�, Loadin� and Drivewav Re�ulations.
R-10 and R- Garages shall be set back a minimum of 10 ft. from the front of the building
14 facade or 7 ft. from the back of a porch or stoop. Garages shall have a minimum
18-foot driveway length from the face of the garage to the back of the sidewalk
or access lane, unless accessed by an alleyway.
General
RC, R-1, R-4, See RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas Re�ulations and 4-3-090,Shoreline Master
R-6, R-8, R- pro�ram Re�ulations.
10, and R-14
SECTION VIII. Subsection 4-2-110.D.12, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
11
ORDINANCE N0. '
12. When lot size is reduced for the purpose of achieving maximum
density, reduced setbacks may also be approved. Setback reductions shall be
limited to the following:
a_Front—twenty feet (20').
b. Side yard along a street — � twentv-five feet (�25') primary
structure, �}� thirtv feet (�30') attached garage with access from the side
yard.
SECTION IX. Subsection 4-2-110.D, Conditions Associated with Development
Standards Table for Residential Design Standards, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended to
add new subsections 4-2-110.D.32 through 4-2-110.D.39,to read as follows:
32. When cluster development is allowed, specified development I
standards are allowed to be reduced, as indicated below: ''
a. R-1 Zone: Ten thousand (10.000) sauare feet minimum lot size.
Minimum lot width and minimum lot depth shall applv the standards of the R-4
zone.
b. R-4 Zone: Minimum lot size, minimum lot width, minimum lot
depth, minimum front vard, minimum side vard, minimum side vard alon� a
street, and impervious surface area shall applv the standards of the R-6 zone.
33. In the R-4 zone,the followin�exceptions applv:
12
''� _ _
' ORDINANCE N0.
a. When parking is provided in the rear vard of the lot with access
from a public right-of-wav or allev the minimum front vard shall be twentv feet
20' .
b. The Administrator mav reduce the setback bv a maximum of fiftv
percent (50%) of the reauired setback, when all of the followin� conditions
app�V !,
i. The setback that was reauired at the time of initial
construction was less than the current reauirement;
ii. A reduced setback is approqriate �iven the character of the II
immediate nei�hborhood; and I'
iii. There are no other alternative locations that can reasonablv
accommodate the reauest without encroachin�into a setback.
34. For short plats of parcels smaller than one (1) acre. one (11 parcel mav
be allowed to be smaller than the required minimum lot size indicated in 4-2-
110.A, Residential Development Standards. If all other parcels meet the required
minimum lot size standard of the zone. one (1) parcel mav be allowed to meet
the followin� reduced minimum lot size:
a. R-4: Ei�ht thousand (8.000) square feet.
b. R-6: Six thousand two hundred fiftv (6,2501 square feet.
c. R-8: Four thousand five hundred (4,500) square feet.
13
ORDINANCE N0. �
35. Assisted livin� bonus: A maximum densitv of ei�hteen (181 units per
net acre, for assisted living, mav be allowed subiect to conditions of RMC 4-9-
065, Densitv Bonus Review.
36. For parcels that are in desi�nated Urban Separators in the R-1 zone,
up to one (1) unit per �ross acre mav be permitted subiect to conditions in RMC
4-3-110, Urban Separator Overlav Re�ulations.
37. Affordable housin� bonus in the R-14 zone: Uq to thirtv (301 dwellin�
units per net acre mav be permitted on parcels a minimum of two (21 acres in
size if fiftv percent (50%) or more of the proposed dwellin� units are affordable
to low income households with incomes at or below fiftv percent (50%1 of the
area median income.
38. For parcels in the R-8 zone, the maximum densitv shall be six 16)
dwelling units per net acre when allevs are considered practical, as specified in
RMC 4-7-150.E.5, Street Pattern: Allev Access, and are not part of the street
confi�uration.
39. In the R-10 and R-4 zones: To ensure adequate vehicular
maneuverin� area, �ara�es and carports that are accessed throu�h allevs shall be
set back as follows:
a. Nine-foot (9') �ara�e doors shall be at least twentv-six feet (26')
from the back ed�e of the allev: or
b. Sixteen-foot (16') �ara�e doors shall be at least twentv-four feet
(24'1 from the back ed�e of the allev.
14
• ORDINANCE N0.
SECTION X. Section 4-2-110, Residential Development Standards, of Chapter 2,
Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended to add a new subsection 4-2-110.F, to read as follows:
4-2-110.F DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY ZONING
DESIGNATIONS (PRIMARY AND ATTACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES�
Minimum Net Densitv(for proposed subdivisionsl1,is
RM For anv subdivision,and/or development:3o
"U" suffix: 25 dwellin�units per net acre
"T" suffix: 14 dwellin�units per net acre
"F" suffix: 10 dwellin�units per net acre
IMaximum Net DensitvZ'la,�s
RM "U" suffix: 75 dwellin�units per net acre26 ,
"T" suffix: 35 dwellin� units per net acre
"F" suffix: 20 dwellin�units per net acre3z
Assisted livin� bonus: l.5 times the maximum densitv mav be allowed subiect to �
conditions of RMC 4-9-065. Densitv Bonus Review.
��.y_..`._--.�uu. :�.�,i ���� �
Minimum Lot Size
IRM In a
I Minimum Lot Width—see subsection 4-7-170.E.
RM "T" suffix: 14 ft.
All other suffixes: 50 ft.
IMinimum Lot Depth—see subsection 4-7-170.E.
RM29 65 ft.
Minimum Front Yard6
RMS "U" suffix: 5 ft.18'19 exceqt �ara�e/carport setback shall be 20 ft.
"T" suffix: 5 ft.except�ara�e/carport setback shall be 20 ft.
"F" suffix: 20 ft.
IMinimum Side Yard
RM "T" suffix—Attached Units:A minimum of 3 ft. for the unattached side(s) of the
structure. 0 ft. for the attached side(sl
Standard Minimum Setbacks for all other suffixes: Minimum setbacks for side vards:Z4
15
ORDINANCE N0. �
Lot width: less than or eaual to 50 ft.—Yard setback: 5 ft.
Lot width: 50.1 to 60 ft. —Yard setback: 6 ft.
Lot width: 60.1 to 70 ft. —Yard setback: 7 ft.
Lot width: 70.1 to 80 ft.—Yard setback: 8 ft.
Lot width: 80.1 to 90 ft. —Yard setback: 9 ft.
Lot width: 90.1 to 100 ft.—Yard setback: 10 ft.
Lot width: 100.1 to 110 ft. —Yard setback: 11 ft.
Lot width: 110.1+ft.—Yard setback: 12 ft.
Additional setbacks for structures�reater than 30 ft. in elevation:The entire structure
shall be set back an additional 1 ft.for each 10 ft. of hei�ht in excess of 30 ft.to a
maximum cumulative setback of 20 ft.
Additional setbacks for lots abuttin�Sin�le Family Residential Zones: 25 ft. alon�the
abuttin�side(s) of the propertv.
ISide Yard Alon�a Street
RM5 "U"and "T" suffixes and on all previouslv existin� platted lots which are 50 ft. or less
in width: l0 ft.except�ara�e/carport setback shall be 20 ft.
All other suffixes with lots over 50 ft. in width: 20 ft.
�Minimum Rear Yard
RM "U" suffix: 5 ft.1s�19, unless lot abuts an RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, or R-10 zone, then 25 ft.
"T"suffix: 5 ft.
"F" suffix: 15 ft.
RM n a
Maximum Buildin� Hei�ht, except for uses havin�a "Public Suffix" �P1 desi�nation and public
water svstem facilities8'9
RM "U" suffix: 50 ft.
"T" suffix: 35 ft.
"F" suffix: 35 ft.20
IMaximum Hei�ht for Wireless Communication Facilities �Includin�Amateur Radio Antennas�
RM See RMC 4-4-140, Wireless Communication Facilities. Amateur radio antennas are
allowed a maximum hei�ht of 6 ft. without a conditional use qermit. Lar�er structures
will have maximum hei�ht determined bv the conditional use qermit process. RMC 4-9-
030, Conditional Use Permits.
IMaximum Buildin�Covera�e(Includin� Primarv and Accessorv Buildin�s�
RM "U" suffix: 75%
"T" suffix: 75%
"F" suffix: 35%
A maximum covera�e of 45% mav be allowed throu�h the Hearin� Examiner site
development plan review arocess.
16 ',
� ORDINANCE N0. I
IMaximum Impervious Surface Area
RM "U" and "T" suffixes:85%
All other suffixes:75%
IBuildin� Desi�n
RM "U" suffix: Modulation of vertical and horizontal facades is reauired at a minimum of 2
ft. at an interval of a minimum offset of 40 ft. on each buildin�face.
"U"and "T" suffixes: See RMC 4-3-100, Urban Desi�n Re�ulations.
General
RM Properties abuttin� a less intense residential zone mav be required to incoraorate
special desi�n standards (e.�., additional landscapin�, lar�er setbacks, facade
articulation. solar access, fencin�)throu�h the site develoqment plan review process.
General: See RMC 4-4-070. Landscapin�.
Surface Mounted or Roof Top Eauipment, or Outdoor Stora�e
- - i ht Location Limitations. �
_IRM ISee RMC 4 4 095. Screenin�and Stora�e He � /
IRecvclables and Refuse
_I RM See RMC 4-4-090. Refuse and Recvclable Standards.
RM See RMC 4-4-090. Refuse and Recvclable Standards.
General: See RMC 4-4-080, Parkin�. Loadin�and Drivewav Re�ulations.
Pre-Existin� Le�al Lots
RM Nothin�herein shall prohibit the construction of a sin�le famila dwellin�and its
accessorv buildin�s or the existence of a sin�le familv dwellin�or two attached
dwellin�s, existin�as of March 1. 1995, on a pre-existin� le�al lot: provided. that all
setback, lot covera�e, hei�ht limits, infrastructure, and parkin� reauirements for this
zone can be satisfied. and provisions of RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas, and other
provisions of the Renton Municipal Code can be met.
17
ORDINANCE N0. '
SECTION XI. Subsection 4-2-115.B.1,Applicability, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses
and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
1. This section shall apply to all new dwelling units in the following zones:
Resource Conservation (RC), Residential One Dwelling Unit per Acre (R-1),
, Residential Four Dwelling Units per Acre (R-4), Residential Six Dwellin� Units per
Acre (R-6), Residential Eight Dwelling Units per Acre (R-8), Residential Ten
Dwelling Units per Acre (R-10), and Residential Fourteen Dwelling Units per Acre
(R-14). The standards of the Site Design subsection are required at the time of
subdivision application. The standards of the Residential Design subsection are
required at the time of application for building permits. The standards of
Residential Design are required for the building for which the building permit is
, being issued.
SECTION XII. Subsection 4-2-115.E, Requirements, of Chapter 2, Zoning bistricts— Uses
and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
E. REQUIREMENTS:
1. Site Design:
Guidelines: Developments shall create pedestrian oriented environments and amplify the
mutual relationship between housing units, roads, open space, and pedestrian amenities, while
also protecting the privacy of individuals. Lots shall be configured to encourage variety within
the development.
Standards:
18
' ORDINANCE NO.
RC, �
R-1, n/a
and
R-4
One of the foilowing is required:
1. Lot width variation of 10 feet (10') minimum of one per four (4) abutting street-
R-6 fronting lots, or
and 2. Minimum of four (4) lot sizes (minimum of four hundred (400) gross square feet
R-g size difference), or
3. A front yard setback variation of at least five feet(5') minimum for at least every
four (4) abutting street fronting lots.
R-10 Developments of more than four (4) structures shall incorporate a variety of home �
and sizes, lot sizes, and unit clusters.
R-14 Dwellings shall be arranged to ensure privacy so that side yards abut other side yards
(or right-of-way) and do not abut front or back yards. i
Lots accessed by easements or pipestems shall be prohibited. �II
Guidelines:The visual impact of garages shall be minimized, while porches and front doors
shall be the emphasis of the front of the home. Garages shall be located in a manner that
minimizes the presence of the garage and shall not be located at the end of view corridors.
Alley�access is encouraged. If used, shared garages shall be within an acceptable walking
distance to the housing unit it is intended to serve.
Standards:
RC
and n/a
R-1
One of the following is required; the garage is:
1. Recessed from the front of the house and/or front porch at least eight feet (8'),
or
2. Located so that the roof extends at least five feet (5') (not including eaves)
R-4 beyond the front of the garage for at least the width of the garage plus the
�
R-6, porch/stoop area, or
and 3. Alley accessed, or
R-g 4. Located so that the entry does not face a public and/or private street or an
access easement, or
5. Sized so that it represents no greater than fifty percent (50%) of the width of
the front facade at ground level, or
6. Detached.
19
ORDINANCE NO. �
The portion of an attached garage wider than twenty six-feet (26') across the front shall
be set back at least an additional two feet (2').
R-10 Garages may be attached or detached. Shared garages are also allowed, provided the
and regulations of RMC 4-4-080 are met. Carports are not allowed.
R-14 One of the following is required;the garage must be:
1. Recessed from the front of the house and/or front porch at least eight feet (8'),
or
2. Detached and set back from the front of the house and/or porch at least six
feet (6').
Additionally, all of the following is required:
1. Garage design shall be of similar design to the homes, and
2 If sides of the garage are visible from streets, sidewalks, pathways, trails, or
other homes, architectural details shall be incorporated in the design.
If shared garages are allowed,they may share the structure with other homes and all of
the following is required:
1. Each unit has garage space assigned to it, and
2. The garage is not to be located further than one hundred sixty feet (160')from
any of the housing units to which it is assigned, and
3. The garage shall not exceed forty-four feet (44') in width, and shall maintain an
eight foot (8') separation from any dwellings.
2. Open Space:
Guidelines:All open space shall be designed to preserve existing trees. Except for Native
Growth Protection Areas, all common open space areas shall be designed to accommodate
both active and passive recreational opportunities and be visible and open to the street. Pocket
parks shall be designed to serve four (4)to ten (10) homes. Private yards are located at the rear
or side of homes and can include trees, planting beds, and privacy fences. Reciprocal use
easements can provide greater usability of private yards.
Landscaping:
R-10
and See RMC 4-4-070, Landscapin� ,� �+ ^ ���� ^ , "^ , ^^'^a.
R-14
�Standards for Parks:
R-10 For developments that are less than ten (10) net acres: No park is required, but is
and allowed.
R-14 For developments that are greater than ten (10) net acres: A minimum of one one-half
20
' ORDINANCE NO.
II(.5) acre park, in addition to the common open space requirement, is required.
(Standards for Common Open Space:
R-10 Developments of three (3) or fewer dwelling units: No requirement to provide
and common open space.
R-14 Developments of four (4) or more units: Required to provide common open space as
follows:
1. For each unit in the development,three hundred fifty (350) square feet of
common open space shall be provided.
2. Open space shall be designed as a park, common green, pea-patch, pocket park,
or pedestrian entry easement in the development and shall include picnic areas,
space for small recreational activities, and other activities as appropriate.
3. Open space shall be located in a highly visible area and be easily accessible to the I
neighborhood. '',
4. Open space(s) shall be contiguous to the majority of the dwellings in the I
development and accessible to all dwellings, and shall be at least twenty feet
(20') wide.
5. A pedestrian entry easement can be used to meet the access requirements if it
has a minimum width of twenty feet (20') with a minimum five feet (5') of
sidewalk.
6. Pea-patches shall be at least one thousand (1,000) square feet in size with
individual plots that measure ten feet by ten feet (10' x 10'). Additionally, the
pea-patch shall include a tool shed and a common area with space for compost
bins. Water shall be provided to the pea-patch. Fencing that meets the standards I ,
for front yard fencing shall surround the pea-patch with a one foot (1') landscape
area on the outside of the fence. This area is to be landscaped with flowers,
plants, and/or shrubs.
7. Grass-crete or other pervious surfaces may be used in the common open space
for the purpose of ineeting the one hundred fifty feet (150') distance
requirement for emergency vehicle access but shall not be used for personal
vehicle access or to meet off-street parking requirements.
8. Storm ponds may be used to meet the common open space requirement if
designed to accommodate a fifty (50) year storm and to be dry ninety percent
(90%) of the year.
IStandards for Private Yards:
R-10 Developments of three (3) or fewer dwelling units: Each individual dwelling shall have
and a private yard that is at minimum six hundred (600) square feet in size. Backyard patios
R-14 and reciprocal use easements may be included in the calculation of private yard.
Developments of four(4) or more dwelling units: Each ground-related dwelling shall
have a private yard that is at least two hundred fifty (250) square feet in size with no
dimension less than eight feet (8') in width.
21
ORDINANCE N0. �
An additional two hundred fifty (250) square feet of open space per unit shall be added
to the required amount of common open space for each unit that is not ground related.
ICommon Open Space or Park Substitutions: .
R-10
and See RMC 4-1-240
R-14
ISidewalks, Pathwavs,and Pedestrian Easements:
R-10 �All of the followin�are required:
and 1. Sidewalks shall be provided throu�hout the nei�hborhood.The sidewalk mav
R-14 disconnect from the road. provided it continues in a lo�ical route throu�hout the
develoqment.
?. Front vards shall have entrv walks that are a minimum width of three feet (3') and a
maximum width of four feet (4'}.
3. Pathways shall be used to connect common parks. �reen areas. and pocket parks to
residential access streets, limited residential access streets, or other pedestrian
connections. Thev may be used to provide access to homes and common open
sqace. Thev shall be a minimum three feet (3') in width and made of paved asphalt,
concrete, or porous material such as: porous paving stones, crushed �ravel with soil
stabilizers, or pavin�blocks with planted ioints. Sidewalks or pathwavs for parks and
�reen spaces shall be located at the ed�e of the common space to allow a lar�er
usable �reen and easv access to homes.
4• Pedestrian Easement Plantin�s: Shall be planted with plants and trees. Trees are
required along all pedestrian easements to provide shade and spaced twentv feet
(20') on center. Shrubs shall be planted in at least fifteen percent (15%) of the
easement and shall be spaced no further than thirtv-six inches (36")on center.
5. For all homes that do not front on a residential access street, limited residential
access street, a park, or a common �reen: Pedestrian entrv easements that are at
least fifteen feet (15'1 wide plus a five-foot (5'1. sidewalk shall be provided.
3. Residential Design:
Guidelines: Entrances to homes shall be a focal point and allow space for social interaction.
Front doors shall face the street and be on the facade closest to the street. When a home is
located on a corner lot (i.e., at the intersection of two roads or the intersection of a road and
a common space) a feature like a wrapped porch shall be used to reduce the perceived scale
22
• ORDINANCE N0.
lof the house and engage the street or open space on both sides.
IStandards:
RC n/a
and
R-1
R-4� One of the following is required:
R-6, 1. Stoop: minimum size four feet by six feet (4' x 6') and minimum height twelve
and inches (12") above grade, or
R-g 2. Porch: minimum size five feet (5') deep and minimum height twelve inches (12")
above grade.
Exception: in cases where accessibility (ADA) is a priority, an accessible route may be
taken from a front driveway.
,
R-10 Both of the following are required:
and 1. The entry shall take access from and face a street, park, common green, pocket
R-14 park, pedestrian easement, or open space, and
2. The entry shall include one of the following: ,
a. Stoop: minimum size four feet by six feet (4' x 6') and minimum height twelve ',
inches (12") above grade, or
b. Porch: minimum five feet (5') deep and minimum height twelve inches (12")
above grade. ;
Exception: in cases where accessibility (ADA) is a priority, an accessible route may be i
taken from a front driveway. I
Guidelines: Buildings shall not have monotonous facades along public areas. Dwellings shall
include articulation along public frontages;the articulation may include the connection of an
open porch to the building, a dormer facing the street, or a well-defined entry element.
Standards: �
RC n/a
and
R-1
R-4� One of the folfowing is required: l
R-6, 1. An offset of at least one story that is at least ten feet (10') wide and two feet (2')
and in depth on facades visible from the street, or
R�8 2. At least two feet (2') offset of second story from first story on one street facing
facade. ;
R-10 Both of the following are required: �i
and 1. The primary building elevation oriented toward the street or common green '
23
ORDINANCE N0. •
� 'i II
R-14 shall have at least one articulation or change in plane of at least two feet (2 ) in I �
depth; and 'I
2. A minimum one side articulation that measures at least one foot (1') in depth ' I�
shall occur for all facades facing streets or public spaces.
Guidelines:Windows and front doors shall serve as an integral part of the character of the
home. Primary windows shall be proportioned vertically rather than horizontally. Vertical
windows may be combined together to create a larger window area. Front doors shall be a
focal point of the dwelling and be in scale with the home. All doors shall be of the same
character as the home.
Standards:
RC n/a
and
R-1
R-4� Windows and doors shall constitute twenty-five percent (25%) of all facades facing
R_6� street frontage or public spaces.
and
R-8
R-10 All of the following are required:
and 1. Primary windows shall be proportioned vertically, rather than horizontally, and !
R-14 2 Vertical windows may be combined together to create a larger window area,
and
3. All doors shall be made of wood, fiberglass, metal, or glass and trimmed with
three and one half inches (3 1/2") minimum head and jamb trim around the
door, and
4. Screen doors are permitted, and '
5. Primary entry doors shall face a street, park, common green, pocket park, or
pedestrian easement and shall be paneled or have inset windows, and
6. Sliding glass doors are not permitted along a frontage elevation or an elevation �I
facing a pedestrian easement.
24
' ORDINANCE NO.
Guidelines: A diverse streetscape shall be provided by using elevations and models that
demonstrate a variety of floor plans, home sizes, and character. Neighborhoods shall have a
variety of home sizes and character.
Standards: ��
RC n/a
and
R-1
R-4� A variety of elevations and models that demonstrate a variety of floor plans, home
R-6, sizes, and character shall be used. !
and Additionally, both of the following are required: '
R-g 1. A minimum of three (3) differing home models for each ten (10) contiguous
abutting homes, and
2. Abutting houses must have differing architectural elevations.
R-10 All of the following are required:
and 1. The primary building form shall be the dominating form and elements such as
R-14 porches, principal dormers, or other significant features shall not dominate, ,
and
2. Primary porch plate heights shall be one story. Stacked porches are allowed, �
and ;
3. To differentiate the same models and elevations, different colors shall be used, I
and i
4. For single-family dwellings, no more than two (2) of the same model and
elevation shall be built on the same block frontage and the same model and
elevation shall not be abutting.
Guidelines: Roofs shall represent a variety of forms and profiles that add character and relief
to the landscape of the neighborhood. The use of bright colors, as well as roofing that is
made of material like gravel and/or a reflective material, is discouraged.
Standards:
RC n/a
and
R-1
R-4� One of the following is required for all development:
R-6, 1. Hip or gabled with at least a six to twelve (6:12) pitch for the prominent form
and of the roof(dormers, etc., may have lesser pitch), or
R-8 2. Shed roof.
25
ORDINANCE N0. �
Additionally, for subdivisions greater than nine (9j lots: A variety of roof forms
appropriate to the style of the home shall be used.
R-10 Both of the following are required:
and 1. Primary roof pitch shall be a minimum six to twelve (6:12). If a gable roof is
R-14 used, exit access from a third floor must face a public right of way for '�,
emergency access, and '
2. A variety of roofing colors shall be used within the development and all roof
material shall be fire retardant.
Guidelines: Eaves should be detailed and proportioned to complement the architectural
style of the home.
Standards:
RC n/a
and
R-1
R-4� Both of the following are required:
R-6, 1. Eaves projecting from the roof of the entire building at least twelve inches (12")
and with horizontal fascia or fascia gutter at least five inches (5") deep on the face
R-g of all eaves, and
2. Rakes on gable ends must extend a minimum of two inches (2")from the
surface of exterior siding materials.
R-10 The following is required: Eaves shall be at least twelve inches (12") with horizontal
and fascia or fascia gutter at least five inches (5") deep on the face of all eaves.
R-14
Guidelines:Architectural detail shall be provided that is appropriate to the architectural
character of the home. Detailing like trim, columns, and/or corner boards shall reflect the
architectural character of the house.
Standards:
RC n/a
and
R-1
R-4� If one siding material is used on any side of the dwelling that is two stories or greater
R-6, in height, a horizontal band that measures at least eight inches (8") is required I�
. 26 ,
� ORDINANCE NO.
and between the first and second story.
R'$ Additionally, one of the following is required:
1. Three and one half inch (3 1/2") minimum trim surrounds all windows and
details all doors, or
2. A combination of shutters and three and one half inches (3 1/2") minimum trim
details all windows, and three and one half inches (3 1/2") minimum trim details
all doors.
R-10 All of the following are required:
and 1. Three and one half inches (3 1/2") minimum trim surrounds all windows and
R-14 details all doors, and
2. At least one of the following architectural details shall be provided on each '
home: shutters, knee braces, flower boxes, or columns, and
3. Where siding is used, metal corner clips or corner boards shall be used and shall
be at minimum two and one half inches (21/2") in width and painted. If
shutters are used, they shall be proportioned to the window size to simulate the!�
ability to cover them, and
4. If columns are used,they shall be round, fluted, or strongly related to the
home's architectural style. Six inches by six inches (6" x 6") posts may be
allowed if chamfered and/or banded. Exposed four inches by four inches (4" x �
4") and six inches by six inches (6" x 6") posts are prohibited. ;
Guidelines:A diversity of materials and color shall be used on homes throughout the
community. A variety of materials that are appropriate to the architectural character of the
neighborhood shall be used. A diverse palette of colors shall be used to reduce monotony of
color or tone.
Standards:
RC n/a
and
R-1
R-4� For subdivisions and short plats, abutting homes shall be of differing color. Color
R-6, palettes for all new dwellings, coded to the home elevations, shall be submitted for
and approval.
R-8
Additionally, one of the following is required:
1. A minimum of two (2) colors is used on the home (body with different color
trim is acceptable), or
2. A minimum of two (2) differing siding materials (horizontal siding and shingles,
siding and masonry or masonry-like material, etc.) is used on the home. One
alternative siding material must comprise a minimum of thirty percent (30%)
27
ORDINANCE N0. •
of the street facing facade. If masonry siding is used, it shall wrap the corners
no less than twenty four inches (24"). _ �
R-10 All of the following are required: �'
and 1. Acceptable exterior wall materials are: wood, cement fiberboard, stucco, I,
R-14 stone, and standard sized brick three and one half inches by seven and one �
half inches (3 1/2" x 7 1/2") or three and five eighths inches by seven and five ,
eighths inches (3 5/8" x 7 5/8"). Simulated stone, wood, stone, or brick may be',
used to detail homes, and �
2. When more than one material is used, changes in a vertical wall, such as from i
wood to brick, shall wrap the corners no less than twenty-four inches (24").
The material change shall occur at an internal corner or a logical transition
such as aligning with a window edge or chimney. Material transition shall not �
occur at an exterior corner, and
3. Multiple colors on buildings shall be provided. Muted deeper tones, as
opposed to vibrant primary colors, shall be the dominant colors. Color '
palettes for all new structures, coded to the home elevations, shall be
submitted for approval.
4. Gutters and downspouts shall be integrated into the color scheme of the '
home and be painted, or of an integral color,to match the trim color.
� 1 �I ' . , , � �� , _ ,
�'�:'dNE�'Ifi��P�io►p.�RS
�Guidelines: Mailboxes shall be located so that thev are easilv accessible to residents. Thev shall
�also be architecturallv compatible with the homes.
All of the followin� are re �
uq ired: ',
1. Mailboxes shall be clustered and located so as to serve the needs of USPS while
R-10 not adverselv affectin�the privacv of residents;
and 2 Mailboxes shall be lockable consistent with USPS standard�
R-14 —
3. Mailboxes shall be architecturally enhanced with materials and details tvpical of I
the home's architecture; and
4. Newspaqer boxes shall be of a desi�n that reflects the character of the home.
� �9.�!I�N�.�!L�t
IG uid' :-------,-_____--.---- _.----- --_-- - ____._____
elines: Hot tubs, pools, and mechanical equipment shall be placed so as to not ne�ativelv
�impact nei�hbors.
Hot tubs and pools shall only be located in back vards and designed to minimize si�ht
R-10 and sound impacts to adioinin�propertv. Pool heaters and pumps shall be screened
and from view and sound insulated. Pool eauipment must complv with codes re�ardin�
R014
fencin�.
R-10 I Utilitv boxes that are not located in allevways or away from public�atherin�spaces
28
• ORDINANCE NO.
and shall be screened with landscapin�or berms.
R-14
� � � ���� � � ,�i�,,� �
��� ^ -_�_- _ � � � � � � � � ,.
�:e� .� �A��tc�f'�����c���x � �1
�Both of the followin�are required:
1. Trash and recvclin�containers shall be located so that thev have minimal impact on
R-10 residents and their nei�hbors and so that thev are not visible to the �eneral public:
and and
R-14 2 A screened enclosure in which to keep containers shall be provided or�ara�es shall
be built with adeauate space to keep containers. Screened enclosures shall not be
located within front vards.
SECTION XIII. The Minimum Rear Yard and Minimum Side Yard rows of the Setbacks
subsection and the Loading Docks subsection of subsection 4-2-120.A, Development Standards
for Commercial Zoning Designations, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts - Uses and Standards, of
Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, are amended as shown
below. The rest of the subsection shall remain as it currently reads.
CN CV CA
Minimum None, except 15 ft. if lot None, except 15 ft. if lot None, except 15 ft. if lot
Rear Yardl$ abuts a lot zoned abuts a lot zoned abuts a lot zoned
residential�e�e. R�� residential�e�e. R�-R�-� residential�e�e., °''��
� Q A D Q D '1!1 D_1 A �, � A D O Q 9!1 D 9 A .� Q A D O D 9!1 D 1/1 �..D 11 A_
i � i � .� .. ..� i i � i i i
TttVT—t 1'cT'It'—r �`
Minimum None, except 15 ft. if lot None, except 15 ft. if lot None, except 15 ft. if lot
Side Yard18 abuts or is adjacent to a abuts or is adjacent to a abuts or is adjacent to a lot
lot zoned residentia► lot zoned residential�e; zoned residential � ^e��,°�;
�, ., D/" D 'I D A D 4 � D '1 D A D 4 D 'I!1 D_ Q 1 D A D 4 D 1 A D '1 A
i i i i i � i � i i � i � i i �
D '1!1 D 9A ... D�A.0 9A D�A C ��.
� � . �.
LOADING DOCKS
Location See RMC 4-4-080. See RMC 4-4-080. See RMC 4-4-080.
within Site Shall not be permitted Shall not be permitted on Shall not be permitted on
on the side of the lot the side of the lot the side of the lot adjacent
adjacent to or abutting a adjacent to or abutting a to or abutting a lot zoned
lot zoned residential lot zoned residential-�e�� residential � ^e�,-,°�°T
29
ORDINANCE N0. •
���D r' D 9 D A D_4 �,r' D � n �� O D 9!1 D_ Q A D 4 D �!1 D �A
/ I / I / �••� �• i� n � .r� . v� .. I I I I ^
p �n o �n ,,. onn 3 �n onn 3 �,�.3
� , . z�-r�-^vT-rTr.r.
SECTION XIV. The Minimum Rear Yard row of the Setbacks subsection and the Loading
Docks subsection of subsection 4-2-120.B, Development Standards for Commercial Zoning
Desi nations, are amended as shown below. The rest of the subsection shall remain as it
g
currently reads.
CD CO COR
None, unless the CD lot
abuts a lot zoned
residential�e�e, �R-�
nn � Q o �n � �n
rc-r,-n--��c—r.,� . ., 3f
Q�A D Q D 1!1 D 9� .,
' ' ' r None required, except, 15
Minimum18 ��then there shall ft. if abutting a lot zoned Determined through site
Rear Yard be a 15 ft. landscaped residential�e�e. development plan review_
strip or a 5 ft. wide sight-
obscuring landscaped
strip and a solid 6 ft.
high barrier used along
the common boundary.
LOADING DOCKS
Location For permitted Not permitted on the side of Determined through site
manufacturing and the lot adjacent or abutting to development plan review.
fabrication uses, a lot zoned residential ��
parking, docking and ° ', o n� o o� o �n� o �n� �
loading areas for ��A-I:�.
truck traffic shall be
off-street and
screened from view
of abutting public
streets.
30
• ORDINANCE N0.
SECTION XV. Subsection 4-2-120.C.16, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
16. The following height requests may be allowed by an administrative
conditional use permit:
APPLICABLE '�
ZONE HEIGHT CHANGE REQUEST
IExceed height of 50 feet
All of the CV Zone
I Exceed height of 45 feet when abutting R-6, R-8�or R-10 Zone
All of the CA ZonelExceed maximum height
In consideration of a request for a conditional use permit for additional
building height, all relevant information and the following factors shall be
considered along with the criteria in RMC 4-9-030, Conditional Use Permits.
a. Location Criteria: Proximity of arterial streets which have
sufficient capacity to accommodate traffic generated by the development.
Developments are encouraged to locate in areas served by transit.
b. Comprehensive Plan: The proposed use shall be compatible with
the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Comprehensive Plan,
the zoning regulations and any other plan, program, map or regulation of the
City.
c. Effect on Adjacent or Abutting Properties: Building heights shall
not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent and abutting
property. When a building in excess of the maximum height is proposed adjacent I�
31
L
ORDINANCE N0. '
to or abutting a lot zoned residential a^�'�-^,*^�' D_1 ° " " ° " '
, ., .. .., .. _ ,
�, then the setbacks shall be equivalent to the requirements of the adjacent
residential zone if the setback standards exceed the requirements of the
Commercial Zone.
SECTION XVI. The Setbacks and Loading Docks subsections, of subsection 4-2-130.A,
Development Standards for Industrial Zoning Designations, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses
and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, are
amended as shown below. The rest of the subsection shall remain as currently codified.
� IL � IM � IH
SETBACKS$'ii
Minimum Front Principal Arterial Principal Arterial Principal
Yard streets:12 20 ft. streets:1z 20 ft. Arterial
Other streets: 15 ft. Other streets: 15 ft. streets:1z 20
provided that 20 ft. is Except 50 ft. is required ft.
required if a lot is if a le�is adjacent to or Other
adjacent to or abutting a abutting a lot zoned streets: 15
lot zoned residential residential�F�- ft.
...,.J D 'I D A D O D�_� 'I D A D 4 D�A LJ D 'I!1
� .� .. ..� � i i > > i i -
D 1(1 D 9A .,.- D�A Q 1A D�A
i i . �.
Minimum Side Yard Principal Arterial Principal Arterial Principal
Along a Street streets:1z 20 ft. streets:lZ 20 ft. Arterial
Other streets: 15 ft. Other streets: 15 ft. streets:1z 20
Except SO ft. is required if Except 50 ft. is required ft.
a lot is adjacent to or if a lot is adjacent to or Other
abutting a lot zoned abutting a lot zoned streets: 15
residential�e�e�° '�-t; residential��et�e�ft- ft.
Q Q D 1!1 D 'IA .,. D�A 1 D A D�ALI D 4 D_1(1
i � � ' � i_ � � �
TC�Y t'C71"rtT'!T.
Minimum Freeway 10 ft. landscaped setback 10 ft. landscaped 10 ft.
Frontage Setback from the property line. setback from the landscaped
property line. setback from
the property
line.
Minimum Rear and None, except 20 ft. if lot is None, except 50 ft. if lot None,
Side Yardsll adjacent to or abutting a is adjacent to or except, 50 ft.
lot zoned residential�e+�� abutting a lot zoned if lot abuts a
32
� ORDINANCE N0.
o � o n � Q onnu � �n residential '^"^ D 1 ° lot zoned
� � � � , , �
��; which may �� � Q� onnu� o �n� n ��� residential
be reduced to 15 ft. e�R�. �e�ed�-�-R-
through the site plan ^, ° °�P
development review o '", "' °""
process. �•
20 ft. if lot
abuts a lot
zoned CN,
CV, CA, CD,
CO, COR, or
P-Suffix.
'-LOADINGpOC1C5 r . � .. . _., _ , ., - y q����`��' �`�F� ' �����J�
�,�.�.} ,�. � :� � f�����.�..���' �� -��,� fi �
Location Not permitted on the side Not permitted on the NA
of the lot that is adjacent side of the lot that is
to or abutting a lot zoned adjacent to or abutting
residential a ^, D 1� ° ^, a lot zoned residential
Q Q, Q '1!l, D 't A, .+. D�A 1,z � .+� D '1, D A' D O� D
'1!1 D 1 A .,. D�A 1 2
� '
SECTION XVII. Subsection 4-2-130.6.3, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts - Uses and
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
3. Provided that a solid 6' high barrier wall is provided within the
landscape strip and a maintenance agreement or easement for the landscape
strip is secured. A solid barrier wall shall not be located closer than 5' to an
abutting lot zoned residential� �, � ^., Q 4, o �n� � �n .,. �nn �
SECTION XVI11. Subsection 4-4-080.E.2.a.i, of Chapter 4, City-Wide Property
Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
33
ORDINANCE N0. '
i. If sufficient parking is not available on the premises of the use, a �
private parking area may be provided off site, except for single and two (2)
family dwellings in the RC, R-1, R-4, R-6, and R-8 zones.
SECTION XIX. Subsection 4-4-080.E.7.b, R-8 Zones, of Chapter 4, City-Wide Property
Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
b. R-6 and R-8 Zones: For lots abutting an alley, all parking areas
and/or attached or detached garages shall not occur in front of the building
and/or in the area between the front lot line and the front building line; parking
areas and garages must occur at the rear or side of the building, and vehicular
access shall be taken from the alley. See RMC 4-2-115, Residential Design and
Open Space Standards.
SECTION XX. Subsection 4-4-090.C.3, Special Setbacks from Residential Properties, of
Chapter 4, City-Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of
the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
3. Special Setbacks from Residential Properties: Outdoor refuse and
recyclables deposit areas and collection points shall not be located within fifty
feet (50') of a ��# lot zoned °�, D 1, ° ^, ° 4, ° '^, ° '", ^� °"" residential,
except by approval through the site development plan review process, or �ia
throu�h the modification process if exempt from site development plan review.
SECTION XXI. Subsection 4-4-095.F.2, Outdoor Loading, Repair, Maintenance and Work
Areas — Commercial and Industrial Zones, of Chapter 4, City-Wide Property Development
34
� ' ORDINANCE N0.
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipa) Code, is amended as
follows:
2. Outdoor Loading, Repair, Maintenance and Work Areas—Commercial
and Industrial Zones: Screening is not required, except when the subject
commercial or industrial lot abuts or is adjacent to a residentially zoned lot�-�
^, ,^, � ^,".��+�^ ° �^. R�4- and the re ulated activit is ro osed on
Q� � � o g Y P p
,-��r- , , � , , , ,
the side of the property abutting or adjacent to the listed zones. In such cases, a
n ca in or a landsca ed berm or an combination �#e�ee#of the
fence, or la ds p g, p , �[
same is required to achieve adequate visual or acoustical screening. These
provisions may be modified through the site plan development review process,
or the modification process for site plan exempt proposals, where the applicant
can show that the same or better result will occur because of creative design
solutions, unique aspects or use, etc.
SECTION XXII. The first sentence of subsection 4-4-100.E.5.i, of Chapter 4, City-Wide
Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended as shown below. The rest of the subsection shall remain as
currently codified:
i. Special Requirements for Specified Uses in the Commercial Office
(CO), Light Industrial (Il�, Medium Industrial (IM), and Heavy Industrial (IH)
Zones within One Hundred Feet (100') of a Lot Zoned Q'' � ' �_" o Q �_'^ °_
�4ra+�d-R�4 Residential:
35
I
ORDINANCE NO. '
SECTION XXIII. Subsection 4-4-110.D.8.c, Classifications, of Chapter 4, City-Wide
Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
c. Classifications: The Classifications for Use Districts (Zoning Codes) of
the City of Renton shall be assigned the Environmental Designation for Noise
Abatement (EDNA) Codes as follows:
EDNA Class A: RC, R-1, R-4, R-6, R-8,
RMH, R-10, R-14, RM
EDNA Class B: CN, CV, CD, CA, COR,
CO, UC-N1, UC-N2
EDNA Class C: IL, IH, IM
SECTION XXIV. Subsection 8-7-4.A, of Chapter 7, Noise Level Regulations, of Title VIII
(Health and Sanitation) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
A. Residential zones, which shall include RC, R-1, R-4, R-6, R-8, R-10, R-14,
RM, RMH, are classified as Class A EDNA.
SECTION XXV. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five
(5) calendar days after publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2015.
Jason A. Seth, City Clerk
36
� ORDINANCE NO.
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2015.
Denis Law, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
ORD:1857:12/10/14:scr
37
i`-
� o�o��aNCE No.
�� IN�USTR
!AL COMMERCIAI.ZC1NlIUG dESiGNAT10NS
UC UC'
RESIDENTtAL ZONING DESIGNATtONS 'H ' �N Cv �a �p �p COR N� N2
, ZQNING U5E 7ABI.E RM R_ R- RM �� !M
� _ _4 R-6 R-8 Zp 14
' �C R �. R — H
I USES:
� ________-.—
� —
� .------______ —_-----'
� ��._._._.—_------
� Rgriculture P35 P35 _,�,_, ---- —'�r�— —
'� q�3 AC3 AC3 AC3 AC3 AC3 AC3 AC3 AC3 � �_ _ _�___ _
', � 5 5 5 � —-5------_"""'_'__ � ti
� Home agriculture 5 5 5 ,�,_ — � H H H H ____ —
� ---.-- }{ H H • — —
� � � N � N H H H . — —
'� Naturai resource � �..�,--- — --'�'�-- P � p P P
�I extraction/recovery ---------_ --� P � P p P P
� P P p p P
P P � __......
P __ ..........
Research—Scientific P ..__ .
__. _
__..__.
�
' (smali scale} , —
AC AC AC AC _ ��--- — —_____— — —
AC AC AC AC qC ______ — �.___-- _
Seekeeping — — -- P37 P3? P37 —
—.___.._-,-
AD3 —"��
—�.--- —
—_____.--
Kennels 7 _ —--.---------
___._----------
AD3 AD3
Stables,commerciai 7 7
p p P P I p P � P18 � P73 � P18 � P3 � � P � P1$ ' P$7 .
Detached dwelling , P ' ' I p73 ` P73 , P � � � � � .
Attached dweliings � � � �
Man�f�ctiired4Ho�nnes P50 ��a
Manufactured P5� p5p p50 P50 p�� P
hames
dweNing AD7 AD7 _ ,______ — -- — — �
Accessory Ap7' AD7 AD7 AD7 AD7 ____ P p3 �
____-- �---�--------
unit ------P P �,�p p P P f P J — — p P40 P _ P75 P87
_.-- —-'—'- P
A du l t f a m i l y h a m e � — — � R D p p -- — �_
AD � — — ----. —.--..-- `�� AC qC q C A C
Assisted liting _____^ ------- a� q� AC
Caretaker's A�
residence
pTfACHMENT A- 1 �
�
ORDINANCE NO. .
Congregate AD P P3
residence
Group homes f AD H3
Group homes II for 6 Ap P P P P P P P P P P3 P
orless —
Group homes II for 7 H H H H H H H H P H H3 AD
or more — ,
Home occupations AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6
Live-work unit AD AD AD
K-12 educational
institution (public or H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H H H H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H H87
private)
Other higher
P29 P29 P29 P P P P21 P H87
education institution
Schools/studios, arts P P29 P29 P P P P
and crafts
Trade or vocational
P P H H H77
school
Parks, neighborhood P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Parks,
regional/community, P P P 0 P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
existing
Pa rks,
regional/community, AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD P P
new
Co`i�i'�'i�i�'r,F���3�t�es`
Cemetery � ( H � H � H � H � H � H � H � H IH IH IH IH I IH IH IH IH I I
Religiousinstitutions IH IH IH I H IH IH IH IH IH IH IH IH IH IH IH IH IH IH IH IH
ATTACHMENT A- 2
ORDINANCE N0. I�I
Serv��iation ocial H H H I H H H H H I H I H I H I H I H I H I H I H12 I H21 I H27 I H �
organi I I I I I I I I I ,
Pulilic.Facilities
City government AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD P AD AD AD !
offices �I
City government H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
facilities — ,
Jails, existing p
municipal
Diversion facility and
diversion interim H71 H71
service facility
Secure community H71 H71
transition facilities �
Other government H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
offices and facilities —
Conference centers P29 P29 P29 H P29 P P P21 P P91
Medical and dental P42 P29 P29 P2g Ap 211 P p p p p P92
offices
Offices, general P42 P13 P13 P13 AD 211 P P P P P P93
Veterinary P P42 P29 P29 P29 211 P P P29 P P27
offices/clinics
Adult retail use P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 P43
Big-box retail P P P P29 P79
Drive-in/drive- AC8 AC8 AC8 AC8 AC6 AC8 AC6 AC2
through, retail 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 � AC
Eating and drinking P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 AD3 P42 P P P P22 P P P P12 P27 P27 P92
establishments — 3
Fast food restaurants P29 P61 P P61 P27
ATTACHMENT A- 3
�--
ORDINANCE NO. •
Horticultural qD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
nurseries,existing —
Horticultural Ap A�2
nurseries, new 9
Marijuana retail AD P AD P21 P82 P92
(RMC 4-1-250)
Retail sales AD3 AD P29 P29 P29 P22 P P P P54 P21 P82 P82
3
Retail sales, outdoor P30 P30 P30 P15 P15 P15 P15 P15
Taverns AD P20 AD P21 P82 P92
Vehicle sales, large P P P P29
Vehicle sales, small P P P P68
Eritei�ainii�'enf
Adult entertainment P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 P43
business
Card room P52 P52 P52 P52
Cultural facilities H H H H H H H H H AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
Dance clubs P29 P29 P29 AD P20 AD P29 AD
Dance halls P29 P29 P29 AD P20 AD P29 AD
Gaming/gambling
facilities, not-for- H29 H29 H29 H20 H29
profit
Movie theaters P29 P29 P29 AD P20 P P12 P83 P92
Sports arenas, '
auditoriums, p2g p2g p2g p20 P H H96
exhibition halls,
indoor
ATTACHMENT A-4
ORDINANCE NO.
Sports arenas,
auditoriums, p2g p2g pZg �D2 H H96
exhibition halls
,
outdoor
Recre'�tion
Golf courses
P P P P P P P
(existing)
Golf courses, new H P H H H H H
Marinas P P21 H
Recreational
facilities, indoor, H P33 P29 P29 P29 P P P P54 P21 P27 P92
existing
Recreational H p29 P4 P P P92 P12 P21 P27 P92
facilities, indoor, new '
Recreational p2g p2g p2g H20 H29 '�
facilities, outdoor !
Servi�e``s;�Gerie`ral� �
Bed and breakfast AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD P
house, accessory —
Bed and breakfast AD AD AD5 AD P
house, professional
Hotel P29 P29 P29 P P20 P P P P P96
Motel P29 P29 P29 P P20
Off-site services P42 P29 P29 P29 P29
On-site services 3D3 P42 P29 P29 P29 P22 P p p P54 P21 P27 P92
Drive-in/drive- AC6 AC6 AC6 AC8 AC6 AC8 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC2 AC
through service 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 7
Vehicle rental, small P P P AD P20
ATTACHMENT A- 5
ORDINANCE NO. •
Vehicle and
equipment rental, P29 PZ9 P29
large
Day�Care S�cvices
Adult day care I AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC P P P p p p p P P P27 P10
0
Adult day care II H H H H H H H P P p p p p p P12 P21 P27 P10
0
Day care centers H25 H25 H25 H25 H25 H25 H25 P P p p p p p P P21 P27 P10
0
Family day care AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC3 AC AC AC AC
Healthcare Services
Convalescent centers H H H H P AD P3 P40 AD AD9 AD9
6 6
Medical institutions H H H H H H H H H56 H56 H56 H H H H P40 H H H
Car washes P P P AD2 P2
Express AD2
transportation A� P 0
services
Fuel dealers H59 P
Industrial engine or P2g P28 P28
transmission rebuild
Parking garage,
structured, P P P P P20 P3 P P P P93
commercial or public '
Parking, surface, p2g p2g p2g P20 P3 AD
commercial or public � � ,
Park and ride, P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10
dedicated 5 5 5 7 5 7 5 7
ATTACHMENT A- 6
ORDINANCE N0.
P10 P10 P10 P10
Park and ride, P P P P P P P P P P 7 9 7 p 7
shared-use
Railroad yards P
Taxi stand P AD AD
Tow truck
AD3
operation/auto P36 H59 P 6 '
impoundment yard
Transit centers H29 H29 H29 P H20 P H29 P P
Truck terminals P
Vehicle fueling P P P P P P29
stations
Vehicle fueling
stations, existing P P P AD P P P29
legal
Vehicle service and AD2 P P
repair, large
Vehicle service and p2 p2 p2 AD2 AD2 AD2
repair, small ,
Wrecking yard, auto H59 H
Ai r:Trans�brtation�Uses
Airplane H59 P
manufacturing
Airplane
� manufacturing, AC AC
accessory functions
Airplane sales and
P
repair
Airport, municipal P
Airport-related or
AC
aviation-related uses
Helipads i11 H29 H29 H29 H H � H29
ATTACHMENT A- 7
__----�-.
�_-
�__
�_-
__----
_- H
___._._._._.__._ pRpiNANCE NO• .�------'_
r`- H
H2� H2� AC1 '
ads,com►rerciai H24 AC1 AC1
Helip ,!,__.....---� AC1 AC1 .� 1 �
pC1 1 1
materiai ----'"_ P ' 1 1
Hazardous p P
� site or _..----- P64 _,_..._--
StOfOg��p� '""�'�-
inciudin� ��,_.,_.----''"`,�� p29 P29 __-----
a{f-site, P29 p64 �
__---,'__.,--- —"""'._
treatme+�t ._----' P29
indaor storage .-�--'_ P29 H22 __._--- '
__----,___---- __--�-'
P59 P....�--- H--'' A�� —
OutdpOr storage� `___.,. P29 9 ._.---
�--�""���
existing starage�
i-''-."'�
' Outdoor ` P p �„_-----
new P P�6 P86
Se1f-service storage _-- ....-�._.-�-
,�______ ___r.__-__----
��hicie storag=�,
' ....----- M p P
using p P4 ----
�Vareho �,,,_ ..,..—
---'' P29
;Gene�al -—
P2� P29 ---"
litidu�t"ri�il;. �.,.,,__.-.----
• and�Q'� """'..- P29 -
pSsemb�Y P29 P29 '
operations_ ,_-.------"'"._..--_.------
packag�ng _____,.._ � ___--- ��_.�..---�-
�1 p P p P
Com eXisting,_,_...- '---- P � P
laundries, _----'" P P
��rcial � � p P �_____._.----
' __,�,,.,,_i ,,,�,
taundries,new P ' ,__,_--
ruction�GOntrac !_�.,�.� .
Co
nst �� ----`""
tor's office P1� , '_----
dtstilleries with _.----
Craft 5 sma��
tasting rOom �
W�neries,and m'cro- 1
--- ,
b{�Werie� � �
industriai,hea�Y �-�-�ACHN�ENT A"$ _ _-
ORDINANCE N0.
Laboratories: light
manufacturing � P29 P29 P29 AD P20 P3 4 P P86
Laboratories: '
research, P28 p p H P20 AD3 AD H P P86
development and
testing
Manufacturing and
fabrication, heavy H59 P67
Manufacturing and
fabrication, medium P67 P67
Manufacturing and
P P P P
fabrication, light
Solid Waste/Recycling
Recycling collection �
and processing P28 P28 P28 P2g
center
Recycling collection
P P P P P P P P P
station
Sewage disposal and
treatment plants H59 H
Waste recycling and
transfer facilities H59 P
Communication
broadcast and relay H H H H H H H H H H29 H29 H29 H H H H H H
towers
Electrical power
generation and H H66 H66 H66 H66 H66 H66 H66 H66 H66
cogeneration
Utilities, small P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Utilities, medium AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
Utilities, large H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
ATTACHMENT A- 9
ORDINANCE N0. ,
Amateur radio qD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 ADS AD8 AD8 AD8 ADS AD8
antenna
Camoufla�ed WCF AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
Camoufla�ed WCF
collocation/modficati AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
on
Concealed WCF AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
Concealed WCF
collocation/modificat AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
ion
�.,«.,,.e�,,..,e..- ' A�4 A94 �484 hB4 �484
' - - - - - - - - � � � � � � � k14� � W4� - -
� g R - � � R R �44 �44 �44 �44 �44 R44 �4�4 �44 �44 R44 AB AB
^�;�
�11��+t� � R R - � � R � � � � � � � � J� � R i� �
�+�a�s
' A44 �44 R44 - R44 R44 R4�4 F44 R44 �44 �44 �44 R44 �44 �44 R44 �44 �44 A�B AB
Maior alterations to AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
existin�WCF towers �
Minor�ae�e+�s
alterations to .
existing WCF towers P49 P49 P43 P P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P43 P43 P43 P49 P49 P43 P41 P49
�eles5 — .
#ac-�ies ,� ' ,
Monopole I support AB4 +484 +484 +484 AB4 AB4 +484 AB4 � � � AB4 � �, AB4 � �B4
structures-e�-�r+va�e § � � H47 � � � � � � � � - -
H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47
�� H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 ' H47 H47 H47
�484 A�B4 �484 A84 AB4 AB4 AB4 AB4 g4�4 �44 �44 �44 �44 �44 � �4�4 � -
��� � � � � � � � � . � � �
ATTACHMENT A- 10
JI
ORDINANCE N0.
��84 AB4 AB4 AB4 AB4
Monopole II support H47 � � � H47 H47 � H47 � H47
structures H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47
Stealth Tower AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
AB4 ��84 �484 AB4 �484 AB4 �rB4 �B4 � �,44 �4�4 �4.4 � F4.4 R4�4 � �4�4 �
�ge � � � � � � � � � � �
Accessory uses per
RMC 4-2-050 and as
defined in chapter 4- AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC
11 RMC,where not —
otherwise listed in
Use Table
Model homes in an �
approved residential
development: one P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10
model home on an
existing lot
Sales/marketing p10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10
trailers, on-site —
Storage yards or
buildingsusedfor P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10
construction
Temporary uses P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10
ATTACHMENT A- 11
r'
�
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION
4-3-050, OF CHAPTER 3, ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND OVERLAY
DISTRICTS, SECTION 4-6-030, OF CHAPTER 6, STREET AND UTILITY STANDARDS,
SECTIONS 4-7-130, 4-7-190, 4-7-200, AND 4-7-220, OF CHAPTER 7, SUBDIVISION
REGULATIONS, AND SECTION 4-8-120, OF CHAPTER 8, PERMITS — GENERAL
AND APPEALS, OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF THE RENTON
MUNICIPAL CODE, AMENDING THE REGULATIONS REGARDING THE CREATION
OF TRACTS TO CONTAIN UTILITIES, OPEN SPACE, CRITICAL AREAS, AND OTHER
SIMILAR AREAS THAT WARRANT PROTECTION OR SERVE A PUBLIC PURPOSE.
��� ��
WHEREAS, the City recognizes that environmentally sensitive areas, such as critical
' areas, are insufficiently protected by easements;
WHEREAS, the City recognizes that utilities and other installations providing a public
benefit, such as stormwater facilities, are frequently inadequately maintained if located within
easements; and
li b nefit or
i revises standards for land that is dedicated for a ub c e
WHEREAS, the C ty p
environmental reservation b requiring the land area be located within a tract; and
p Y
WHEREAS, this matter was referred to the Planning Commission for consideration, and
m ndment re uests
' r d b the Plannin Commission and the text a e
the matter was conside e y g , q
being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 5, 2014, and
considered all relevant matters, and all parties were heard appearing in support or in
opposition;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
1
��,
ORDINANCE N0. �
SECTION I. Subsection 4-3-050.E, General Performance Standards, and Allowed
Alterations, of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended so the subsection title is
revised as follows:
E. Q,���n����nonennirc �n��R�B�, nnin n��n�e►rn AITCDATIAI►1�
NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION AREAS AND BUILDING SETBACKS:
SECTION II. Subsection 4-3-050.E.4.c, Method of Creation, of Chapter 3,
Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the
Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
c. Method of Creation: Native gGrowth �Protection aAreas shall be
established by one of the following methods, in order of preference:
i. Tract and Deed Restriction: The permit holder shall establish
and record a permanent and irrevocable Notice of Sensitive Area on the title of
, anv critical area mana�ement tract or tracts created as a condition of a qermit.
Such Notice of Sensitive Area shall prohibit development, alteration, or
disturbance within the tract except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part
� of an enhancement proiect. which has received prior written approval from the
Citv and from any other a�encv with iurisdiction over such activitv. In addition,
the Notice of Sensitive Area shall prevent the sale of such tract to anv partv
without the Citv of Renton's qrior written apqroval. Each lot owner of the
subdivision shall be �ranted an eaual and undivided ownership interest in the
tract.
2
� — -- - - - --
I � ORDWANCE N0.
+�ii. Conservatian Easement: The permit halder shall, subject to I
the City's approval, convey to the City or other public or nanprofit entity
specified by the City, a recorded easement for the protection af the critical area
and/or its buffer.
�i,--R�re�Ee�iue Easemen�= T�e—�er-�"�t,--�,z.!! L�.ww��.�d
��
„
, ,. ,w„ . ,
,
,
4�'F���FI��'a�....� .a.i Nurt r.F�r��'C11TERiTCTlT�TVICC'+rTTR�w'. `.,�...i �FE�'CtYCtt�"�'FvT
YT'i7TTw�... .1,.M F"- t
���
i ���i +{�. ' /
n +. ..+ ..4_fr. ..[ 4. 4.'a i h ,,,;;` u✓ ��cttT�—�
..�.. ��• G ^{r
7
I
3
�
�
.k
ORDINANCE N0. �
#e-�4asea .,., +������t-�es��+ct+r�g+ts-se��a�e�a;�-€�.". �"�++'�a
' ,... ��M�� ��+ �+t,�F,d�e-�-
SECTION III. Subsection 4-3-050.E.4.g, Responsibility for Maintenance, of Chapter 3,
Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the
Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
g. Responsibility for Maintenance: Responsibility for maintaining the
�Native gGrowth �Protection �,�^m^^`� �-Area tract or tracts shall be held by a
homeowners' association, ,'���*+:^,� '^+ ^ ��, *"^ ^ m;* , ^';�,^* ^r a^�:^^^^,
or other appropriate errtity, as approved by the City.
SECTION IV. Subsection 4-3-050.E.4.h, Maintenance Covenant and Note Required, of
Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
h. Maintenance Covenant and Note Required: The following note
shall appear on the face of all plats, short plats, Planned Unit Developments, or
other approved site plans containing separate�Native gGrowth�Protection Area
tract or tracts, and shall also be recorded as a covenant running with the land on
the title of record for all affected lots on the title: "MAINTENANCE
RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created by or benefiting from this City action�
abutting or including a �Native gGrowth $Protection Area ��tract} are
responsible for maintenance and protection of the ea��ep�tract}.
Maintenance includes ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and
4
� ORDINANCE N0.
that all vegetation remains undisturbed� unless the express written authorization
of the City has been received."
SECTION V. Subsection 4-3-050.J, Geologic Hazards, of Chapter 3, Environmental
Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended so the subsection title is revised as follows:
1. GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS:
SECTION VI. Subsection 4-3-050.J.7.c, Native Growth Protection Area - Very High
Landslide Hazards, of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
c. Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA) - Very High Landslide
Hazards: The landslide hazard area shall be ptaced in a t�Native gGrowth
pProtection aArea (NGPA) tract pursuant to �e� RMC 4-3-050.E.^ ^�
�ec-�+et�, Native Growth Protection Areas, e�and desi�nated as a "no
improvement area." The tract mav be dedicated to a conservation organization
or land trust, or similarly preserved through a permanent protective mechanism
acceptable to the City. Based upon the results of the geotechnical study, the
buffer may be �-desi�nated '+�a �Native gGrowth �Protection aArea and
included in the NGPA tract, or it may be designated as a "no build" easement, or
the area may be designated, in part, a �Native gGrowth �Protection aArea and
included in the NGPA tract and, in part, a "no build" easement not included
within the N6PA tract.
5
ORDINANCE N0. •
- SECTION VII. Subsection 4-3-050.K, Habitat Conservation, of Chapter 3, Environmental
Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended so the subsection title is revised as follows:
K. FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS (FWHCAs�:
SEC?ION VIII. Subsection 4-3-050.K.4, Native Growth Protection Areas, of Chapter 3,
Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the
Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
4. Native Growth Protection Areas: Based on the required habitat
assessment, critical habitat areas and their associated buffers may be required to
be �aEe�-i�•desi�nated as t�Native gGrowth �Protection aArea1 subject to the
requirements of s�see-�ia� RMC 4-3-050.E.4 , Native Growth
Protection Areas, or dedicated to a conservation organization or land trust, or
similarly preserved through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to
the City.
SECTION IX. Subsection 4-3-050.L, Streams and Lakes, of Chapter 3, Environmental
Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended so the subsection title is revised as follows:
L. FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS (FWHCAs) -
STREAMS AND LAKES:
SECTION X. Subsection 4-3-050.L.7.a, Creation of Native Growth Protection Areas
Required, of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
6
" ORDINANCE NO.
a. Creation of Native Growth Protection Areas Tract Required: As a
condition of any approval for any development permit issued pursuant to this
Section, the property owner shall be required to create a +�Native gGrowth
�Protection aArea tract e�::+�?�?�a that includes the stream/lake area and
associated buffers based upon field investigations performed pursuant to
����^�; RMC 4-3-050.E.4 �{+'��< <^�+���. Native Growth Protection Areas; and
SECTION XI. Subsection 4-3-050.M.9, Compensating for Wetlands Impacts, of Chapter
3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the
Renton Municipal Code, is amended so the subsection title is revised as follows:
9. Requirements for Compensaton►
Miti�ation:
SECTION XI1. Subsection 4-3-OSO.M.9, Requirements for Compensatory Mitigation, of
Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended to add a new subsection 4-3-050.M.9.h,
Protection,to read as follows:
h. Protection: All miti�ation areas whether on- or off-site shall be
desi�nated as Native Growth Protection Areas within separate tracts and
permanentiv protected and mana�ed to prevent de�radation and to ensure the i
protection of critical area functions and values into aerpetuitv. Permanent ,
qrotection shall be achieved throu�h a Notice of Sensitive Area on the NGPA
tract or other protective covenant in accordance with RMC 4-3-050, Critical
Areas Re�ulations.
7
ORDINANCE NO. '
" SECTION XIII. Subsection 4-6-030.K.3 of Chapter 6, Street and Utility Standards, of Title
IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
3. Conveyance systems to be maintained and operated by the City must
be located in a drainage easement, tract, or right-of-way granted to City.
Draina�e structures, such as vaults or ponds, must be located within a dedicated
tract. Offsite areas that naturally drain onto the project site must be intercepted
at the natural drainage course within the project site and conveyed in a separate
conveyance system and must bypass onsite stormwater facilities. Separate
conveyance systems that intercept offsite runoff and are located on private
property must be located in a drainage easement that may be dedicated to the
City if the City deems it appropriate depending on the upstream tributary area.
SECTION XIV. Subsection 4-7-130.C.2, Native Growth Protection Easement and
Minimum Lot Size, of Chapter 7, Subdivision Regulations, of Title IV (Development Regulations)
of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
2. Native Growth Protection Areas ���^�^�` ^��' "":�:�..�^ '^` `:�^:
Native gGrowth �Protection aAreas ____.....:::� ...�•,���:: �`:� ..........,....
�„+ � „� i,.+.. ,.
.�o. ....., .,. ; ,
„� +�„ i„+ ,.,,+�;,�„ „f +�,,, „ „�+ ; .-„�;,.:,,�+ +,. .,i
must be within separate tracts.
SECTION XV. Section 4-7-190, Public Use and Service Area—Genera) Requirements and
Minimum Standards, of Chapter 7, Subdivision Regulations, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows: �i
8
.
' ORDINANCE N0.
� 4-7-190 PUBLIC USE AND SERVICE AREA — GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND
MINIMUM STANDARDS:
Due consideration shall be given by the subdivider to the allocation of
adequately sized areas for public service usage.
A. EASEMENTS FOR UTILITIES:
Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as
specified by the Department.
B. UTILITIES IN TRACTS:
Utilities, such a stormwater vaults, ponds, or other structures, shall be
located within dedicated tracts.
B�C. COMMUNITY ASSETS:
Due regard shall be shown to all natural features such as large trees,
watercourses, and similar community assets. Such natural features should be
preserved,thereby adding attractiveness and value to the property.
SECTION XVI. Subsection 4-7-200.B, Storm Damage, of Chapter 7, Subdivision
Regulations of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
B. STORM DRAINAGE:
An adequate drainage system shatl be provided for the proper drainage of all
surface water. Cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all natural water
flow and shall be of sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required
slopes. The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-
9
.
ORDINANCE N0. '
030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. The drainage system shall include '
detention capacity for the new street areas. Residential plats shall also include '
detention capacity for future development of the lots. Water quality features
shall also be designed to provide capacity for the new street paving for the plat.
Draina�e vaults, ponds. etc. shall be located within dedicated tracts.
SECTION XVII. Subsection 4-7-220.C, Standards, of Chapter 7, Subdivision
Regulations, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended
to add a new subsection 4-7-220.C.3, Tracts, to read as shown below. The current subsections
4-7-220.C.3 through 4-7-220.C.5 shall be renumbered accordingly.
3. Tracts: Areas of the subdivision deemed to be critical areas due to
desi�nation as protected slopes shall be located within a tract or tracts.
SE�TION XVIII. The definition of "Final Plat Plan" in subsection 4-8-120.D.6,
Definitions F, of Chapter 8, Permits — General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended to add a new subsection 4-8-120.D.6.d
to read as shown below. The current subsections 4-8-120.D.6.d through 4-8-120.D.6.m shall be
relettered accordingly.
d. Include boundaries of utilitv. open space, and/or critical area(s)
tracts, square foota�e. and purpose statement of each tract.
SECTION XIX. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five (5)
calendar days after publication.
10
. I
' ORDINANCE N0.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNGL this day of , 2015.
Jason A. Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2015.
Denis Law, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
ORD:1858:12/15/14:scr
11
` 4 i
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING
SECTIONS 4-2-060, 4-2-080, 4-2-110, 4-2-120 AND 4-2-130 OF CHAPTER 2,
ZONING DISTRICTS — USES AND STANDARDS, SECTIONS 4-4-095 AND 4-4-140
OF CHAPTER 4, CITY-WIDE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 4-
9-03U OF CHAPTER 9, PERMITS—SPECIFIC, AND SECTION 4-11-230 OF CHAPTER
11, DEFINITIONS, OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) AND SECTION 5-
19-5 OF CHAPTER 19, TELECOMMUNICATIONS LICENSES AND FRANCHISES, OF
TITLE V (FINANCE AND BUSINESS REGULATIONS) OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL
CODE,AMENDING THE WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES REGULATIONS.
P�(�b
WHEREAS,the City recognizes that structures, such as wireless communication facilities,
can have adverse impacts on abutting properties, public rights-of-way, and detract from the
aesthetics of the City's landscape; and
WHEREAS, current development regulations do not provide sufficient standards to
mitigate adverse impacts caused by wireless communication facilities; and
WHEREAS,the City sets revised standards for wireless communication facilities; and
WHEREAS, this matter was referred to the Planning Commission for consideration, and
the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the text amendment requests
being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 5, 2014, and
considered all relevant matters, and all parties were heard appearing in support or in
opposition;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
1
ORDINANCE N0. . � "
SECTION I. Subsection 4-2-060.P, Wireless Communication Facilities, of Chapter 2,
Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended as shown on Attachment A.
SECTION I1. Subsections 4-2-080.A.44, 4-2-080.A.45, 4-2-080.A.47 and 4-2-080.A.49,
of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of
the Renton Municipal Code, are amended as follows:
44. I�t�, +h.,,.i. • i„� +ti-,., „ ti,�r,�.-�a F�„+ l�nn�1 �..,, .,.�c., +
Tn.�ccvucnT:rrc�r«nr�rmrc�n�r-ca-rcccTr cci rc
C.�6,�,++�.,.. . �i.��,..+�-.II.. -, .,.J ., .,1 .,rl.,,.c.,7�+.�+�..., � .,.J�+c.,.,-,1 � .,,�+ i�
.,........a � �
�Reserved.
45. i�+�„ .-„+ti-,�� �� i,,.-� +w.,., „ „ t,��.,,�.-,,,� �„�+ i�nn�� �.,,,.,,. ., -.a:.,,.,,.,+
�r �+I���++:.�.rt .- ririn.�+i�ll.i -� nrl r� �I � LJn�rinn C......-.i«.
� ,...........
���w:'.: '.., :-�Reserved.
47. Monopoles are prohibited if located within three hundred feet
(300') of residentially zoned property� unless the ���:w::::::+�
Administrator determines that all residentially zoned property
within three hundred feet (300') of the proposed facility is undevelopable due to
RMC 4-3-050, eCritical aAreas �Regulations
.r�+�_+"= Ee„zt�E�e�--e�—�e�e�t-�--�v#e�. „�,,..,. ,..,,.;,.� ��rY�
2
' ' ORDINANCE N0. I
4(�. �����y_p�p{*�� w.�rl�f�r-.+��.�� -.rn .� .v��++�rl ���I�nn 4tioro�c
,� .,. .„
..........�! .,. ..., �a,=rge--i�—The-�-v�i�s�:�! �r,:aa�ee;--a=.�e�e�r�::T^am--4=�-z�i e
Reserved.
SECTION III. The Maximum Height for Wireless Communications Facilities subsection,
of the subsection entitled Building Standards, in subsection 4-2-110.C, Development Standards
for Residential Manufactured Home Park Zoning Designation, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts —
Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as shown below. The rest of the subsection shall remain as currently codified.
Maximum Height for See RMC 4-4-1406. See RMC 4-4-1406. See RMC 4-4-140�.
Wireless Communication
Facilities
SECTION IV. The Maximum Height for Wireless Communications Facilities subsection,
of the subsection entitled Height, in subsection 4-2-120.A, Development Standards for
Commercial Zoning Designations, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts— Uses and Standards, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as shown below. The
rest of the subsection shall remain as currently codified.
Maximum Height for See RMC 4-4-1406. See RMC 4-4-140�. See RMC 4-4-1406.
Wireless Communication •
Facilities
SECTION V. The Maximum Height for Wireless Communications Facilities subsection,
of the subsection entitled Height, in subsection 4-2-120.B, Development Standards for
Commercial Zoning Designations, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts— Uses and Standards, of Title IV
3
ORDINANCE N0. " '
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as shown below. The
rest of the subsection shall remain as currently codified.
Maximum Height for See RMC 4-4-140f. See RMC 4-4-140�. See RMC 4-4-140�.
Wireless Communication
Facilities
SECTION VI. The Maximum Height for Wireless Communications Facilities subsection,
of the subsection entitled Height, in subsection 4-2-120.E, Development Standards for
Commercial Zoning Designations, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts— Uses and Standards, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as shown below. The
rest of the subsection shall remain as currently codified.
Maximum Height for See RMC 4-4-1406. See RMC 4-4-1406.
Wireless Communication
Facilities
SECTION VII. The Maximum Height for Wireless Communications Facilities subsection,
of the subsection entitled Height, in subsection 4-2-130.A, Development Standards for
Industrial Zoning Designations, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as shown below. The
rest of the subsection shall remain as currently codified.
Maximum Height for See RMC 4-4-1406. See RMC 4-4-1406. See RMC 4-4-1406.
Wireless Communication
Facilities
4
�
� ORDINANCE N0.
SECTION VII1. Subsection 4-4-095.E, Roof-Top Equipment, of Chapter 4, City-Wide
Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
E. ROOF-TOP EQUIPMENT:
All operating equipment located on the roof of any building shall be enclosed
so as to be screened from public view, e�c�a�^� *^'^^^^�:~�~'.��+:a�s
eqt�i�ae��. Subiect to the Administrator's discretion, s�hielding shall consist of
the following:
1. New Construction: Roof wells, clerestories, or parapets, walls, solid
fencing, or other similar solid, nonreflective barriers or enclosures ,� �'^*^��^�^^�'
�, �� �a ;�+..,,.,,.+„ ... „++►,,, ;.,*o.,*��+�.;� . .,+
2. Additions to Existing Buildings: Where the existing roof structure
cannot safely support the required screening, or where the integrity of the
existing roof will be compromised by the screening, the Administrator may
�#er+�e reauire painting of the equipment to match the approximate color of
the background against which the equipment is viewed, or an equivalent
nonstructural method to reduce visibility.
SECTION IX. Section 4-4-140, Wireless Communication Facilities, of Chapter 4, City-
Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
4-4-140 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES:
A. PURPOSE:
5
ORDINANCE N0. �
The purposes of this �section are +�to_e�:��!`.�!: a�~ ~,' ^ ��^'^'��^� �^� +"^
•+• � � .�-.F�,,.,� t-�����+:ne- n����rl�r�n f�,..�orc_-....d -..�+,,.,.,�.r
� ' .
1. Provide a varietv of locations and oations for wireless communication
providers while minimizin�the unsi�htiv characteristics associated with wireless
communication facilities;
2. Encoura�e creative approaches in locatin� and desi�nin� wireless
communication facilities that blend in with the surroundin�s of such facilities;
3. Provide standards that complv with the Telecommunications Act of
1996 ("the Telecommunications Act"l; the provisions of this section are not
intended to and shall not be interpreted to prohibit or have the effect of
prohibitin� personal wireless services as defined in the Telecommunications Act;
and
4. Administer the provisions of this section in such a manner as to not
unreasonablv discriminate between providers of functionallv equivalent personal
wireless services, as defined in the Telecommunications Act.
B. GOALS:
1.�Commercial Wireless Facilities:
a. Encourage the location of towers in nonresidential areas and
minimize the total number of towers throughout the community;
b. Encourage s#-�e�g��the joint=use of new and existing towers si�es;
6
' ORDINANCE NO.
c. . Encourage users of towers and antennas to locate them, to the
extent feasible �e, in areas where the adverse impact on the community is
si�nificantiv minimized ��4;
d. Encourage users of towers and antennas to configure them in a
way that minimizes the adverse visual impact of the towers and antennas; and
e. Enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunications services
to provide such services to the community quickly, effectively, and efficiently.
2. �Amateur Radio Antennas: The goals of this �section are to ensure
the interests of neighboring property owners are considered while reasonably
accommodating amateur radio communications so as to comply with applicable
Federal law. These regulations are not intended to preclude amateur radio
' communications.
G�-E���1A�P�4AA�
Tl�ir C��+i�.� rl�...- .+.++ -. I + 1�. il.di.�� w� ..++n.J �w�-�+n��r r-�rli� �+.++.�.�
ra�-a�-" • { + IG�1 � 1 I�..�i+L.+ �r �rn.+e�+�r„1�nn �inr+ie��� m�rii+.+�ln �+ �++r���r
c�}H�.......My+I,Y+ Y.o�.,.+.,f:.,.,�.,.,+ lnc�1 .,. I.,« i.�, M�,��,ht
�C, nn�ni�i�erro�n�r APPLICABILITY AND��6FP�6 AUTHORITY:
,.�......
##e-.g�:;�-�! ��+st-��:�� ..,. No qerson shall
place, construct, reconstruct or modifv a wireless communication facilitv within
the City without an Administrator issued permit. except as provided bv this Title
or chaqter 5-19 RMC, and a Buildin� Official issued permit. The Administrator
7
ORDINANCE N0. �
shall have discretion to approve or denv elements of a WCF where standards
provide flexibilitv or subiectivitv: the same discretion is �iven to the Hearin�
Examiner for applications requirin�a public hearin�.
D. COLLOCATION REQUIRED:
1. Evaluation of Existin� Support Structures: No new support structure
shalt be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates to the Administrator's
satisfaction that no existin� tower or support structure can accommodate the
applicant's proposed WCF. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that an existin�,
tower or structure cannot accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna mav
consist of anv of the followin�:
a. No existin� towers or structures are located within the �eo�raphic
area required to meet the aqqlicant's en�ineerin� reauirements.
b. Existin� towers or structures are not of sufficient hei�ht to meet
the applicant's en�ineerin� requirements.
c. Existin� towers or structures do not have sufficient structural
stren�th to support the applicant's proposed antenna and related equipment.
d.The applicant's proposed antenna would cause electroma�netic
interference with the antenna on the existin� towers or structures, or the
antenna on the existin� towers or structures would cause interference with the
apalicant's qroposed antenna.
e. The fees, costs, or contractual qrovisions reauired bv the owner in
order to share an existin� tower or structure or to adapt an existin� tower or
8
� ORDINANCE N0.
structure for sharin�are unreasonable. Costs exceedin� new tower development
are nresumed to be unreasonable.
f. The applicant demonstrates that there are other limitin� factors
that render existin�towers and structures unsuitable.
2. Cooperation of Providers in Collocation Efforts: A permittee shall
cooperate with other providers in collocatin� additional antennas on support
structures provided the proposed collocators have received a buildin� permit for
such use at the site from the Citv. A permittee shall exercise �ood faith in
collocating with other qroviders and sharin� the permitted site, provided such
shared use does nat�ive rise to a substantial technical level of impairment of the
abilitv to provide the qermitted use (i.e.. a si�nificant interference in broadcast
or reception capabilities as opposed to a competitive conflict or financial
burden). Such �ood faith shall include sharin� technical information to evaluate
the feasibilitv of collocation. In the event a dispute arises as to whether a
permittee has exercised �ood faith in accommodatin� other users. the Citv mav
reauire a third-partv technical studv at the expense of either or both the
applicant and permittee.
3. Reasonable Efforts: All applicants shall demonstrate reasonable efforts
in developin� a collocation alternative for their proposal.
9
ORDINANCE NO. '
Th., C.,.d.,.-.I T�,I.,.,.,w.w,��.,i.,-++�....� A�+ �,� 1��G . � +L,., !'L+..+.. .- .,I.�
�. T�7��E+t��ar�s-�e�;T��r�e::+� ...��y
.,I., �+.,I.,.-.,..�...,��.,i�.,+�.,., ., .tA.,.�+4,�+ � .,+., � .,r+ ., .,+l,.,r
7 T6,., /"�+.. -, .,m.,.,+� ..L.�L.�+ ... 4,-,..,. +M., ..�.,.-+ .,�
. ....�.. ....'.�/�......,.. .,. .....
I �..L.:�:::..a�l..� .� ��..,ir.�.l�rr+nlni-�..�w���.�.i��+i�.-��- r-' -----
] Tl�.�. !'i+.i w� ��+ -�.-+ ..,7+L.7.�. •. ..l�l.. r ...d ..F *7.r� � ..r+� �.�r
n...w�Lr�-�r�.� +� ..1-..... .. �-+r��r�+. r.l�e�e�+(.Inr�.�...-....���.�7.-�+i.�..�e���..ili+i�e�
/I A .Jn�����,., 1�,.. +1,., !'i+.. .dn.,,..c.,.. -, n.-+ f.,r ., .. t., 7.,�+�11 .,
h-,�.,.d .. ,�.J.,.,�., � .�++.,., � .,..d
C I� -. ...I�r� +�I���.�.���h���.+7�..r �-.�•ili+., w��.�+� +n.•l.n�..-�I
�+-..,.J-,..d� �.,+ 4,,.+I,., C�'!'� :+ .� p,'��ari-rC��a'�., Tl,., /"�+.. ..� .,+ .J.,.... -, .,�++.,
'�1� :�:�+ . ...............� �.Ytl�t�
.-.+� :� +h.+�., ., ..+
rrr .-+�..a-..a�
E.ALTERATION OF EXISTING TOWER:
1. Minor Alteration: Proposed collocations and/or modifications to a
lawfullv existin� tower, excludin� other support structures, that do not
substantiallv chan�e the phvsical dimensions of the WCF shall be a minor
alteration and exempt from Site Plan Review. "Substantiallv chan�e the phvsical
dimensions" means:
10
� ORDINANCE NO.
a. Hei�ht: A collocation and/or modification that wouid increase the
overall hei�ht of the WCF bv more than ten percent (10%), or bv twentv feet
(20'), whichever is greater;
b. Width: A collocation and/or modification that would add an
appurtenance to the bodv of the tower that would protrude from the ed�e of �
the tower bv more than twentv feet (20'i, or more than the width of the tower
at the level of the apqurtenance, whichever is �reater; and
c. Compound Expansion: Expansion of a WCF's compound
necessitated bv the proposed installation of more than four (4) new equipment
cabinets or more than one (1) new equipment shelter. An expansion of a
compound necessitated bv a minor alteration shall not constitute a major
alteration; however, the compound expansion shall be the minimum necessarv
to accommodate the alteration.
2. Maior Alteration: Anv chan�e that is not a minor alteration is a major
alteration.
3. Ori�inal Dimensions: An increase in hei�ht and/or width of a WCF due
to a collocation and/or modification shall be measured a�ainst the dimensions of
the ori�inallv approved WCF.
4. Applicable Standards: Each collocation and modification shall adhere
to this section's standards; however, hei�ht limitations specified in this section
shall not be enforced if RMC 4-4-140.E.1.a. Hei�ht, allows an increase in height.
11
ORDINANCE NO. �
5. Review Time Period: Reauests for minor alterations, as described in
this subsection. shall be reviewed within ninetv (90) davs.
F. STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL TYPES OF WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES:
1. Equipment Shelters�-e�Cabinets:
a. Location:�4�esse�� Equipment shelters and cabinets#aE+l+t+es used
to house ^'^« �,+�^^ related equipment
should be located within buildings or placed underground, unless it is av#et�
�e infeasible. However, in those cases where it can be demonstrated by
the applicant that the equipment cannot be located in buildings or underground,
equipment shelters or cabinets shall be screened an� -to the
Administrator's satisfaction e€�ie-�m?^;�+.-,+�
b. Screening: 6a�-���g-#�-��ees�sa� Equipment
shelters and cabinets shall �^�,�-�. ��
{'�^^� '^^* ���'` be surrounded bv a sight-obscuring landscape buffer with a
continuous minimum hei�ht of fifteen feet (15'1: however. existine t�nneranhv,
ve�etation and other site characteristics mav provide relief from the screenin� �
reauirement. The required landscaped areas shall include an automated
irri�ation svstem, unless the applicant is able to iustifv an exception to this
reauirement to the Administrator's satisfaction. a��--t#�—aeeesso;�
. �4�esse�� Related equipment facilities located on the roof of
any building need not be landscaped but shall be e�le�sed screened on all sides
12
' ORDINANCE NO.
in a manner that complements and blends with the surroundin�s so as to be
' shielded from view. ' �"�"• "�
.,�-�-�----�{�ef-I�r���Ea� a� �e�ermine� ��—t�e ^a.,.,;,,,�+..,+,,. +�.,,,,,,�, ,.�„
�e-�c-�c: Y-^_____ ^.��^«��, Related equipment facilities � shall
not be enclosed with exposed metal surfaces.
c. Size: The applicant �x+s� shall provide documentation that the size
of any ac�e�se�� equipment shelters or cabinets is the minimum �ess+�e
necessary to meet the provider's service needs. The area of the compound ma�r
be �reater than is necessarv in order to accommodate future collocations, but
the area reserved for future eauipment shelters/cabinets shall be the minimum
necessarv for the documented WCF capacitv.,
d. Generators:
i. Architectural inte�ration is required (if applicablel.
ii. To the extent feasible, �enerators shall be enclosed alon� with
the related eauipment. Similar to eauipment shelters, the screenin� for the
�enerator shall utilize similar buildin� materials. colors, accents, and textures as
the primarv buildin�; if no buildin�s exist on site. ensure that the buildin� is
desi�ned to blend in with the environment.
iii. A screenin� wall and/or landscapin� material shall be repuired
to miti�ate visual impacts.
iv. Fences shall be constructed of materials that complement and, •
blend in with the surroundin�s.
13
ORDINANCE N0.
v. Anti-�raffiti finish shall be apqlied to all solid fences. walls, and
a� tes•
vi. A noise analvsis shall be required to demonstrate that the
�enerator will operate within allowed noise limits if the �enerator is the sole
power source.
2. Maximum Hei�ht: All wireless communication facilities shall comply
with RMC 4-3-020, Airport Related Hei�ht and Use Restrictions, as well as the
hei�ht limitation of the applicable zonin�district, except as follows:
a. Monopole I: Less than sixty feet (60') for all zones. Antennas may
extend sixteen feet (16') above the Monopole I support structure.
b. Monopole 11: No more than thirtv-five feet (35') hi�her than the
maximum hei�ht for the applicable zonin� district, or one hundred fiftv feet
(150'), whichever is less. Antennas mav extend sixteen feet (16') above the
Monopole II support structure.
c. Stealth Towers: The maximum allowed hei�ht of a stealth tower
shall be one hundred fiftv feet (150'); however, the allowed hei�ht for a specific
tvpe of stealth facilitv shall be determined throu�h the Conditional Use Permit
review process and the standards of this section.
d. Rooftop WCF: Concealed and/or camoufla�ed WCFs erected on a
rooftop mav extend up to sixteen feet (16') above the allowed zone hei�ht.
�3. Visual Impact: Site location and development shall preserve the pre-
existing character of the surrounding buildings and landscape ���^� ,^�' +"�^ �^^^
14
� ORDINANCE N0.
�e-� to the extent consistent with the function of the communications
equipment. `"'��^T.���:M:':':�^'.�a�ie+�Towers shall be integrated through location
and design to blend in with the existing characteristics of the site to the extent
practical. Existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved or improved, and
disturbance of the existing topography shatl be minimized, unless such
disturbance would result in less adverse visual impact ^�t#�� to the
surrounding area. Towers, antennas and related eauipment shall be uniformlv
painted a non-reflective neutral color that best matches the colors within the
immediatelv surroundin� built and natural landscape in order to reduce the
contrast between the WCF and the landscape.
4. Setbacks: Towers shall be set back from each aropertv line bv a
distance eaual to the tower hei�ht, unless an en�ineerin�analvsis concludes that
a reduced setback is safe for abuttin� properties and the Administrator
determines that a reduced setback is appropriate for the site.
3�5. Maximum Noise Levels: No equipment shall be operated so as to
produce noise in levels above forty-five (45) dB decibels as measured from the
nearest property line on which the a#�ae�#e� wireless communication facitity is
located. Operation of a back-up power generator in the event of power failure or
the testing of a back-up generator between eight o'clock (8:00) a.m. and nine
o'clock (9:00) p.m. are exempt from this standard. No testing of back-up
generators shall occur between the hours of nine o'clock (9:00) p.m. and eight
o'clock (8:00) a.m.
15
ORDINANCE NO. "
4s6. Fencing: Security fencing, ��� shall be required and shall be
painted or coated with a non-reflective neutral color. Fencing shall comply with
the requirements listed in RMC 4-4-040, Fences and Hedges.
�7. lighting: Towers or antennas shall not be artificially lighted, unless
required by the FAA or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the
ge�er�+�g-at�#e�i#� Administrator may review the available lighting alternatives
and approve the design that would cause the least disturbance to the
surrounding views. Security lighting for the equipment shelters or cabinets and
other on-the-ground ancillary equipment is also permitted, as long as it is
appropriately down shielded to keep light within the boundaries of the s+�e
compound.
bT8.Advertising Prohibited: No lettering, symbols, images, or trademarks
large enough to be legible to occupants of vehicular traffic on any abutting
roadway shall be placed on or affixed to any part of a �e�e��:�:::^�^:�s WCF
tower, antenna array or antenna, other than as required by FCC regulations
regarding tower registration or other applicable law. Antenna arrays �a�r—be
desi�ned and approved to be located on or within signs or
billboards as a stealth tower, or a concealed or camoufla�ed WCF, shall not be
construed to be in violation of this prohibition ����+"^„* ,'+^r�+;^^ ^'*"^ ^�;�*;^rt
..,�. ,,.�;�
�,9. Building Standards: `"'��^'^« �,+:�~ �Support structures
shall be constructed so as to meet or exceed the most recent Electronic
16
-�
� ORDINANCE NO.
Industries Association/Telecommunications Industries Association (EIA/TIA) 222
Revision G Standard entitled: "Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers
and Antenna Supporting Structures" (or equivalent), as it may be updated or
amended. Prior to issuance of a building permit the Building Official shall be �
provided with an engineer's certification that the support structure's design
meets or exceeds those standards.
8=10. Radio Frequency Standards: The applicant shall ensure that the
wireless communication facility (WCF) will not cause localized interference with
the reception of area television or radio broadcasts. If��e�r+e�the City finds
that the WCF interferes with such reception, and if such interference is not
remedied within thirty (30) calendar days, the City may revoke or modify a
building and/or conditional use permit. '
9, sp@61.3,�—.���FF2FY�Na�S�AFE�k�2Caz c1,,,��e.��r..�.:...,+� ..,:+►,�.. +�..,
�.�.: .�.i:
..�.... r......
���1���.�+ +.. +M� � .-�I �f tko Ra�«+I.�...w��.�+ Ci+ r I17,���.+.+ w.+r) rl��+ll M� �
cw�-.11 •.rrl ��n.�.l�+r�.r:..� �-..-+i��hl�
�` �TAI►If1AD1'1C «1D CDC�'I[1/`TVDC� AC\A/IDCI C�C [A/"II ITIC�.
Tv�--�rmr�zv��-revrc���cvs
C�,. .J.,i0.,7+t...,r "��.,.,.�:;:..+...,.,r ..�..,L.�,Inee c...,.......�...i,--.+L.,.�, F-,..ili+i., ., DA/1�"
............. 'i
�'�3n .... :♦ + b. .,rl.�.J Il., .,I.�, ..+ .-+�..,.J-.r.Jr �.-. r.�n.-iFie-
.,� .
f...,.,� .,f . .,I.,« .- -.+c.... f-.��I�t�.,< <,..�o.�t_f... .. ..+ -, y+�
, "".r,. .....
crr,�eR,-.a-��.,�,T�'E�t ,:�� L,-..,,, t,.,i.�4,+ .,.J „+L,�,. -, .,���.,1,�„ �+�.,.J-...J� .d„+,,.-..,,;r,o,�►
:♦ ., :=2�5�_�L.,,11 6.., '.�
..... r,.' , ...... ..
17
.
ORDINANCE N0.
CTAI►If1ADf1� [AD �DC/'I[1/'TVDC� A[1A/IDC1 C« !`A11A11A111►11�'ATIAIU.LA['1LITICC
7r7T1oRA f�7f7�� TrTrlCRA 1 A�
_ CAf�r �A�'�T [Af�^II I,rTVr ��� �� ���
���� 7'1"�'�T�'� �� t�t"T�TII� T'� 1"�'ft 1'�T[
8u�{�i�gs ��-sk�a�4 �e F�-�ay-be
�e�eEa�e�� IsEa�e�e+� �a�ed-e+�
ex�s�+�g �a�+�gs-a+� �+1�it�g3-a�r�
�+�►g� °��,.Q�� ��..,,.,��
�e1es-e�e�#� ��� �a�
E�EIS�FF#� t�cc t�.iric
S�eF� +�e�ief-v�e� +�Ee�ie�-w�e�
�+.,,,.,�-n '"'� ,.;�,;;�,���
N4+E�e�i�+E�r ��:::::.,.."�� ��e�-a
••o-
��ea #���+�+s�e�-a �e�ig�a�e�
�+ags-a+� �e� �+�e�+al
��. ,.,t,�� �:,.�,,�;a; s�aEe:
�e��-�,a� spa�e:
4��
���
��
�t�
���C
�M
�;a�rt'�I
�m
��
�� AI��.�+�� AI�..,�� AII�..,�,�..,�J All�..�..�1��� �FF�SS i�t�--VV�FF�Q"�
}{@F��3R� E�F9 E�RFfRfE2�F9 E�E2'EF6 E�tE2�F9
.,f-.,-;i;r�..� .,t....•i;►�,.� ...,,� r«,,,.. ., c-„-�ia+,,,�.,.,a
14f2B �F�3Ei�E�25-2FT� r�-rvcn,rrc�-i.R� r�-racn,c,c�-vr,v Fl-�@�:......_...^.� �2Ei�+�ff5-c'�!� rvc,.mc�-m-.v
-•+a�cs'acrtcv �ttCt� �{{c�� �{{�tf -•�+^nL.n.�l. .,I.,�� .,rr�..L..,.J. ..1.,��
W+fE'�2''.,5 Wif£'�255 WFf�55 1NfFE'�55 E�..........._�::�"+ C�.......,..:�fA14
,,,,......_..:�+A 6�f+1+E2�tA E6�RfE�F9 C�FE3�+9 �3�5� s"'���racnrs:c^��rc�i
"rriacincii3 Fi-�F�S ^..Ti*c'Ti'mi.� ^irmc'�°rrri;c^3
��Y �� �� ��Y ��g ���g
�e �e �e �e �,�..�� �+��as
��� �P�� ��� f�g i;..t,,,a:., onnr n �
�►er�s,as �e��s ��ea�as �?��as A�& A�B:
�#$�'�'��E I��F..�rc �C I��*n�D�� �Ae�.n.�.�eile� 1�.f�
T�rvrrvpvrc
Q�-�-�s�$: �� 4-.�r-Bia: �� �3Ef�{j!-�jEF� �jhP�d�3EF�li�
+�41sFa�aEi�+eS +�i-F�i�+�ies flAaeFe �qgpg�gl�E u,,;.,��:'�i u,,;,.ti�,�:'��
�������,,�{,,,, P7 �� L�•-�I����'^``�iai� C��,I.t.. F+.rtF+o.+�� h��.L�...aL.-...►L.�
rvcrrrcf rr*bn rnbTr.. ....... ...
rY'tYtl-trTC �Ytte �YT TnC7nTTTQ� rno`I`.�_.w.�tf_`I rarta.l��ptKtTKC'lT
rc6vTOT-r,„
^cr6'-rc � �� u.,..f,�-.c-.��'• I_.._, ..�.h.,.,I,r ���Tri c�'Tr
-'o,.
�+�+AFT �+f�ft�tFAf� �FH4+�+AR ��2Fl"��E'� �AK�3��3IfE�
'fi .�1 i.. �:f' .J f., �if' .�F.. G., II ...�i��..-f
`��pc�-�c'rrtcv-rvr §�pc�zrr'ti�-a-rv`r `�pcsrt�ca�vr Tvrarrzv�Tc.r. ---..".o_.__.._ � _. �A �
^Im�v�c� '�m;-ivrr� �6RC'S �FA �22� t[nc�ccr
�� �� �� L�,.,I17�T ..L.t�L..,.....i�1..�� ..ML..L..,.....��1..��
�A�@1Nr-�iEf�� �A�BiIVFS:�Ffif �A�@Nh�s�{�EF6 r�'^rrrc�a�c�
1g
� ORDINANCE N0.
Fa�+�ies�� �a� ��Y a�ed
�.�I FL�„ �I�I-�„ a.I�„ :�'�TIV
�C ��C G"vREL�"�CQ-CrIC �.v....�......
� •""G"' "�'O"� ��7
1+.:;;..�........ L...� �+�a�+e�-�y �+�+ea-by� a�lev�ed--e+��
..,
F.,..r�� '1 A�m '1 C�� �ppqqq�p.�
.....�..,r.,... .
�� trrtc-cv�vf ttnc'iv:�c�vEr racrrrcy:
f�fFS�+H� �IS�F�� E�EIJ�
rh.-��.-�� rhr��r���i+ �4r��.-��
i��") ......^.....v..���.�.�r RTT'C'c""""""')
n..+r�r��CTIQ'VTGCC �•h�.��LTq�p'T�R ••1�r��T�iTTQ SVTCCT
�9�}e �AY� 3�AV��i2
�s�iag �g �+s�+�g
�...,,...,.,, �..,,,.t,..,, �..,,,.t,,.,,�
��: �� �T
Wae�rer�e€
�ea
a
�e�+�►
��
�be
E�e
be-a+�
e�c�a�rs+e+��€
�e
t�e�er�€er�+�
g-s���
�d�FF1�ifAi ��^c��--'cvvr� °�-vf °�vr n••nrrccrn=ra'✓ �3EFA-F3Ef�F�F25
�ii� �2�d-6R �-9R �-6F ..�� .,s��s
�F2d a rZ �•, ��� �2F�2� �2i�1�£�
{�e�ed� ��€er�+R ��+� +Ac-#e5-it� ..««.,,.�,,,�. „�,.�.. ..++..,.�,,.,,. „�„��
o..+.,,,..,,.,, �e d+a�e�ef-.c�aY
--•=---•-
��e � k�e-a
Ea�s+deFe�-�e e��s �ef►e►�e€ e ����
�e-ar� be-a� a-Me�►s�e1e� #ac�y: �erve�:
�� �� �� �..*.,......i�..,,,.*,..
�k►e �e e+leigkr� e-He►gk��:
f?6Rf6R�Afi�}ffi R6RE6F1#eFf�l++� �tR��......�:.".�: ^^r�mtc^^^rn-ra�'�`�nvc
��• ..h� �Ey, v1.,r�.�I ,.F�.. ..hL... vl...�.,I -.F�.. ..LL...
o_ ._:_._.
T�� 1-.��
iAFFf2{25"J W+�55
E�......,...._�::3R5
�P�'t�e
s�iaN-�e�be shaN-�►e�be
,..,�,.,,�.,�„a ., -,.«
�,F tL..,L..,'..L.f.,F
k114.n.�..'...+C�CJ� 4LT C-f9TTLTJ7
��....r...�rF.�S
. ��.�..�..f.��...^.+«�1
'fl�o� 6'7CCt- Ytl'7CCY Y�C� Y'B-Ft'Ct Y�7CCt l C2�
f'�1'�1'�
�
f"�'YV'IIc
�
19
.
.
ORDINANCE N0.
�
�
��r
�9�N2F�F
�
E919F cti..ii�„mr��^--'�� c�-,�i��.,,� cti.,ti�� A�?c A},4 {�R
C�e E919�i2 fe�6�-35-t�#e
�� �� ��
�� �� ��
�F�F1f� �••��•.�s,�srccvic-vrr �f2-6R
W}}}E{�-}�}5 "�rT icT'rrc-F� iAf�iE�F�fS
PT�P�� PT�P�� ��
�= L."pc,-Tvc'aic� ~�vc�vcaicv
C�T1q7C�FF� T'A ttA 1�1'� �•,•,���7cz7v�n f'.".,���M�...-ti..., C C....���L.�n�+f.�n C
n,�..i{ ttlT�S �.f�L.���ir �.F tL.��vrn�rr�c•�cc�v�r
�'RnR �
� �rtttvrr � �3fl�3F�
�' �t�fflfH� �f�#
f�t-�TttTitt'tT�� t�YY��.�.r.:�'.p.,'..�� �..�,..y.b.�..�
�•�n'io�•-�r�� ^F�n`+vL.vll L.` ^F 1�C 4n,`��Mvli L.4
rvnmcap
'�arca-vf�-rccT f� �
$its�t'�2 ...i'...,�F...
� fVtTTTti�vr ��
�D �C ��l'G
��-@F SEf2�Rf�-?5 SEF�2R#R�-0S
�' �fl��'§�#�e afl���
sc�ee�►g-as A�e� ,4�It�+a+s�fa�ef:
��Y ���1� �aac�s�a�l
� ,.i a ..,,,... ,.i a «..,,,..
6;�T :.;�,�-�,-RT
�ff#IS�F3#6F � Sk?f�5-�R�
�� � . .
5�3�-I�FlE�e F�fE�lFff� f2�ifE�
t' '�cc�-�rrr'�"c'�^o-�s �3R�SE�E'�-�f2c35 �3�e�-af2c�5
,
�R� S�FHE�fi�Ei,3fi
cv�:cr'.—iic ��Af�2� �2�
T� . .
��
m���r'arr
�
�
Kf�F�d�6R
�
.. �L,M11 4.0 �L,.w,�++.,.�1 +., *6,., CA A .. ..........«r'T3
-.+�-...b.orl � �-nl�rr � -.+i.�..-. F-..-ili+:..
2�
� ORDINANCE N0.
G. CONCEALED WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY STANDARDS:
Additions or modifications to buildin�s shall complement the existin�desi�n,
bulk, scale, and svmmetrv of the buildin�, and minimize the addition of bulk and
clutter. Concealed WCFs shall adhere to the followin�standards: �
1. Buildin� Addition: All antennas shall be fullv concealed within a
structure that is architecturallv compatible with the existin� buildin�. Roof top
additions shall be concealed on afl sides.
2. Related Equipment: The related equipment shall be completelv
concealed inside a structure or inside an under�round vault. Concrete masonr�r
unit (CMU) walls and prefabricated facilities do not meet the intent of a
Concealed WCF. Eauipment enclosures shall be desi�ned to be compatible with
the existin� buildin�/structure.
3. Materials: Fiber�lass reinforced plastic or radio frequenc�r
transparent materials mav be used to screen and inte�rate a WCF with an
existin� buitdin�. Visible transition lines between the old and new surfaces are
prohibited.
4. Architectural Elements: New architectural features such as columns,
pilasters, corbels, or other ornamentation that conceal antennas mav be used if
it complements the architecture of the existin� building.
5. Residential Buildinss: Wireless Communication Facilities shall not be
located on residential buildin�s except for multi-familv structures constructed
pursuant to the International Buildin� Code as an occupancv �roup R-2, which
21
�
ORDINANCE NO.
maV serve as a support structure if the interior wall or ceilin� immediately
abutting the facilitv is an unoccupied residential space (e.�., stairwells. elevator
shafts, mechanical rooms. etc.).
H. CAMOUFLAGED WIRELE55 COMMUNICATION FACILITY STANDARDS:
Additions or modifications to buildin�s shall complement the existin� desi�n,
bulk, scale, and svmmetrv of the buildin�, and minimize the addition of bulk and
clutter. Camoufla�ed WCFs shall adhere to the followin�standards:
1. Architectural Inte�ration: Antennas mav be mounted to the sides of
a buildin� if the antennas do not interrupt the buildin�'s architectural theme.
a. When feasible, camoufla�ed WCF's shall emplov a svmmetrical,
balanced desi�n for all facade mounted antennas. The first provider on a
structure will dictate the antenna len�th, width. and placement. All succeedin�
applications will be required to ensure consistencv and svmmetrv in placing
antennas on the structure's exterior.
b. When feasible. interruption of architectural lines or horizontal or
vertical reveals is prohibited.
2. Materials:
a. Mountin� Hardware: Utilize the smallest mountin� brackets
necessary in order to provide the smallest offset from the buildin�.
b. Concealment: Utilize skirts or shrouds on the sides and bottoms
of antennas in order to conceal mountin� hardware. create a cleaner
22
' ORDINANCE N0.
aaqearance, and minimize the visual impact of the antennas. Exaosed cabling is �
prohibited.
c. Paint: Paint and texture antennas to match the adiacent buildin�
surfaces.
3. Antennas:
a. Antennas shall be no lon�er or wider than the facade on which
thev are qroposed.
b. When panel antennas are unscreened, thev shall be mounted no
more than twelve inches (12")from the buildin�faGade.
c. No exposed mountin� apparatus shall remain on a buildin�faGade
without the associated antennas.
4. Residential Buildin�s: Wireless Communication Facilities shall not be
, located on residential buildin�s except for multi-familv structures constructed
pursuant to the International Building Code as an occupancv �roup R-2, which
mav serve as a support structure if the interior wall or ceilin� immediatelv
abuttin� the facilitv is an unoccupied residential space (e.�., stairwells, elevator
shafts, mechanicat rooms. etc.).
I. STEALTH TOWER STANDARDS:
The followin� standards for each tvpe of stealth tower are the minimum
necessarv to meet the intent of effectivelv dis�uisin� the tower. Standards for
tvpes of stealth towers not identified within this subsection will be determined,
on a case-bv-case basis bv the Administrator throu�h the Conditional Use Permit
23 '
ORDINANCE N0. '
criteria pursuant to RMC 4-9-030.E. Decision Criteria — Wireless Communication
Facilities.
1. Faux Trees:
a. Location: Faux trees shall be located within one hundred feet
1100') of existin� trees, unless photo simulations show, to the Administrator's
satisfaction, that the proqosed faux tree would be appropriate for the site.
b. Hei�ht: The faux tree mav exceed the avera�e hei�ht of nearby
trees bv no more than twentv percent (20%) or thirtv feet (30'), whichever is
�reater.
c. Authenticitv: Faux trees shall replicate the shape, structure, and
color of live trees common to the area. Plans shall provide detailed specifications
re�ardin�the number and spacin�of branches. bark, folia�e, and colors. All faux
trees shall incorporate a sufficient number of branches (no less than three (31
branches per linear foot of hei�ht) and desi�n materials (e.�., faux bark) so that
the structure appears as natural in appearance as feasible. Branches shall not be
reauired for the lowest twentv feet (20') of the trunk.
d. Concealment:
i. All cables and antennas shall be painted to match the color of
the trunk.
ii. Antenna socks are mandatorv for atl antennas (and similar
comqonents) located on a faux tree.
2. Fla,�poles:
24
� ORDINANCE N0.
a. Location and Hei�ht: The hei�ht. diameter and location of the
fla�pole shall be comqatible with the surroundin� area, as determined bv the
Administrator. The fla�pole shall be tapered in order to maintain the a�pearance
of an authentic fla�pote.
b. Authenticitv: Fla�s shall complv with the U.S. Fla� Code. Allowed
fla�s include national. state, countv and municipal fla�s properlv displaved. In
addition, one (1) corporate or institutional fla� mav be properlV displayed at ,
each site. II
c. Concealment: Antennas shall be enclosed within the pole or a
radome. If a radome is used, it shall have a diameter no �reater than one
hundred fiftv percent (150%1 of the diameter of the pole at the hei�ht where the I�
radome will be mounted. The len�th of the radome shall not be �reater than
one-third (1/3) of the hei�ht of the proposed li�ht pole. All cables shall be routed
directiv from the �round up throu�h the pole. Cable coverin�s are prohibited.
3. Sports Field Li�hts:
a. Location and Hei�ht: Utilization of an existine or replacement
sports field li�ht as a WCF suqport structure shall onlv be permitted on sites
where a sports field exists. The hei�ht. diameter and location of the soorts field
li�ht(sl shall be comqatible with the surroundin� area, as determined bv the
Administrator.
25
,
ORDINANCE N0. �
b. Authenticitv: Sports field li�hts shall be uniform fstvle, hei�ht,
etc.) with the exception of the WCF. The sports field li�hts shall provide
consistent illumination for the sports field.
c. Concealment:
i. Antennas shall be no more than twentv feet (20') above the
li�ht source.
ii. All cables shall be routed directiv from the �round up throu�h
the pole. Cable coverin�s are prohibited.
iii. Paint antennas and mountin� apparatus the same color as the
pole•
4. Freestandin�Si�ns:
a. Si�n Permit Reauired:Towers replicatin� a si�n shall be subiect to
RMC 4-4-100. Si�n Re�ulations, and a separate si�n permit shall be required.
b. Concealment:
i. All antennas shall be completelv screened bv the facade of the
si�n or by fiber�lass reinforced qlastic or radio frequencv transparent materials.
ii. All cables and conduit to and from the si�n shall be routed from
underneath the foundation up into the pole. Cable coverin�s may be allowed in
limited circumstances in situations where thev are minimallv visible and
desi�ned to inte�rate with the si�n.
J. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: In addition to ap�lication
materials and information reauired pursuant to RMC 4-8-120.C, Table 4-8-120C—
26
' ORDINANCE NO.
Land Use Permit Submittal Reauirements, the followin� materials are the
minimum reauired to complete a review of anv WCF, other than an alteration
pursuant to RMC 4-4-140.E.1. Minor Alteration. Additional materials and
information mav be required.
1. Technical Analvsis:
a. Site Justification letter: This report shall iustifv the need or
reauirement for the proposed WCF location and desi�n. An analvsis of other
available sites shall be included as well as determination as to whv these sites
were not selected.
b. Justification Map: A map identifvin� the zonin� districts, search
area, alternative sites, the selected site. and all existin� and approved WCFs
within a one half(1/2) mile radius.
c. Coverage Map: Maplsl identifvin� the proposed tar�et covera�e
that illustrate the covera�e qrior to and after the installation.
d. Noise Report: For proiects proposed adiacent to residential uses
when �enerators. air conditionin� units. or other noise-�eneratin� devices are
utilized.
2. Photo Simulations: Photo simulations shall be required with each plan
set. The ahoto simulations shall illustrate the qroqosed WCF from at least four
(4) vanta�e points and show the existin� view (without the proposed WCF) and
proposed view (with the qroposed WCF) from each vanta�e point.
27
.
ORDINANCE NO. '
3. Method of Attachment/Cablins: Dimensioned details shall be
provided of antennas and mountin� hardware used to attach the antennas to
the structure.
4. Visual Miti�ation: Anv concealment/inte�ration techniques proposed
shall be fullv explained, illustrated and detailed.
�K. OBSOLESCENCE AND REMOVAL:
Any wireless communications facility
#ae+l+�that is no longer needed or is not operational
shall be reported immediately by the service provider to the Administrator.
Discontinued facilities or facilities that are in disrepair, as determined bv the
Administrator, shall be decommissioned and removed by the facility owner
within six (6) months of the date it ceases to be operational�^� �{*"^ �,^�'�+�•�,"�
;�+^ ���-^^���, and the site shall be restored to its pre-existing condition. The
Administrator may approve an extension of an additional six (6) months if good
cause is demonstrated by the facility owner.
� rn��n�nT�nwi ncni�i�rn.
Zr E'�EI'S'��'F�'—b9�#QFC�d��kl'�AF� ��r"sr'E��H'$5rF N6 F12 W
.-6.-.II hi+ .r�++�rl .+I�r�- +L�n
;o;Tek� ee,;,�n��iEa�i��� .,::r .. .,...... �...
QPPTrEtlrr�2F��"-cr��t� �}(.�--CCd�v•,-�4,10 r�+ir�-..-+i., �,F 4L... ...... '� .:+1'.��
�a �
rl, * ' +' + �+.��..+��.,, � .,a-.+�, +4,0 �r,.n.l_«-..,��� ,,.1
.,+�,...,� C.,�rl.,.,.-,. .-�.L...-.t++.,.�1 +., .J.,.�. .,�+..,�.. +L.-.+ -..�. o..:�+�.,..+......,. . �+.��.-+��r.,
., r. �+
. .... .,......�.�... .. ....... ..,.. ------- -o ------ -- -------- -
20
i .
' ORDINANCE NO.
.,`�.. .,.�}�` . ,,.,�,.-+ „� „� +N„
,,,... ., r ...... ..,�'r
�A�@V1�FR� I
' ^I � �'�M + A +Y �/�+��rAf A Il1I�1+AIY \�f1+RIH_+�/1 fT�1A/T Y1�i/�
0
, ,
h C , +' + +.���r��..,� .,+ .�,� �.�{f�.. .,+ L..,:�.1,+ +., .,+
o �-
.,I: ..+�� '..,+.-
�"..�:.�........... .. ..":o'�--"��r=`=�='- —'---,�_.
E-€�Ei�Ti n�ewe r-�e r �ri;���r���-n e�M��e—sa##iEi�::: �.'���a�l
� �+.,,.,,.�� +„ � ,,.+ -,.,��,,.....��� �.,,�^�^��.,., .,a .,,�.,+,,.� „ .�,,,.,+
,.,.... r,..,r. .. .... .
� �:.,���, r.:
' + .-f '+L, +L. + +' + +
rrrccr r crci�cc--rrrc�rci�c—sa Fl�eFl Cl a vrrz�'1�2jEl�rl Ilg--c9�cf3 A r S�i'k�crk�f�5��F--�
+ +L, +' + .-+.� �+�� ��I.a ���.�0 1��,,.-�., ,t+L, +L,., �
v I
a�+�u.;��.. .a�ese�.a�} '
N�
TI� � e + r� +.-.�4��+1 .+ nr ron��irorL L+�i +ho.n�...+.+r � �,
. � �
..I..»a
�4N� ar�
.,.a +.. 4... .o-�e�.��hl�
f T{,., .,I��-,.,+ .J.,.ti,.,.,rtr�t.,� +{,�+ +rhrPF-{• �=.,+M.,. I..,�,�+...., tr�9�5
, ..., ...... . � . .a
*L,-.+ . .�.1., �+�....+.. .,'t c+t,s..+.....� ..:'.�
.,I -� 4.���Irl:.... .�. .�.t+ F.,. � .,4. ���o �t r-.7.J ��+�,
29 '
ORDINANCE N0. -
��*�,ti�^ �o+., n ., .,,,�++,,,, �t,wii `.,.,.,.��„ ,� t.,:+t, :..
.. �cr....... .
�3�.1 VL�Yr:.�q,��,n �`.w.�4+.�y���in� r. .�rl�r) c �{� e�l»r�rl ���� rl�oe ne�+ rri�r�
+.�. �I��aM..�:.'.� +."..",�'::...."..� ��-${ ... " ....�n.�+ .�.� +4�� -�l�il�+., +� i�rl� +l�n
. . . . �. . , . "'.r.�
pE4'i���e���c—r��., .. �:���..••+ �+,,•cRci-cnc� ... �."^ac�vE2����eEe�t�+e�
��,�t�es--�x�es�� �e�ee,;,F��t+v�Ee„Tl�e��r f+na r�Eial �t���er` c���� ^ ^^'
:;t, ,�.,�; .. „`w +�„ r•+. ��.:
�AA�—�. ..� :��-E$F�?6 ,,. .::a ., .t..`i"--il�Cf3� .. .. ..
fn.•L...i.•-.I �-+��.�J.. •.++1�� .. i+�i.7+4��.- r I��+l� +1�.� -� nl��-�n+ -�nrl r�nrrn�++oo
..+� �1��
..+:., �I+
�L. PERMIT LIMITATIONS:
1. Maintenance Required: The applicant shall maintain the WCF to
standards that may be imposed by the City at the time of the granting of a
permit. Such maintenance shall include, but shall not be limited to, maintenance
of the paint, structural integrity and landscaping. If the applicant fails to maintain
the facility, the City may undertake the maintenance at the expense of the
applicant or terminate the permit, at its sole option.
/C/^!'1 �+•..�rl-.rrl� ��. .-.r17.�. �r�r.���.���. r�w��rr��nc U/�+{��n e��rt�� ICII1_.•-.I.�..`1-..- iJ-...�
�: ..,........ .,� �+� 4,� �I.a� .....�+ +L.o ..1�.- .,+ �L.M11 V�L,.r.:+ M ...�
-� � r
30
' ORDINANCE N0.
�r�r.�.n.�n.. �mi�c�i�r�c. nl 411 M..+...�.«..�'.� :::.`�.}.�'.�Y�—Ct�F'Ftl e���4.���-+ ri4� -�n� .- rr�r�-�r�e
}H� .• �.I+�- ��.�+1� �r+�.l�li�l��rl C.�iJ`.-.1 V+� .-+ �I+-.II Mo �-����o
r .d � f+l� A.�1 ' + -.+�.-��.-.-.�..�.��r+.�r��i��r�+h Carl..►-.1 �+�.�.�1-...�1.-
►F .. +L,., !'i+.� F:...J.. �4...+ +L.n 1A//"C .J., �,+ m.,.,+ C.,.1.. -.1 �+-....aaTa� tttt
.,I .... ...... ... .....� ..... ,
3�2. Notice to City of Change of Operation of Facility: The applicant shall
notify the Department Community and Economic Development of all changes in
operation of the facility within sixty (60) calendar days of the change,
�M, n�Troninrrc� MODIFICATIONS, "^oinn�rrc.
�ee The Administrator shall have the authoritv to modifv the standards of
this section, subiect to the provisions of RMC 4-9-250.D, Modification
Procedures.
AA�.N. APPEALS:
See RMC 4-8-110. Anneals.
SECTION X. Subsection 4-9-030.E, Decision Criteria—Wireless, of Chapter 9, Permits—
Specific, of Title IV (Development Regulations, of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
E. DECISION CRITERIA—WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES:
1. Decision Criteria: In lieu of the criteria in s+�sec-�ie� RMC 4-9-030.D�
Decision Criteria ^{ +"�< <^�'�^^, the following criteria shall be considered in
determining whether to issue a Conditional Use Permit for a wireless
31
ORDINANCE N0. �
communication facility (WCF); however, '.::a �::;!�:� the
Administrator may waive or reduce the burden on the applicant of one �or
more of these criteria if the �^����^;^^ ^�.*�^��*., Administrator concludes that
the goals of RMC 4-4-140, Wireless Communication Facilities,
�^ ,^�^�a��', are better served bY",ere���e-fel�e�ir��#a��s�:
�a. Height and Design: The height of the proposed tower and/or
antenna as well as incorporation of design characteristics that have the effect of
reducing or eliminating visual obtrusiveness.
�b. Proximity to Surrounding Uses: The nature of uses on adjacent
and nearby properties and the proximity of the tower and/or antenna to
residential structures and residential district boundaries.
�c. Nature of Surrounding Uses: The nature of uses on adjacent and
nearby properties. The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in
substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property.
4.d.Topography and Vegetation: The surrounding topography; and
tree canopv coverage a�#e�iage.
3.e. Ingress/Egress:The proposed ,��ingress and egress.
6�f. Impacts: The potential noise, light�a�glare, and visual impacts.
��Collocation Feasibility: The availability of suitable existing towers
and other structures to accommodate the proposal.
S�h. Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The compatibility with
the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Comprehensive Plan,
32
�
� ORDINANCE N0. I
Title IV Development Re�ulations of the Renton Municipal Code, +"^�� '
^:-�'?^�^�� and any other Citv plan, program, map or ordinance e#�e-Ei#�.
9ti_Landscaping: Additional landscaping may be required to buffer
adjacent properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use.
2. Revisions to Conditional Use Permits for Wireless Communication
Facilities: In (ieu of the criteria in RMC 4-9-030.G. Maior and Minor Revisions, the
followin� criteria shall be considered in determinin� whether a proposed
alteration to a wireless communication facilitv constitutes a ma�or or minor
revision to a previouslv approved Conditional Use Permit.
a. Maior Revision: A proposed maior alteration to an existin� WCF
tower, as defined bv RMC 4-4-140.E, Alteration of Existin� Tower, shall be
deemed a maior revision. Maior revisions to an aparoved Conditional Use Permit
. F r ma'or revisions that. due to extraordinarv
shall require a new apqlication o i
circumstances. would result in a hi�hlv unreasonable and unconscionable burden
on the applicant or permit holder. if the applicant or permit holder were
required to �o throu�h a new application process, the Administrator mav permit
the maior revision to be treated as a minor revision.
b. Minor Revision: A proposed minor alteration to an existin� WCF
tower, as defined bv RMC 4-4-140.E. Alteration of Existin� Tower, shall be
deemed a minor revision. Minor revisions mau be permitted bv an administrative
determination.
33
ORDINANCE N0. �
SECTION XI. The definition of"Wireless Communication Facilities —Terms Related To"
in section 4-11-230, Definitions W, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
WIRELE55 COMMUNICATION FACILITIES—TERMS RELATED TO:
��
, •
��:'.:'.�� �.,�i��.M� n,.��+�,,.,�.,.,c.,�+.,..., �oc .,+,,.,.,-,�
BTA. Antenna: Any system of poles, panels, rods, reflecting discs or similar
devices used for the transmission or reception of radio frequency signals.
n�+,,.,.,-,� ; ,.i,.a„+�,„�„ii„ ,.+.,
1 1'1��1. A...+...�.o.... �.,., D-,.--,L..,I�., A.�.+.,.�,.,-,
.. .... .. �����i"��r�n�iCnrraTi
Tr�.�r.�.�.�+� �.�.J r r�.J�� �r�r.��.�..��.i � -.I�- � -. +L.r�n I���.�.Jr�rl �-�..+.. rl.......n
'a.'..... ... .. ...
�o��► ..,,�..,� .,.,t�c�r��ufbEc�-i�-�e���Teer� �eet��'; ... !:�:g#�-a�-�s
f,.��. �.,�1,,,� rn��1 :., .J�-,.,,,,,+,,.
. .._ .. "�an�4" Ar�t���Tran�min
.,,� .,,��„ �. „ .,i.- ..����,. ,��.,,..+:,,.,-,t -,++„ „t i., ,. +w�:?
��a......, ... .. �r... . ....,., ...
+4...,., L.�....d..,.,1 ��..+.. .J.,....,.,� /2Gl1°1
� A D.....�1 A.w+.,.�...... C.,., Il�..,.�t�..r.-,1 A..+.,.,.�.-.
,� !! II
r�i+•.i�i. ��.r+�.r� v`.r��r�+ir.r� -.nr��r.r 4r-.r�r.v�:rri�n ��r��i� �r�r.���r�i-.. nr.w.rv���r.i�,.�}'����.
..............L11'C7CTTJ
-��c i e-i�ii- r�ir�i-Fir.r�-.� r�-�++�}
.,.,,. r,....
34
�. ORDINANCE N0.
6o.,...�..,i:.. n., �.,. n .. .-,�, i,� .. +�.-,., �n ��
, �e�a�,--�ge; �. r�.....3nz-a;,�e��g�ca��. ....... .......
:n�M.,� •r a�-,.,,,,,+,,. L,��+ .,,,+*., „a +.. ., I,. .,.�I.,,a ,.1�,�� I7nn��� •., ,J� �+„
7 \A/L.i.. A..+.,....�,. C�,., ll..�..�.: Il:.o.,+7...,-,I A.,+.,.,.�.-,
8,rB.Antenna, Amateur Radio (also calied ham radio) "�-�a: A device that
picks up or sends out radio frequency energy used for purposes of private
recreation, non-commercial exchange of inessages, wireless experimentation,
self-training, and emergency communication. The term "amateur" is used to
specify persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and
without pecuniary interest, and to differentiate it from commercial broadcasting,
public safety (such as police and fire), or professionat two (2) way radio services
(such as maritime, aviation,taxis, etc.).
C. Antenna Arrav: A �roup of antennas connected and arran�ed in a re�ular
structure to form a sin�le antenna that is able to produce radiation patterns not
produced bv individual antennas.
D. Antenna, Panel: Transmits and receives radio frequencv si�nals in a
specific directional pattern of less than three hundred sixtv de�rees 1360°).,
1.E.AntennatVertica) Monopole Amateur Radi�a: A type of amateur
radio device consisting of a single vertical element constructed of wire,
aluminum, or fiberglass without any attached horizontal antennas. This
definition does include associated guy wires attached not more than halfway up
the monopole for anchoring purposes. This definition does not include amateur
35
ORDINANCE N0.
radio antennas with any more than a single vertical element (e.g., tower or
lattice-type amateur radio antennas).
�' A++•.�4��+�J \A/ir�lncc !`ww�rw��wi�..+C�+r� C..�ili+�.. A �Ine��- ............:'.:��
+6.-.+ : ..F��.. �,irre`)E'r.z cr'� F .,..-...-..,I., ., a..��+�..., L,.�:I.J�.,
�dEi�F�§' �..... ... .....,.2� �A �FR^�� E�k*1'^t�-r^vr..,......r...., .... .. "�
#$W�F—dMc��,.. +�.^.� �+���t � ��E—v4'�'::�� '�� .. .... ��I#-F9t�
, •�� +Tr'�/--'�*"� �
�F. Collocation: The t�se—e�-a si+�g��mountin� of antennas and related
eauipment on an existin� support structure ,^a��z by more than one�
wireless communications provider.
G. Compound: The leased or owned propertv upon which all elements of a
WCF reside, which is demarcated with securitv fencing.
H. Eauipment Cabinet: A mounted case with a hin�ed door used to house
eauipment for utilitv or service providers.
L�I_Equipment Shelter�e�: A room�e�or building used to house
equipment for utility or service providers (also known as a base stationl.
�.J. FAA: The Federal Aviation Administration, which maintains stringent
regulations for the siting, building, marketing and lighting of cellular transmission
antennas near airports or flight paths.
6TK. FCC: The Federal Communication Commission, which regulates the �
licensing and practice of wireless, wireline, television, radio and other
telecommunications entities.
36
ORDINANCE NO.
Sappvr�r��FE��k�i", •,1,:�1, �II., ., 1,�,.,.J..,.d �.,.,+ l�nni► +�II ;Y�-}FC�i
.. � ....��
r.�..�r�7�+� ..4 .�.�i.+•.l .. .-�n'1 r+.:..,- ... L....� -...�J 7 �-+.�-.rli�rl L.�. . .� -� r�rl��l
..r,.. �., ,,...., ,...
1 �.,++:...,T......,.. n r.,f� �- .,.-+i.,.,, �I�ra��,mvv,��.. ..a:,... .- ...,r+ e,+.��.�+�..,,
.......... ....Y Y
, 4... ♦..
..1,',-4. �+� ..� �,+-,I .,.J �t. ..� ....... �.. �1��.....,.. ..:'.d .+cf�v
�'
1 n/l .. .. [•.�'1'* . n �,t+-,.•L,.,.J . .,I.,rr � .,i.-�+��,n f�c;Lif.. ..4,L.�6. .� ;e�+e�
�L.-. .,+�, �n.,+ f'I G�1 L.�. .-. -,6.�
.... ...... ..... � ... . .. r�...
c"li-'}��..,... ^ +� .,.... ..,�,*,,. l�a 2���► .J��.,,,�,+... M.,..d :t'°±l: .... ....... ..
,�r, . .. ..
C.,,. �......� .J /�nn1 F „� �., +t,., ., �,-,+., � i3n���c�rl frr .,+
��Cs-�F�-�6F�F�ss-�A.. va+M�h.,.J .,I., .,.......,. .�''�*L.,., �-,.•71;+., ..,6.i�L, .-r,.,c�ic+c
�F •. + .. •.I +.�. .�.. I'.�r +L.-..� r .. f�n+ /G.�1_irs_hni�l�+ � ...-....L.r�l'� +.�..�.�•.
. .. p.......,�ric n�i�ccrrrra
�/b���� .�.... ... � + +1�•. f' 1���.�rl.�rl � r�l�+.i /C4l11 �- -�rn �n�4�...- �.. +L.�
IIg���•t„ �„ „ ,. �.,,,+ �9�► .di-�.�v,n+�. ., �L. �
,� r� �
l� 1�f + ('1 1 /7�1 .. ..11 -� ...1 F. n+ Ale� L.�..�. .. .... .". �."ttt�-CtC�
1 M' ' [ '1'+ . A ++ M rl , ..�I..rr � ��++�r�n �f�r�IG+.. ...L�i�L� .� i�+r
� �
.�i �.,+.......... .. ..I +., .,.- I...-� +L.-.., �.... �.,.,+ /1 f1'\ �.. I,.,�.,L,+ .,.- � .+�..,L...I;.� +.,...,-,
...,.. .....�. . p......,...rc-circcrrrra
.� +� .. i++�r l�� �7��\ in rlizw+..+... -.nrl �.,:+L. �.
e F.��F :r� +1�� �. ..-.+� � •inrl �r�m-+.... n+
37
ORDINANCE N0. �
...� ��.��,.+,�.-„ ..,w�,.w ,- ��+�
..�� .,.�r.r....�
F ,,.+ +t,.,., • +„f��f �cn�� cn hot�.t ���.J +„
Q#�'-r��5r�� z�F{}E�EH'�5� «run-7ncc�rccclvvTnrrr�.�brrc�crc c cc a co
r.r+. �I�e�r � r�i��ti�r� �r�f.�...r.�.e- -.r�� r �+iv.n -. ��r+.�r.-.r�n�r
���.�.. .��r .�.w.m�� .M �r.n.� ....
.......,... ... .._...._--...o _rr_.__.._..---•
1�1 1►A...�....n..l., 11. A . r,l.,e� i-.-...-..o..... .��,+:...�, .- ..r..+ e-+.��.�+��.., �..L,L.�6. .� 1r+r
..�......,.............. ...,:M f
ef -�_{r��+��p�������.�.� riv+.e �n�,+ /Gll�\ .. n-.+.,r i.� 4.ni..L.+, r, n�+.�r�
vr-aTr C (.i�.i�+�a
+., .+. .,In .,..,......,,.E�19fl-�F}��......., .... .
A�L. Provider: A company providing telephone or other communications
service.
M. Radome:A plastic housin�shelterin�the antenna assembly.
�N. Related Equipment: All equipment ancillary to the transmission and
reception of voice and data via radio frequencies. Such equipment may include,
but is not limited to, cable, conduit and connectors.
O. Satellite Dish: A microwave dish tvpicallv used for receiving television
transmissions from at least one orbitin�satellite.
Q.P. Support Structure: �^^ `"'���'� �^ �+��.. ���;�e�* �+�__+�._. A
structure used to support wireless communication antennas and related
equipment, either as its primary use or as an accessory use. Support structures
include, but are not limited to, towers, existin� buildin�s, water tanks, si�ns, and
li�ht fixtures.
��Tower• � � `",�-^'^« '"^m^���^ �,*�^^ ���^^^�* �+•"�� A freestandin�
support structure used solely to support wireless communication antennas and
related equipment. Tvpes of towers include. but are not limited to:
38
ORDINANCE N0.
1. Guved Tower: A freestandin� or supported wireless communication
suaport structure that is usuallv over one hundred feet (100'1 tall, which consists
of inetal crossed strips or bars and is steadied bv wire �uvs in a radial pattern
around the tower.
2. Lattice Tower: A self-supportin� wireless communication suqport
structure that consists of inetal crossed strips or bars to support antennas and ,
related equipment.
3. Monopole I: A freestandin� support structure less than sixtv feet (60') �
in height, erected to support wireless communication antennas and connectin�
appurtenances.
4. Monopole II: A freestandin� suaport structure sixtv feet f60') or
�reater in hei�ht, erected to support wireless communication antennas and
connectin� appurtenances.
5. Stealth Tower: A freestandin� suqport structure that is dis�uised as a I
natural or built obiect tvpicallv appearin� in the natural or urban landscape and.
is primarilv erected to accommodate wireless communication facilities. Examples
include, but are not limited to, manmade trees, freestanding si�ns, fla� poles,
li�ht fixtures and clock towers.
�R. WCF: see Wireless Communication Facility (WCF).
�5. Wireless Communication Facility (WCF): An unstaffed facility for the
transmission and reception of low-power radio signals usually consisting of an
equipment shelter or cabinet�, a support structure, antennas �-�e�r�
39
ORDINANCE N0. �
�t+���', ��^�'��'��^�*�^�,' ... ��:'�"�}—and related equipment, generally
contained within a compound. For purposes of this Title, a WCF includes
antennas, support structures and equipment shelters, whether separately or in
combination.
6F, `�e4�ss—��~.,,��c�t+e��^^���r���re� T�r��r�rEtt���e��E�e� �
�., ,,.+ „i„ ,...,...�,.:^.,+��., .,+„ , M.,.� ��„ .,.. ,.+�„-..,,.,,�
,.. b :r.r.r..... ------ -
i i i �
i
T. Wireless Communication Facilitv, Camouflaged: A wireless
communication facility that is tvpicallv affixed to the facade of an existing
structure that was not ori�inallv constructed to be a WCF support structure (e.�.,
an existin� buildin�), in a manner that inte�rates and dis�uises the WCF with the
buildin� bv matchin�architectural elements, colors, materials, etc.
U. Wireless Communication Facilitv, Concealed: A wireless communication
facilitv that is incorporated into an existin� structure, that was not ori�inatly
constructed to be a WCF support structure (e.�., an existin� buildin�), in a
manner that completelv hides the WCF within the existin� structure or within an
addition to the existin�structure that is architecturallv compatible.
SECTION XII. Subsection 5-19-5.B.5 of Chapter 19, Telecommunications Licenses and
Franchises, of Title V (Finance and Business Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
40
� ORDINANCE NO.
5. If the applicant is proposing to install overhead facilities, evidence
that surplus space is available for locating its telecommunications facilities on
existing utility poles along the proposed route. Proposed replacement utilit�r
poles, for the purpose of sitin� wireless communication facilities, shall be no
more than twentv feet (20'1 taller than adiacent utilitv poles: utilitv poles on
residentialtv zoned private proqertv shall be no taller than fortv-five feet (45'1.
SECTION XIII. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five (5)
calendar days after publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2015.
Jason A. Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2015.
Denis Law, Mayor
� Approved as to form:
Lawrence 1. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
ORD:1852:12/15/14:scr
41
ORDINANCE N0.
ATTACHMENT A
4-2-060.P, WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
ZONING USE TABLE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS
USES: RC R-1 R-4 R-8 RMH R-10 R-14 RM IL IM IH CN CV CA CD CO COR UC-N1 UC-N2
Amateur radio qD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 ADS AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8 AD8
antenna
Camoufla�ed WCF AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
Camoufla�ed WCF AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
collocation /
modfication
Concealed WCF AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
Concealed WCF AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
collocation /
modification
� ..�+.,.,,�,,,.,,,.�
- - - - - - - �d4� �B4-� A�B4 A�B4 #4� �l4� AB4� �44� �494 �#4� - - ��
� � � I
���� � R � R R R R R4�4 R4�4 R4�4 �4�4 R4�4 R4�4 �44 �44 �44 �4�4 A B �B
�Q��
� R R R R R R � � R R R R � � R R � R �
a�er�as
��'�� �4�4 �44 �44 �4�4 �44 �4�4 R4�4 �44 R4�4 �4�4 �44 �4�4 P�4 �4�4 �44 �44 �44 AB A9
�s
ATTACHMENT A- 1
ORDINANCE N0. '
Maior alterations to AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
existin�WCF towers
Minor alterations P P P p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p
to
existing WCF towers
�r+r�ele�s
#ac�l+�ies
Monopole I support ,�84 �4 A94 AB4, AB4� A.9.q, AB4 ,4g4 �q,q, �44 �4q �484� R44 �44, ,484� R44 qg4
structures e�
� � � � H47 § § � H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 �
H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47
�484 A94 �rB4 A�B4 �84� �B4 ��84 �B4 �44 �4�4 �4�4 R4�4 F�4-4 �4�4 � �4�4 �B4
��� § � § � � � § �
Monopole II H47 A94� �B4 AB4 H47 H47 �� H47 A�94 H47
support structures
H47 � � H47 �
H47 H47 H47
Stealth Tower AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD
AB4 AB4 ��84 A94 A94� �484 A�4 �#45 R44 F44 R44 +4845 R44 F�44 �484� �4�4 �4�8�4 - -
�e � � � § � � �
ATTACHMENT A- 2
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION
4-4-040 OF CHAPTER 4, CITY-WIDE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS,
AND SECTIONS 4-11-060 AND 4-11-180, OF CHAPTER 11, DEFINITIONS, OF TITLE
IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE,
AMENDING THE REGULATIONS REGARDING FENCES, HEDGES AND RETAINING
WALLS AND ADDING NEW DEFINITIONS OF "FENCE", "RETAINING WALL",
RETAINING WALL HEIGHT", "RETAINING WALL HEIGHT, EXPOSED" AND
,
ROCKERY .
,D--loB
WHEREAS, the City recognizes that structures, such as retaining walls, can have adverse
impacts on abutting properties and public rights-of-way; and
WHEREAS, current development regulations do not provide sufficient standards to
mitigate adverse impacts caused by retaining walls; and
WHEREAS,the City is now setting standards for retaining walls; and
WHEREAS, this matter was referred to the Planning Commission for consideration, and
the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the text amendment requests
being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 5, 2014, and
considered all relevant matters, and all parties were heard appearing in support or in
opposition;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Section 4-4-040, Fences and Hedges, of Chapter 4, City-Wide Property
Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
1
ORDINANCE NO.
4-4-040 FENCESt A�9-HEDGES,AND RETAINING WALLS:
A. PURPOSE:
These regulations are primarilv intended to regulate the material and height
of fences�a�hedges, and retainin�walls, particularly in front yards and in yards
abutting public rights-of-way, in order to promote traffic and public safety and to
maintain or create aesthetically pleasing neighborhoods. The #e�4e�+�g
regulations are also intended to provide and maintain adequate sight distances
along public rights-of-way at intersections� a�l-�e encourage safe ingress and
egress from individual properties�. T"^�^ �^^��',}�^^� ,'�^ encourage the feeling
of spaciousness along neighborhood streets, promote crime prevention throu�h
environmental desi�n, and �+���k��ese�E+�y--at�$sp�ier�e� �•�—�;;^��:
����^� ���^^ ^�."��� - �"+� ^� , ^�+� reduce conflictin� interests between
.:b. ��
abuttin� qropertV owners.
B. APPLICABILITY:
1. Exceptions: The provisions and conditions of this �section regulating
height and desi�n of fences, retainin� walls„ or barriers to
surround and enclose public safetv installations, transportation facilities,
waterways, storm draina�e facilities, school �rounds, public plav�rounds, private
or public swimmin� pools, and similar installations and improvements, are not
applicable if required by �e law
�,�..,.,,�,� .,a .,,-+.,ii.,+�
�ar,vur,a--crncr—ei9 c�c�3e—�tl�I I E�-SdT��ji—:...,_......,.. , ,
2
�
ORDINANCE N0.
„�i• • .. i,. �a
• „ ,,. ., ,,.,,,...,;., ., ., . . . .
� .. ... r�.,.FE-�sV1........ .a rJ6... _..
2. Urban Separator Overlav: Fences� a�hedges, and retainin� walls
within the urban separator overlay are also subject to requirements of RMC 4-3-
110,#�►e Urban Separator Overlay Regulations ��^^ o��� � � „�►
3. Citv Mav Reauire Modification: Where a traffic vision hazard is
created or exists that endan�ers qedestrian and/or vehicular safety, the City may
reauire a modification to the hei�ht limitations and location of fences, hed�es or
retainin�walls to increase or enhance safetv.
4. Permit Required:
a. Fences: A fence taller than six feet f6') sha�l reauire a buildin�
permit or an explicit exemption from the Buildin�Official.
b. Retainin� Walls: A retainin� wall that is four feet (4') or taller. as
measured bv the vertical distance from the bottom of the footin� to the finish
�rade at the top of the wall (i.e., not measured bv exposed retainin�wall hei�ht),
shall require a buildin� permit. This determination does not account for other
factors that mav cause a buildin� permit to be required for a retainin� wall (e.�.,
the addition of a surchar�e or fence).
C. GENERAL FENCEL A�N�-HEDGEr AND RETAINING WALL STANDARDS:
DCAI 11DC1►/ICI►IT�.
1. Fer�e Height—Method of Measurement:
3
ORDINANCE N0.
a. Fences: The height shall be measured from the top elevation of the
top board rail or wire to the ground. In cases where a wall is used instead of a
fence, height shall be measured from the top surface of the wall to the ground
on the high side of the wall.
i. Grade Differences: Where the finished �rade is a different
elevation on either side of a fence the hei�ht may be measured from the side
havin�the hi�hest elevation.
�ii. Fences on Berms: A berm �+ shall not be constructed with
a fence on it unless the total height of the berm plus the fence is less than the
maximum height allowable for the fence if the berm were not present.
3= r_.-..1., n:uIFC�FI�C-25:' �.v,�'rL�F{.�+�: F:"'���"�� �Fi�c,c�3 '�rm'��'r�rE`FC�fii
nl.,..-.+�.,., .,�+1.., �-:rl.. .,� F., +L,�, 6.., ..L.+ L.., .,.J F. +6,., ,-7.J.,
'a... ::':��i
l.-..,�.,..+L.., L,�..l,.,�+ .,1.,.,-.+�....
E�ea�e�, �#e�Ft-�—ma�-�e�;�„ ,,,,;�;Eat�e�e t�c.�,,,��� �.....,��+�--�a
�o���-�ef fer�es, �ie�ge�-o;-=::�,ris �e t�c,�eg�ce ne�e�sary�-�s el�i„,;,;s�e�
�c�-
b. Hed�es: The hei�ht shall be measured from the topmost portion of
ve�etation to the�round.
c. Retainin� Walls: The standards of this section refer to exposed
retainin� wall hei�ht, as defined in RMC 4-11-180, Definitions R, which is the
4
�
ORDINANCE N0.
vertical distance measure from the finish �rade at the bottom of the wall (i.e..
lower soil �radel to the finish �rade at the top of the wall (i.e., upper soif �rade).
2. Retaining Wall Standards:
a. Fences on Retainin�Walls: A fence shall not be constructed on top
of a retainin�wall unless the total combined hei�ht of the retainin� wall and the
fence does not exceed the allowed hei�ht of a standalone fence.
i. Exceation — Guardrail: If the Buildin� Official requires a
�uardrail, the combined hei�ht of the retainin� wall and required �uardrail shall
not exceed nine feet (9'1 in residential zones, or twelve feet (12'1 in commercial
and industrial zones.
ii. Excention — 50% Transparent Fences: Fences that provide at
least fifty percent (50%) transparency, as viewed perqendicularly to the face of
the fence, mav be allowed directiv on top of a retainin�wall. However. chain link
fencin� shall not be installed. This exception shall not be applied to front vard
setbacks, or clear vision areas, as defined bv RMC 4-11-030. Definitions C.
b. Fences and Hed�es Adiacent to Retainin� Walls: Fences or hed�es
adiacent to retainin� walls with a combined hei�ht that exceeds the allowed
hei�ht of a standalone retainin� wall shall be set back bv a minimum of two feet
(2'1; this area shall be landscaped as if it were a terrace. If a fence is placed anu
distance within the proqertv line, the propertv owner continues to be
responsible for the propertv on both sides of the fence.
5
ORDINANCE N0. .
c. Materials: Retainin� walls shall be composed of brick, rock,
textured or patterned concrete, or other masonry product that complements the
proposed buildin� and site development. Other materials mav be used with the
Administrator's approval.
d. Setback from Public Ri�hts-of-Wav: There shall be a minimum
three-foot (3') landscaped setback at the base of retaining walls abuttin� public
ri�hts-of-wav. Landscapin� shall include a mixture of shrubs and �roundcover
� (trees are optional) in conformance with the standards of RMC 4-4-070.H.4.
Perimeter Parkin� Lot Landscapin�.
e. Terracin�: Terracin� is the act of formin� hillside into a number of
level flat areas (terraces) between retainin� walls, which is often used when the
maximum hei�ht of a sin�le retaining wall is insufficient. The followin� standards
shall applv to terraced slopes:
i.Terrace Width: No portion of a retainin�wall shall be measured
as part of the terrace width. The width of a terrace shall be eaual to the hei�ht
of the tallest abuttin� retainin� wall: however, the minimum terrace width shall
be two feet (2') and the maximum required width shall be five feet (5'). Terrace
width shall be measured from the back ed�e of a lower retainin� wall to the
foremost ed�e of the immediatelv succeedin�and hi�her retainin�wall.
ii. Terrace Landscapin�: Terraces created between retainin� walls
shall be permanentiv landscaped with a mixture of shrubs and �roundcover
(trees are optional) in conformance with the standards of RMC 4-4-070.F.
6
L
1
ORDINANCE N0.
Landscapin�. Landscapin� provided in front of retainin� walls and within
terraces shall contribute to anv landscapin� required bv RMC 4-4-070.F: the
Administrator mav�rant exceptions for required trees based on land constraints.
f. Gradin�: For land area that is not between two (21 retainin� walls
(i.e., not a terracel, the lower soil �rade (i.e., �round at the bottom of a retainin�
wall's exposed surfacel and the upper soil �rade (i.e., �round at the top a
retaining walll abutting a retainin� wall shall be level for a horizontal distance �
(measured perpendicularlv to the wall) equalin� one foot (1'1 for everv one foot
(1') in hei�ht of the retainin�wall.
�. Modifications: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-250.D. Modification
Procedures, the Administrator mav �rant modifications to this section's retainin�
wall standards. Approval of a modifications permit mav include conditions such,
as, but not limited to increased setbacks, additional landscapin�, a reauirement
to terrace or specific materials to be used.
D. STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL USES:
1. Maximum Hei�ht: In anv residential district. the maximum hei�ht of
any fence, hed�e or retainin� watl shall be seventv-two inches 172"), subiect to
further hei�ht limitations as specified in this section.
2. Height Limitations for Interior Lots:
a. Front Yard Setbacks: Fences, retainin� walls or hedges shall not
exceed �r��-e# forty-eight inches (48") in�height �y-a�e-a�e�e� within
the�front yard setback. .
7
ORDINANCE N0.
b. Side Yard '^•�.� Setbacks: Fences, retainin� walis or hedges
within both e�interior side vard setbacks�e#�i+�es and thee#�e�front yards
setback shall not exceed forty-eight inches (48") in height. Fences, retainin�walls
or hedges within e� interior side vard setbacks ��es and not within fe�e�
the front yard� setback shall not exceed �^�., "^ � ^�,��m��� ^{ seventy-two
inches (72") in height.
c. Rear Yard '^�.� Setbacks: A fence, retainin� wall or hedge shall
not exceed � :�^�::?^�w:,^ s#seventy-two inches (72")�e-4aEa�e�-s�t within the
rear vard setback. ��
�''` +r �•
�
� � 3
.� �
, �4..:;,�$u• • �'_xF...,�,
��:",'�!y - �I - �r
� \i�:<���� " _�%
��,.�`�. `. f
,�4��� ) t /////////
+ `�I I �� /
� � �, �� �
' `�� � � ;�'
�'�w: g���
.. •�.f "' _� � �`.
., ,��� •'/.'" __,
,
.��•- � .�
�3. Height Limitations for Corner Lots:
a. Front Yard Setbacks: Fences, retainin� walls or hedges shall not
exceed � :�:�::':�:r�e#forty-two inches (42") in height in any
part of the clear vision area as defined bv RMC 4-11-030, Definitions C. Fences, �
i ' II r h h II n x ��#fort -ei ht inches 48" I�
reta nm�wa s, o edges s a ot e ceed a-�a� y g ( ) ,
8
ORDINANCE N0.
in height�a�y-�e-a�4ewe�within any part of the front yard setback when located
outside of any clear vision area on said lot.
I b. Interior Side Yard '^•��Setbacks: Fences, retaining walls or
hedges shall not exceed � :~�::'.::�:a�a-e# seventy-two inches (72") in height �
��e-4e�� e� within anv part of the interior side vard setback �es to the
point where they intersect the �i�e� front yard setback, in which case they
shall be governed by s�§see�+et� RMC 4-4-040.D.2.a, Front Yard Setbacks e#-##+s
��.
c. Side Yard 6e��^ ^���••��^ Along a Street Setbacks: Fences,
retainin� walls or hedges shatl not exceed forty-two inches
(42") in height within any clear vision area, as defined bv RMC 4-11-030.
Definitions C, and forty-eight inches (48") in height elsewhere in the front yard
setback. The remainder of the fence or hedge shall not exceed #� � :~v::'.:~::.x�
seventy-two inches (72") in height within the side vard alon� a street setback.
d. Rear Yard '^�� Setbacks: Fences, retainin� walls, or hedges
shall not exceed :: ....,.:'.::::,x�—e# seventy-two inches (72") in height �ra�r—E�e
within the rear vard setback �s�-�+�e except the fence. retainin�
wall or hed�e shall not exceed forty-eight inches (48") in height
where they intersect the width of the � side yard alon� a street setback_
„�+�, •,� + + a ..,�,,,.,,+ti„c,,.,,.,, -,�„+� +�„�.,,..+,,.,..,� �c M.. :.,+��
9
ORDINANCE NO.
.�«
�
'�
�
.�
�
�� �
, �
�
� -,
� �
C�tUL YJYd�/tiIONG �fW..L f
� M �� •
S1GFi1�1KJ1'`IGl E ��.
.`
.
,
�
.
.� 4?."kU1Kk1UM FfJC.M�
� �!�"M/U('tv�JM I CJGI tt
� 72'MA)U�IJM r�G!I(
3��4. Gate Required: Residential fences, retainin� walls or hedges along
rear lot lines of interior lots abutting alleys shall have an access gate to the alley.
4=5. Electric and Barbed Wire Fences: Electric and/or barbed wire fences
may be permitted by special administrative fence permit in all residential zones
in cases where large domestic animals are being kept; provided, that additional
fencing or an Administrator approved barrier is erected along the property lines.
E. STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND OTHER USES:
1. location and Maximum Height: A maximum of eight feet (8')
anywhere on the lot provided the fence, retainin� wall or hed�e does not stand
in or in front of any required landscaping or pose a traffic vision hazard.
10
L _
. •
ORDINANCE N0.
ti�
•�.
�` ��
,� .. ��x�
d�a�a'�a�ssw�
���
,� �; r
\ �R f ���
� 4�� � ,�`
u� ��� d ��� �
,��� /�ti�
� ,� .
�� �,
ua<rc tn�v::�
2. Electric Fences: All electric fences shall be posted with permanent
signs a minimum of thirty_six (36) square inches in area at intervals of fifteen feet
(15') stating that the fence is electrified.
Electric fences and any related equipment and appliances must be
installed in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and in compliance
with the National Electrical Code.
3. Barbed Wire Fences: Barbed wire may only be used on top of fences at
least six feet (6') high for commercial, industrial, utility and public uses.
11
,
ORDINANCE N0. �
� �.,��.. . ..
�
��� � �
---� i C :
� � r;- CC,'tr1N��IX.AL I.Cyf
^� �
�' �. �
�. �c
_v- _
� . , , f'ff'll�y - - �"'..�.�."T
� . a��'�'ti
,
;ZtN:'�Il;i.;XV 11T�h �. `�
.
`` �' ���;� �Y
� �•aux�+�t s�t►�t��
� r.�.; '�r.k�:���nr�����i�h�ra��:�r.�
Ffir�.��ia nt r�.c-+�r c:= rr�= :w- m•t�T
4. Bulk Storage Fences:See RMC 4-4-110, Stora�e Facilities, Bulk.
5. Special Provisions: Fences for mobile home parks, subdivisions or
planned urban development and for sites which are mined, graded or excavated
may vary from these regulations as provided in the respective code sections.
F. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF VARIATION FROM HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS:
A property owner wishing to vary the height restrictions or placement of a
fence or hedge on a lot may make written application to the Planning Division for
an administrative review of the situation. The Department's staff shall review the
application and prepare a written determination based upon criteria listed in
*"^�^ �^^��',+'^^� RMC 4-4-040.G, Special Administrative Fence Permits.
G. SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE FENCE PERMITS:
1. Fences Eligible for Administrative Review Process: Persons wishing to
have one �of the following types of fences may submit a letter of justification,
12
ORDINANCE N0.
site plan and typical elevation together with the permit fee to the Department of
Community and Economic Development:
a. Fences exceeding forty_eight inches (48") within front yard or side
yards along a street setback but not within a clear vision area.-�
b. Fences or hed�es exceedin� seventv-two inches (72") and located
outside of required vard setbacks; ',
#:c. Electric fences-; and
Ed. Barbed wire fences.
2. Evaluation Criteria: The ^^„^'^^^^^�+ �^�.,��^� ^�.,����^ Administrator
-r------- -
may approve the issuance of special fence permits provided that the following
objectives can be met:
• a. The proposed fence improves the privacy and security of the
adjoining yard space;
� b. The proposed fence does not detract from the quality of the
residential environment by being out of scale or creating vast blank walls along
public roadways;
=c. The proposed fence compliments the environment it serves in an
aesthetically pleasing manner; and
� d. The proposed fence does not present a hazard to vehicular or
pedestrian traffic.
a�.3. Acceptable Measures to Meet Criteria: Fences located within the
front or side and/or rear yard along a street setback may be a maximum of
13
,
.
ORDINANCE N0. '
Fences � that do not comply with these regulations must be brought
into compliance within six (6) montf�s from the date of notice of a fence violation
from the City.
SECTION II. Section 4-11-060, Definitions F, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended to add a new definition
of"Fence",to read as follows:
FENCE: An outdoor phvsical and/or visual barrier, railin�, or other upri�ht
structure erected above �round and separatin� an area of �round. For the
purqose of administerin� this Title, a wall shall be considered to be a fence
unless the wall resists the lateral displacement of soil or other materials. in
which case it shall aualifv as a retainin�wall.
SECTION III. Section 4-11-180, Definitions R, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended to add new definitions
of "Retaining Wall", "Retaining Wall Height", "Retaining Wall Height, Exposed" and "Rockery",
in alphabetical order,to read as follows:
RETAINING WALL: A wall desi�ned to resist lateral earth and/or fluid
pressures, includin� anv surchar�e, in accordance with accepted en�ineerin�
practice. For the purposes of this Title, a "rockerv" or "rock wall" is a type of
retainin� wall. Structural components of stormwater facilities shall not be
interpreted to be a retainin�wall.
RETAINING WALL HEIGHT: The vertical distance measured from the bottom
of the footin�to the finish �rade at the top of the wall (i.e.. upper soil �rade).
15
f
� ORDINANCE N0.
RETAINING WALL HEIGHT. EXPOSED: The vertical distance measure from the
finish �rade at the bottom of the wall (i.e., lower soil �rade)to the finish �rade at
the top of the wall (i.e., upper soil grade). This height does not include the depth
of footin� below �rade.
ROCKERY: One 11) or more courses of rocks stacked a�ainst an exposed soi)
face to protect the soil face from erosion and slou�hin�. The bottom course of
rocks bears on the foundation soils and the uaper rocks bear partiallv or entirelv
on the rocks below. A rockerv is also known as a "rock wall."
SECTION IV. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five (5)
calendar days after publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2014.
Jason A. Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2014.
Denis Law, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence 1. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
ORD:1854:11/25/14:scr
16
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON �
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION
4-4-130, OF CHAPTER 4, CITY-WIDE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS,
SECTION 4-8-120 OF CHAPTER 8, PERMITS — GENERAL AND APPEALS, AND
SECTIONS 4-11-080 AND 4-11-200 OF CHAPTER 11, DEFINITIONS, OF TITLE IV
(DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE,AMENDING
THE REGULATIONS REGARDING TREE RETENTION AND LAND CLEARING, AND
ADDING,AMENDING AND DELETING CERTAIN DEFINITIONS RELATED TO TREES.
�-(4�
WHEREAS,the City recognizes that trees are valued natural resources; and
WHEREAS, current development regulations pertaining to tree retention and land
clearing are insufficient; and
WHEREAS, the City sets revised standards for tree retention and land clearing
regulations; and
WHEREAS, this matter was referred to the Planning Commission for consideration, and
the matter was considered by the Planning Commission, and the text amendment request
being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 5, 2014, and
considered all relevant matters, and all parties were heard appearing in support or in
' opposition;
I NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNGL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Section 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations, of
I m nt Re ulations of
Cha ter 4 Cit -Wide Pro ert Develo ment Standards, of Title IV (Deve op e g )
P � Y p Y P
the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
1
�
ORDINANCE NO. .
� 4-4-130 TREE RETENTION AND LAND CLEARING REGULATIONS:
A. PURPOSE:
This�section provides regulations for the clearing of land and the protection
and preservation of trees, shrubs, and ground cover plants. The purposes of
these regulations are to:
1. Preserve and enhance the City's physical and aesthetic character by
minimizing indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees, shrubs and ground
cover;
2. Implement and further the goals and policies of the City's
Comprehensive Plan for the environment, open space, wildlife habitat,
vegetation, resources, surface drainage, watersheds, and economics;
3. Promote land development practices that result in minimal adverse
disturbance to existing vegetation and soils within the City while at the same
time recognizing that certain factors such as condition (e.g., disease, danger of
falling, etc.), proximity to existing and proposed structures and improvements,
interference with utility services, protection of scenic views, and the realization
of a reasonable enjoyment of property may require the removal of certain trees
and ground cover;
4. Minimize surface water and groundwater runoff and diversion, and aid
in the stabilization of soil, and minimize erosion and sedimentation, and
minimize the need for additional storm drainage facilities caused by the
destabilization of soils;
2
. ORDINANCE N0.
5. Retain clusters of trees for the abatement of noise and for wind
protection, and reduce air pollution by producing pure oxygen from carbon
dioxide;
6. Protect trees during construction activities from damage to tree roots,
trunks, and branches; and
7. Recognize that trees increase real estate values. �
B. APPLICABILITY:
The regulations of this �section apply to any developed lot, and property
where land development or routine vegetation management activities are
undertaken or planned.
C. ALLOWED TREE REMOVAL ACTIVITIES:
Tree removal and associated use of inechanical equipment is permitted as
follows, except as provided in s�sec�+e�► 8� RMC 4-4-130.D.3„ ^{ +"�� c^�+;^^
Restrictions for Critical Areas — General, and in RMC 4-3-110.E.5.b, Urban
Separator Overlay Regulations. Except as stated in ���"�^�+.,,., �o,. „���„� c,,,.+,,,.,�
RMC 4-4-130.C.9.f. Permit Reauired to Remove Trees in Excess of the Numbers
Above, no Routine Vegetation Management Permit is required for the following
activities/work:
1. Emergency Situations: Removal of trees and/or ground cover by the
City and/or public or private utility in emergency situations involving immediate
danger to life or property, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services
provided by a utility.
3
ORDINANCE N0. .
2.sea�Dangerous Trees: Removal of a dangerous tree, as
defined in RMC 4-11-200. Definitions T. �^,a, �^��^�^,"„ a���,�^�', �'�~�,rt^^', ^
a,��^-^"� R-^.�^�+ �^„^� ^�+-^^� ..,"'�" '"..^ that has been certified as such by a
Citv approved ���er��. licensed landscape architect; or certified
arborist� �,,,.�;,,., „� ,.,�,.w, �„ �„ ., ,,.a �,., �►,,, �;+., �.,�„a ,,., +�„ +.,�„ „�
+�r.`�....�:'..,.. . ,
3. Maintenance Activities/Essential Tree Removal — Public or Private
Utilities, Roads and Public Parks: Maintenance activities including routine
vegetation management and essential tree removal for public and private
utilities, road rights-of-way and easements, and public parks.
4. Installation of SEPA Exempt Public or Private Utilities: Instaltation of
distribution lines by public and private utilities; provided, that such activities are
categorically exempt from the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act
and RMC 4-9-070, Environmental Review Procedures.
5. Existing and Ongoing Agricultural Activities: Clearing associated with
existing and ongoing agricultural activities as defined in E#a�e�-RMC 4-11-010,
Definitions A °"^'', ^^��^;'�^^�
6. Commercia) Nurseries or Tree Farms: Removal of only those trees
which are planted and growing on the premises of a licensed retailer or
wholesaler.
7. Public Road Expansion: Expansion of public roads, unless critical areas
would be affected, � •�"�^" ^ ^ (refer to ����� RMC 4-4-130.C_12�
4
� ORDINANCE NO.
�3, Utilities, Traffic Control, Walkways, Bikewavs Within Existin�, Improved
Ri�ht-of-Wav or Easements ^{�";c �^�+�^~�
8. Site Investigative Work: Site investigative work necessary for land use
application submittals such as surveys, soil logs, percolation tests, and other
related activities including the use of inechanical equipment to perform site
investigative work provided the work is conducted in accordance with the
following requirements:
a. Investigative work should not disturb any more than five percent
(5%) of any protected sensitive area described in ���"�^^+:^� ^' RMC 4-4-
130.D.3, ^� +"�< <^�+�^^, Restrictions for Critical Areas — General, on the subject
property. In every case, impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas
restored.
b. In every location where site investigative work is conducted,
disturbed areas shall be minimized, and immediately restored.
c. A notice shall be posted on the site by the property owner or
owner's agent indicating that site investigative work is being conducted, and that
the work must minimize disturbance to the critical areas identified in ����o„
8� RMC 4-4-130.D.3 ^�}"�< <^�+�^^, Restrictions for Critical Areas—General.
d. No site investigative work shall commence without first notifying
the Community and Economic Development Administrator��.
9. �ewab�e—Minor Tree Removal Activities: Except as provided in
�.�"�^�*'^^ ^' RMC 4-4-130.D.3 ^� +"�� ���}�^~, Restrictions for Critical Areas —
5
ORDINANCE N0. �
General, #�ee removal of trees and associated use of inechanical equipment is
permitted �vv�at the rates specified within the table below, provided
RMC 4-4-130.C.9.a throu�h C.9.f are satisfied. A Routine Ve�etation
Mana�ement Permit is required for removal of trees in excess of the rates listed
below.
Maximum number of si�nificant Maximum number of si�nificant
Lot Size trees* allowed to be removed trees* allowed to be removed
in anv twelve(12) month period in five (5)vears
Lots up to 10,000 sq. ft. 2 4
Lots 10,001 to 20,000 sq. 3 6
ft.
Lots 20,001 sq. ft. or 6 12
r� eater
*Except landmark trees (�reater than a thirty inch (30") caliper) shall not be removed without a
Routine Vegetation Mana�ement Permit.
a. "�—�-t�#t-ee--�3Tt�c�s��ret�ov���' ... ..��,+—t-we��e '�-`,
��:.�a �..,... ^'�d�'.!:::-+
r �r �
s+�e-a��There is not an active land development application for the site;
b. ��„ .., „ ��..,., � ., ��� �.,,,,� ., ,,,� ; , +..,,,i.,,, �,�► .., .,+�
.-..,.-;.,,� f.,, ,,.-+„ +t,c.+„ �., ., +4.,, ..,� /2� nnnl �.,�,�ro Foot �.,�1 nrozt.,. :
�
s+�The trees proposed for removal are not qrotected trees;
c. .
A D.v��+i..� Ve�..i++-.+:r..� flA�+.�-+renrv.i.n+ D�rmi+ i rnn��iroe� ��r.remn�i.��.��_tn000._in
6
. ORDINANCE NO.
Ia. I:..a -.6..�..,� DAA/" A � 1�C D�.�� \/�.�.�+�.+i�.r�
ex�c�s��t�c.�}�::::�., „��e�-��-�ee ��i�= - -o--__._..
. The tree is not a landmark tree: and
d. Minimum Tree Densitv:
i. A minimum tree densitv shall be maintained on each
residentiallv zoned lot. as specified in the table below. The tree densitv mav
consist of existin�trees. replacement trees. trees required pursuant to RMC 4-4-
070.F.1, Street Fronta�e Landscapin� Required, or a combination. If the number
of trees required includes a fraction of a tree. anv amount equal to or �reater
than one-half(1/2) shall be rounded up: and
Tvpe of Residential Development Minimum Tree DensitV
Multi-familv Development lattached Four (41 si�nificant treesl for everv five
dwellin s thousand (5.000) sq. ft. ,
Sin�le-familv development fdetached Two (2) significant treesl for everv five '
dwellin�s) 2 thousand (5,000) sq. ft. I
lOr the �ross eauivalent of caliper inches provided by one (1) or more trees.
z Lots developed with detached dwellin�s in the R-10 and R-14 zones are exempt.
ii. Propertv owners are responsible for maintainin�these trees in a
healthv condition.
de. Rights-of-Way Unobstructed: In conducting minor tree removal
activities, rights-of-way shall not be obstructed unless a right-of-way use permit
is obtained.
10. landscaping or Gardening Permitted: Land clearing in conformance
with the provisions of s+�sec�-RMC 4-4-130.C.9� �� *"�� c��`�^�, �e
7
ORDINANCE NO. .
Minor Tree Removal Activities, and ���'^�^�+�^^ ^' RMC 4-4-130.D.3 e�-taa+s
�ee#�e�, Restrictions for Critical Areas — General, is permitted for purposes of
landscaping or gardening; provided, that no mechanical equipment is used.
11. Operational Mining/Quarrying: Land clearing and tree removal
associated with previously approved operational mining and quarrying activities.
1�, C�i��+w„ �+..,,,«� �a ��+,�,..,,�. ��,,,�;�;,...+;,,� „� „ ;�+;.,,, „+;�;+,,,� .,a
�+..,.,+� 4,,,+.,., r „�+ I�noi 1 .,. I„��
�12. Utilities, Traffic Control, Walkways, Bikeways Within Existing,
Improved Rights-of-Way or Easements: Within existing improved public road
rights-of-way or easements, instaltation, construction, replacement, operation,
overbuilding, or alteration of all natural gas, cable, communication, telephone
and electric facilities, lines, pipes, mains, equipment or appurtenances, traffic
control devices, illumination, walkways and bikeways. If activities exceed the
existing improved area or the public right-of-way, this exemption does not apply.
Restoration of disturbed areas shall be completed.
�4.13. land Development Permit Reauired: Tree removal authorized by
a Land Development Permit.
D. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES:
1. Tree Cutting in Advance of Issuance of Land Development Permit:
There shall be no tree removal or land clearing on any site for the sake of
preparing that site for future development unless a �Land �Development
8
• ORDINANCE NO.
�Permit, as defined in RMC 4-11-120, Definitions L, for the Citv approved site�+a�s
�e�.. .,..... ,,,� �.,+�,,, �•+„
M',r �,
2. Tree Cutting or Vegetation Management Without Required Routine
Vegetation Management Permit:
a. Tree cutting in excess of the limits established in ����,T RMC
4-4-130.C_9 ^�+"�< <^�+�^^, �e� Minor Tree Removal Activities, is prohibited
unless a Routine Vegetation Management Permit has been granted.
b. Routine vegetation management on an undeveloped property
without a Routine Vegetation Management Permit is prohibited.
c. Use of non-exempt mechanical equipment (mechanical eauipment
with more than twentv-seven (27) horsepower) without a Routine Vegetation
Management Permit is prohibited.
3. Restrictions for Critical Areas — General: Unless exempted by critical
areas, RMC 4-3-050 C_5 or Shoreline Master Program Regulations, RMC 4-3-090,
no tree removal, or land clearing, or ground cover management is permitted:
a. On portions of property with_
i_^�^��Critical habitats, � pursuant to RMC 4-3-050_K�
Habitat Conservation;
ii_Sstreams and lakes,� pursuant to RMC 4-3-050_L, Streams
and Lakes;
iii. Shorelines of the State, � pursuant to RMC 4-3-090, R�#�
Shoreline Master Program Regulations; and
9
ORDINANCE N0. .
iv. �Wetlands and wetland buffers, � pursuant to RMC 4-3-
050:M. Wetlands ;
b. On protected slopes except as allowed in this �section or in the
Critical Areas Regulations, RMC 4-3-050; or
c. Areas classified as very high landslide hazards, except as allowed in
this�section or in the Critical Areas Regulations, RMC 4-3-050.
4. Restrictions for Native Growth Protection Areas: Tree removal or land
clearing shall not be permitted within a +�Native gGrowth �Protection ���
Area except as provided ifl rh2 {'Sivv�l3h2� Fr2�lv�s�6��1-�^vicc�lA„—�rr"E'�
^^�^+� ^�RMC 4-3-050.E.4, Native Growth Protection Areas.
5. Tree Topqin�: Tree toppin� shall be prohibited unless the Citv has
approved the tree for removal.
6. Removal of Landmark Tree: The removal of a landmark tree (a tree
with a caliqer of thirtv inches (30") or �reater) is prohibited without an approved
Routine Ve�etation Mana�ement Permit or a Land Development Permit.
E. REVIEW AUTHORITY:
1. Authority and Interpretation: The Community and Economic
Development Administrator is #e�e��# authorized and directed to interpret and
enforce all the provisions of*"'��;o„ RMC 4-4-130 when no other permit or
approval requires Hearing Examiner review. � � �,t �� ���*�^•'�^�' *^ The
Administrator may require retention above the minimum standards, to require
10
� ORDINANCE N0.
phasing of tree retention pians, or to require any other measures to meet the
purpose of this�section.
2. Independent Secondary Review: The Administrator may require
independent review of any land use application that involves tree removal and
land clearing at the City's discretion. An evaluation by an independent qualified
professional regarding the applicant's analysis on the effectiveness of any
proposed removal, retention, or replacement measures, to include
recommendations as appropriate. This review shall be paid for by the applicant
and the City shall select the third-party review professional.
F. PERMITS REQUIRED: �
1. Land Development Permit Required for Site Preparation:An approved
land development permit, as defined in RMC ^ 4 ��nn�� "_11-120, Definitions L,
is required in order to conduct tree removal or land clearing on any site for the
sake of preparing that site for future development.
2. Routine Vegetation Management Permit Required for the Following
Activities:
a. Routine Vegetation Management on Undeveloped Properties:
Any person who performs routine vegetation management, as defined in RMC 4-
11-180, Definitions R, on undeveloped property in the City must obtain a Routine
Vegetation Management Permit prior to performing such work.
b. Use of Mechanical Equipment: Except where mechanical
equipment is twenty_seven (27) horsepower or tess, any person who uses
11
� _ _ . _
ORDINANCE N0. -
mechanical equipment for routine vegetation management, land clearing, tree
removal, landscaping, or gardening must obtain a Routine Vegetation
Management Permit prior to performing such work.
c. Tree Removal in Excess of Maximum Allowance: A Routine
Vegetation Management Permit shall be required for tree cutting in greater
amounts than specified under–��see�ier� RMC 4-4-130.0 9� o; t�i»«t{en
Minor Tree Removal Activities��where tree cutting is proposed
without an associated Land Development Permit. Any tree cutting activities shall
be the minimum necessary to accomplish the intended purpose, and shall be
consistent with ���"���+��� ^' RMC 4-4-130.D.3, e€-t"'���t� Restrictions for
Critical Areas - General. Trees removed in excess of the maximum amount
allowed under se�sec�ie� RMC 4-4-130.C.9, Minor Tree Removal Activities, s#
t�is--�eE�ie�► shall be subject to RMC 4-4-130.H.1.e, �e+,—Replacement
Requirements, unless determined by the Administrator to be unfeasible in the
specific case.
d. Removal of Landmark Tree: A Land Development Permit or
Routine Ve�etation Mana�ement Permit, which explicitly approves the removal,
of a landmark tree, as defined bv RMC 4-11-200, Definitions T, from anv
propertV. Replacement trees are required if the minimum tree densitv for the
subiect propertv is not maintained upon removal of the tree. Removal of a
landmark tree mav be �ranted for situations where:
i. The tree is determined to be a dan�erous tree: or
12
�
� ORDINANCE NO.
ii. The tree is causin� obvious phvsical dama�e to structures
includin� but not limited to buildin� foundations, drivewavs or parkin� lots, and
for which no reasonable alternative to tree removal exists. Routine maintenance
of roofs that is reauired due to leaf fall does not constitute obvious phvsical
dama�e to structures: or
iii. Removal of tree(s) to provide solar access to buildin�s
in r oratin active solar devices. Windows are solar devices onlv when thev are
CO q �
south-facin�and include special stora�e elements to distribute heat ener�v: or
iv. The Administrator determines the removal is necessarv to
achieve a specific and articulable purpose or �oal of Title IV. Development
Re�ulations.
itional Use Permit Re uired for Timber Stand Thinnin : While
3. Cond q g
timber harvesting shall not be permitted until such time as a valid land
development is approved, a request may be made for maintenance and thinning
of existing timber stands to promote the overall health and growth of the stand.
Permits allowin thinnin be ond the limits allowed in ������ RMC
4-4-
g g Y
130.C.9a--�—��,, Minor Tree Removal Activities,� e# t-k�iT�e��+en shall be
considered as a conditional use permit by the Hearing Examiner according to the
following criteria ' •
a. Appropriate approvals have been sought and obtained with the
Washin�ton State Department of Natural Resources; and
13
ORDINANCE NO. -
b. The activity shall improve the health and growth of the stand and
maintain long-term alternatives for preservation of trees; and
c. The activity shall meet the provisions of �����^�*'^�� �� RMC 4-4-
130.H.4, Appticability, Performance Standards and Atternates; and ++4 RMC 4-4-
130.H.5, General Review Criteria, ^{+"�� ���+�^~; and
d. Thinning activities shall "^ "^�°*�a +� '^« conform to the basal area
densitv recommendations of the Washin�ton State Department of Natural
Resources, but shall not reduce the volume of tree canopv bv more than forty
percent (40%) ^��"^, ^',,.,^^ -,^�, �.^^..
e. A Tree Retention/Land Clearin� (Tree Inventorv) Plan, as defined in
RMC 4-8-120.D, Definitions T, shall be required.
G. ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS:
Permits for routine vegetation management shall be processed consistent
with RMC 4-9-195, Routine Vegetation Management Permits.
H. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT/BUILDING
PERMITS:
1. Protected Trees— Retention Required: Si�nificant trees required to be
retained qursuant to RMC 4-4-130.H.1.a, Percenta�e of Tree Retention Based on
Zones, are considered "protected trees." Protected trees mav contribute to each
residential Iot's required minimum tree density, but any trees that are in excess
of an individual lot's minimum tree densitv shatl not contribute to the total
number of trees that are required to be retained for the Land Development
14
• ORDINANCE NO.
Permit. Protected trees that do not contribute to a lot's req�aired minimum tree
densitV shall be held in perpetuitv within a tree protection tract qursuant to
subsection RMC 4-4-130.H.2, Tree Protection Tract: protected trees on an
individual lot are the responsibilitv of the lot owner and mav onlv be removed if
in compliance with RMC 4-4-130.C, Allowed Tree Removal Activities. Si�nificant
t�rees shall be retained as follows:
� a. II...«..e��rl ..r�rl /1C�����r1 Trnnr Cv����e�ea•_Tem� :�'.-+.} .-+...�+. .��.'a'��S
u�-vE'�irr2� � o n n r n ���nn� „ ��#2�jf-i'I��Er�Fk2-�A P9A , , �
+ ��..+,,.-.,4.,�I��.,, �L,-.11 .,.,+ 4.., ., .,+.,.J .. .,+�,.-+.,.d +..,.,�
Percenta�e of Tree Retention Based on Zones:
Properties subiect to an active Land Development Permit or buildin� permit shall
retain the following percenta�es of si�nificant trees based on the property's
zone. Trees within critical areas and proposed �ublic ri�hts-of-wav shall not
contribute to the number of si�nificant trees required to be retained.
i. RC, R-1, R-4, R-6 and R-8 Zones:At least t�hirty percent (30%) of
i i nal
the si�nificant trees shall be retained in a residential or inst tut o ,
development.
ii. R-10, R-14, RM-F, RM-T, RM-U and RMH: �.w At least twent�!
o ° II re ained in a residential or
percent {�Ay6� 20/ of the si�nificant trees sha be t
institutional development.
15 �
ORDINANCE N0. �
- � iii. All Other Zones: F+e�e At least ten percent {s;6� 10% of the
si�nificant trees shall be considered protected and retained in
commercial or industrial developments.
d= iv. Utility Uses and Mineral Extraction Uses: Such operations
shall be exempt from the protected tree retention requirements of this �eF
section if�I the applicant can iustifv the exemption ��. in writing
to the Administrator's satisfaction .
b. Priority of Tree Retention Requirements: Si�nificant trees shall be
retained in the followin� prioritv order:
Prioritv One i. Landmark trees;,
ii. Si�nificant trees that form a continuous canopv„
iii. Si�nificant trees on slopes �reater than twentV percent
20% •
iv. Si�nificant trees adiacent to critical areas and their
associated buffers; and
v. Si�nificant trees over sixtv feet (60') in hei�ht or�reater than
ei�hteen inches (18") caliper.
Prioritv Two i. Healthy tree�rouqin�s whose associated under�rowth can
be preserved;
ii. Other si�nificant native ever�reen or deciduous trees; and
iii. Other si�nificant non-native trees.
Priority Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have
Three been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained, unless
16
• ORDINANCE N0.
the alders and/or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved
enhancement proiect within a critical area or its buffer.
c. Calculatin� Tree Retention: Tree retention standards shall be
apqlied to the developable area of a propertV (i.e., land within critical areas and
' their buffers, public ri�hts-of-wav. qrivate PUD streets. shared drivewavs, and
public trails, shall be excludedl. If the number to be retained includes a fraction
of a tree, anv amount eaual to or �reater than one-half (1/2) tree shall be
' rounded up.
d. Minimum Tree Densitv: Pursuant to RMC 4-4-130.C.9.e, Minimum
Tree Densitv. each residential lot to be created bv subdivision shall have
retained, or newlv planted, trees that satisfv the lot's minimum tree densit�i
requirement. Anv protected tree, whether retained or newlv planted, that is in
excess of the individual lot's minimum tree densitv shall not contribute to the
total number of trees that are reauired to be retained for the land develo�ment
ep rmit•
e. Replacement Requirements: As an alternative to retainin� trees,
the Administrator mav authorize the plantin� of replacement trees on the site if
it can be demonstrated to the Administrator's satisfaction that an insufficient
number of trees can be retained.
i. Replacement Ratio: When the required number of protected
trees cannot be retained, t� replacement trees� with at least a two-inch (2")
17
�
ORDINANCE N0.
caliper ^� o�_�•=� or an ever�reen at least six feet (6') tall, shail be planted-��e
���',���^^^+ at a rate sk�a�4--be of twelve (12) caliper inches of new trees to
replace each protected tree removed. Up to fiftv percent (50%) of trees reauired
pursuant to RMC 4-4-070, Landscapin�, mav contribute to replacement trees.
The Citv mav require a suretv or bond to ensure the survival of replacement
trees.
I1. �n�M,,., -, �.,,,, . +.,,,, �I���+,,.- +4.�+ • �.+ .,c v.. �.,..,.,,,avc�-c�c^z
• �rr�
r.,+.,.,+�.,., ..I-.., .. .,+ L,., ..,+��.,n.a .V.�+�.,-.+�.,., r4.�,l1 L,., . ..,.a ., ��L,r.,.�+�.,.,
.........,. .,.. ......... �
L1.,� .,f+L,�� C.,.-+�....
+i+—Prohibited Tvpes of Replacement Trees: Unless replacement
trees are being used as part of an approved enhancement project in a critical
area or buffer, they shall not consist of a�the followin� species_ ���+^,� ;^ o""�
/1 A 1�LJ��
(a) All Populus species includin� cottonwood (Populus
trichocarpa), quakin� aspen (Populus tremuloides), lombardv poplar (Populus
ni�ra "Italica"), etc.:
(b) All Alnus species, which includes red alder (Alnus ore�ona),
black alder (Alnus glutinosal, white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), etc.;
(c) Salix species, which includes weepin� willow (Salix
babvlonica), etc.; and
18
• ORDINANCE N0.
(dl Ail Platanus species, which include London plane tree
(Platanus acerifolia), American svcamore. buttonwood (Platanus occidentalis),
etc.
iii. Fee in Lieu: When the Administrator determines that it is
infeasible to replace trees on the site. pavment into the Citv's Urban Forestrv
Pro�ram fund maY be approved in an amount of monev approximatin� the
�
current market value of the reqlacement trees and the labor to install them. The,
Citv shall determine the value of replacement trees.
F T +....+�.�,., �+...�,.J-,..d< <L,�11 L,., � .,I�.,.d +., +1,�, .,.,+ .d.,.�.,1.�,.,�hto
, i.
I -,.,.a ..,�+L,�., .-.-�+�.--.I � .,.a +L,.,�. 4,���£.,.,- �Y`II � ..��L.1�� . .,L.+� .,F �
, ,.,.,, ..., ., r�„ ",
' ��I-�e—e�c�ed-;�,TTt�e-�p��Ea I Ea I a�i e�--I��#� ....w.►.�. � �„ „�.,:.,,,a
Ft�C�-,�r;aE�i9f1-A�-E�t-FC2, ^� +„ „ ,,,,+,,. +4,-�., �.,o���f �� /7►
2. Tree Protection Trad: Trees required to be retained (i.e.. protected
trees), and/or Administrator approved replacement trees (excludin� required
street trees pursuant to RMC 4-4-070.F, Areas Required to be Landscaped) , that
are not necessarv to provide the reauired minimum tree densitv for residential
lots, shall be preserved bv establishin� a tree protection tract that encompasses
the drip line of all protected trees: however, multiple tree protection tracts ma�i
be approved if it can be demonstrated. to the Administrator's satisfaction, that
multiple tracts provide a better site desi�n and/or suqports other adoqted �oals
and purposes of this Title.
19
ORDINANCE N0.
a. Applicabilitv: Tree protection tracts shall be reauired for anv �
protected trees that are not located on an individual lot. Tree protection tracts
mav contribute to open space requirements. if applicable. I
b. Standards: �I
i. Tree protection tracts should consist of an a��re�ation of
trees occupvin� a specific area and sufficientiv uniform in species composition,
size, a�e, arran�ement, and condition as to be distin�uished from adioinin�
areas;
ii. Trees shall be retained and maintained pursuant to the
recommendations of a Citv approved certified arborist or licensed landscape
architect, as stated within the required Tree Retention/Land Clearing (Tree
Inventorvl Plan,;
iii. Amenities, as approved bv the Administrator, may be installed
to facilitate passive recreation within the tract. Such amenities mi�ht include„
but are not limited to benches. picnic tables, and soft surface (semi-permeable)
trails.
c. Tract Creation and Deed Restriction: The permit holder shall
establish and record a permanent and irrevocable deed restriction on the
propertv title of anv tree protection tract or tracts created as a condition of a
permit. Such deed restriction(s) shall qrohibit development, alteration, or
disturbance within the tract except for purposes of installin� Administrator
approved amenities. or habitat enhancement activities as part of an
20
' ORDINANCE N0.
enhancement proiect, which has received prior writterr approval from the Citv. A
covenant shall be qlaced on the tract restrictin� its separate sale.
d. Fencin�: The Citv shall require permanent fencin� of the tree
protection tract. This shall be accomplished bv installin� a wood, split-rail fence
I with applicable si�na�e. The Administrator mav approve pedestrian-sized
openin�s for the purpose of facilitatin� passive recreation within the tract for the
benefit of the communitv. The Administrator mav authorize alternate stvles
and/or materials for the required fencin�.
e. Si�na�e Required: The common boundarv between a tree
protection tract and the abuttin� land must be permanentiv identified. This
identification shall include qermanent wood or metal si�ns on treated wood. or
metal posts. Si�n locations and size specifications are subiect to Citv review for
approval. Su��ested wordin� is as follows: "Protection of these trees is in vour
care. Alteration or disturbance is prohibited bv law."
f. Responsibility for Ownership and Maintenance: The relevant
Homeowners' association, abuttin� lot owners. the permit applicant or desi�nee.
or other Citv approved entitv, shall have ownership and responsibilitv for
maintainin�the tree protection tractfs) and protected trees.
�. Maintenance Covenant and Note Repuired: The followin� note
shall appear on the face of all plats, short plats, PUDs, or other approved site
I plans containin� at least one 11) tree protection tract, and shall also be recorded
as a covenant runnin� with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on,
21
ORDINANCE N0.
the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created by or
benefitin� from this Citv action are responsible for maintenance and protection ',
of the tree protection tract. Maintenance includes ensurin� that no alterations
occur within the tract and that all ve�etation remains undisturbed unless the
exqress written authorization of the Citv has been received."
�3. Plan Required: When a �Land �Development �Permit, as defined in
RMC ^ 4 ���4-11-120, is submitted to the City it shall be accompanied by a
Tree Retention/Land Clearin� (Tree Inventorv) Plan ��e���n,a=4�! �::�' !�:�
c'^��:^^ ^',^ as defined in RMC 4-8-120.D.20, Submittal Requirements —Specific
to Application Type.
34. Applicability, Performance Standards and Alternates: All land
clearing and tree removal activities shall conform to the criteria and
performance standards set forth in this�section unless otherwise recommended
in an approved soil engineering, engineering geology, hydrology, or forest
management plan and where the alternate procedures will be equal to or
superior in achieving the �e�+e�es purposes of this �section. All land clearing and
tree removal activities may be conditioned to ensure that the standards, criteria,
and purposes of this�section are met.
45. General Review Criteria: All land clearing and tree removal activities
shall comply with RMC 4-4-060, Grading, Excavation, and Mining Regulations,
and shall meet the following criteria:
22
' ORDINANCE NO.
a. The land clearing and tree removal will not create or contribute to
landslides, accelerated soil creep, settlement and subsidence or hazards
associated with strong ground motion and soil liquefaction.
b. The land clearing and tree removal will not create or contribute to
flooding, erosion, or increased turbidity, siltation or other form of pollution in a
watercourse.
c. Land clearing and tree removal will be conducted to maintain or
provide visual screening and buffering between land uses of differing intensity,
consistent with applicable landscaping and setback provisions of the Renton
Municipal Code.
d. Land clearing and tree removal shalt be conducted so as to expose
the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time,
I in an necessar
consistent with an approved build-out schedule and inc ud g y y
erosion control measures.
e. Land clearing and tree removal shall be consistent with �sec�+e�
8� RMC 4-4-130.D.3, ^�+"�� �^�+��^, Restrictions for Critical Areas—General, and
RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations.
f. Retained trees will not create or contribute to a hazardous
condition as the result of blowdown, insect or pest infestation, disease, or other
problems that may be created as a result of selectively removing trees and other
vegetation from a lot.
23
�
ORDINANCE N0. �
g. Land clearing and tree removal shall be conducted to maximize the
preservation of any tree in good health that is an outstanding specimen because
of its size, form, shape, age, color, rarity, or other distinction as a community �
landmark.
b6. Timing: The City may restrict the timing of the land clearing and tree
removal activities to specific dates and/or seasons when such restrictions are
necessary for the public health, safety and welfare, or for the protection of the
environment.
b7. Restrictions for Critical Areas: See �,���^�+��^ ^"' RMC 4-4-130.D.3, e#
*"'��:T Restrictions for Critical Areas — General, and RMC 4-3-050, Critical
Areas Regulations.
�8. Tree/Ground Cover Retention: The following measures may be used
in conditioning a land development permit or building permit proposal, to
comply with the general review criteria of ���"�^�+�^^ �" RMC 4-4-130.H.5,
General Review Criteria ^�*"�< <^�+�^^:
a. Trees shall be maintained to the maximum extent feasible on the
property where they are growing. Modification of the tree retention and land
clearing plan, or the associated Land Development Permit
�ts, may be required to ensure the retention of the maximum number of
trees.
24
� ORDINANCE N0.
b. The applicant may be required to replace trees, provide interim ,
erosion control h droseed ex osed soils or other similar conditions which I
, Y p ,
would implement the intent of this�section.
c. Trees that shelter interior trees or trees on abutting properties
from strong winds that could otherwise cause them to blow down should be
retained.
..� +�„ ►..,�„ .,�„�� .,t,.,..,. ��
�:--��EE�r ... CFi�FC��--c�F�3�-v; "�, _....._
�
�3fE'a;iu c.,+��,� ,.,4.�..6, +,,.,.d +., t,�.-1,,,, t., .,�+ .,�r+�,
i
,.1
. .......�M`^/i
u o
i i
��
AII A1..��� ..I,��L, �I.�.�1.,� n.J �I.d.,r IAI.�,��� .,r�,.�.,.,�1
. ,
�+t.. -,1
.......,..�� . � •
FH. C-.I�.. � ..L.��L. 7.,.-L�.J.,� . •��11.,�.. (C-.li.. 4,�h..l�,.�,i��1�
��
��:;:....,. ^o.,�.,� ..6.�.-L. �I��.J., I.....,1.. ..I-. ., +.- /D1.'.+:.....�
�r
1-.+-.
i i .........«., � .
89. Protection Measures During Construction: Protection measures in
this subsection shall apply for all trees that are to be retained '+p-aF��� �::";�e
eet�s�ier�. All of the following tree protection measures shall apply:
25
�
ORDINANCE NO. �
a. Construction Storage Prohibited: The applicant may not fill,
excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or
fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth
in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained.
b. Fenced Protection Area Required: Prior to development activities.
t�he applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary
construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees or at a distance
surroundin�the tree equal to one and one-quarter feet (1.25'1 for everv one inch
(1") of trunk caliper, whichever is �reater, or along the perimeter of a tree
qrotection tract �*,^�' ���^+,�^^�' +�^^�. placards shall be placed on fencing every
fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING — Protected Trees�' or on
each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually
protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees
shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide
supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees.
c. Protection from Grade Changes: If the grade level adjoining to a
tree to be retained is to be raised, the applicant shall construct a dry rock wall or
rock well around the tree. The diameter of this wall or well must be equal to the
tree's drip line.
d. Impervious Surfaces Prohibited Within the Drip Line: The
applicant may not install impervious surface material within the area defined by
the drip line of any tree to be retained.
26
' ORDINANCE NO.
e. Restrictions on Grading Within the Drip Lines of Retained Trees:
The grade levei around any tree to be retained may not be lowered within the
greater of the following areas: (i) the area defined by the drip line of the tree, or
, (ii) an area around the tree equal to one and one-half feet (1-1/2') in diameter
i ��
for each one inch (1 ) of tree caliper. A larger tree protection zone based on tree
size, species, soil, or other conditions may be required.
f. Mulch Layer Required:All areas within the required fencing shall be
covered com letel and evenly with a minimum of three inches (3") of bark
p Y
mulch prior to installation of the protective fencing. Exceptions may be approved
if the mulch will adversely affect protected ground cover plants.
g. Monitoring Required During Construction: The applicant shall
retain a 1^�^����T certified arborist or licensed
landscape architect to ensure trees are protected from develo�ment activities
and/or to prune branches and roots, fertilize, and water as appropriate for any
trees and ground cover��that are to be retained.
h. Alternative Protection: Alternative safeguards may be used if
determined to provide equal or greater tree protection.
310. Maintenance:
r ed trees shall
� a. All retained and replacement trees, mcluding p otect ,
be maintained in perpetuitv �^' '} '^�`+ �`.," "' .,""` from the date of the final
land development permit issued for the project, unless tree removal is
authorized ursua
nt to this section;
p .
27
ORDINANCE N0. '
b. All retained trees and vegetation shall be pruned and trimmed to
maintain a healthy growing condition or to prevent limb failure;
c. With the exception of dan�erous �'�,�', �'��^��^�', ^� �',��^^�' trees
specifically retained to provide wildlife habitat, anv protected tree that becomes
a dangerous trees, as defined in RMC 4-11-200, or anv protected or replacement
tree that is stolen�#�ees shall be replaced within three (3) months or during the
next planting season if the loss does not occur in a planting season.
I. MODIFICATIONS .
The Administrator shall have the authority to grant modifications �a�ia�e-es
from the provisions of this �section pursuant to
^-'�n RMC 4-9-250.D, Modification Procedures. when no other permit or
approval requires Hearing Examiner review.
J.VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES:
1. Penalties: Penalties for any violation of any of the provisions of this
�section shall be in accordance with RMC 1-3-2. Code Enforcement and Penalties
. In a prosecution under this�section, each tree removed, damaged or destroyed
will constitute a separate violation, and the monetary penalty for each violation
shall be no less than the minimum penalty, and no greater than the maximum
penalty of RMC 1-3-2�.P, Penalties.
2. Additional Liability for Damage: In addition, any person who violates
any provision of this �section or of a permit ��::�~:: '..".�e#�shall be
liable for all damages to public or private property arising from such violation,
28
' ORDINANCE N0.
including the cost of restoring the affected area to its condition prior to such
violation.
3. Restoration Required: The City may require replacement of all
improperly removed ground cover with species similar to those which were
removed or other approved species such that the biological and habitat values
will be replaced. Restoration shall include installation and maintenance of
interim and emergency erosion control measures that shall be required as
determined by the Cit�3
4. Replacement Required: The City may require, for each tree that was
improperly cut and/or removed in violation of, or without, an approved Land
Development Permit and associated tree retention and land clearing plan,
replacement planting of a tree of equal size, quality and species or replacement
trees at a rate of one-to-one 11:1) caliper inches. ��^ *^ ^�R'�+^�^ �'4' �,'�^^�
FK}C-�-lc�-aT��F.^_-�-�-,r�{..�arrr�:rpccP�� ::: :�:., � �,.d�-,*., . ..5+.. .,F+L.., +..,�,(�1 +L,-,+
�vv,;,�;;;:�e���ve�—The replacement trees will be of sufficient caliper to
adequately replace the tost tree(s), and at a minimum of two inches (2") in
caliper. The Citv mav require a bond to ensure the survival of replacement trees.
5. Stop Work: For any parcel on which trees and/or ground cover are
improperly removed and subject to penalties under this �section, the City shall
. stop work on any existing permits and halt the issuance of any or all future
permits or approvals until the property is fully restored in compliance with this
�section and all penalties are paid.
29
ORDINANCE N0. "
SECTION II. Subsection 4-8-120.C, Table 4-8-120C — Land tJse Permit Submittal
Requirements, of Chapter 8, Permits — General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code is amended so the Submittal Requirement entitled
"Tree Removal/Vegetation Clearing Plan" is retitled as shown below. The rest of the table shall
remain as currently codified.
Tree Retention/Land Clearing (Tree Inventorv) Plan ,�
SECTION III. The Definition of "Tree Retention/Land Clearing (Tree Inventory) Plan" in
subsection 4-8-120.D.20, Definitions T, of Chapter 8, Permits — General and Appeals, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
Tree Retention/Land Clearing (Tree Inventory) Plan: A completed tree '
retention worksheet accompanied by a full dimensional plan, drawn by a
�fi��ess+e+�a4 certified arborist; or a licensed landscape architect, er ^��
, based on finished grade, drawn at the same scale
as the project site plan with the northern property line at the top of the paper
clearly showing the following:
a. All property boundaries and adjacent streets;�
b. Location of all areas proposed to be cleared;�
c. Species and sizes of vegetation to be removed, altered or retained
and the boundaries and predominant species of stands of trees consisting of five
(5) or more trees. This requirement applies only to trees six inch (6") caliper and
30
' ORDINANCE NO.
larger, fifty_four inches (54") above grade, and the location, size and species of
all protected trees on the site;�
d. For trees proposed to be retained, a complete description of each
tree's health, condition. and viabilitv:
e. For trees qroposed to be retained. a description of the method(s)
used to determine the limits of disturbance (i.e.. critical root zone. root plate
diameter, or a case-bv-case basis description for individual treesl;
f. For trees proposed to be preserved within a tree protection tract,
anv special instructions for maintenance fe.�., trimming, �round clearin�, root
prunin�, monitorin�, aftercare. etc.1: �
�. For trees not viable for retention, the reasonlsl for removal based
on qoor health. hi�h risk of failure due to structure. defects, unavoidable
isolation (i.e., hi�h blow down potentiall, or unsuitabilitv of sqecies, etc., and for
which no reasonable alternative action is qossible fqrunin�, cablin�, etc.lt
h. A descriqtion of the impact of necessarv tree removal to the
remainin�trees, includin�those in a �rove or on abuttin� properties;
i. For development applications, a discussion of timin� and
installation of tree protection measures that must include fencin� and be in
accordance with the tree protection standards as outlined in RMC 4-4-130.H.9,
Protection Measures Durin�Construction:
31
ORDINANCE N0. •
� i. The su��ested location and species of supplemental trees to be
used when reauired. The report shall include plantin� and maintenance
specifications;
dk. Future building sites and drip lines of any trees which will
overhang/overlap a construction line;�
el. location and dimensions of rights-of-way, utility lines, fire
hydrants, street lighting, and easements;�
#m. Where the drip line of a tree overlaps an area where construction
activities will occur, this shall be indicated on the plan;�
gn. For allowed activities, including allowed exemptions,
modifications, and variances, show all trees proposed to be removed in priority
tree retention areas: slopes twenty_five percent (25%) to thirty_nine percent
(39%), high or very high landslide hazard areas, and high erosion hazard areas;�
#o. Show trees to be removed in protected critical areas: wetlands,
Shorelines of the State, streams and lakes, floodways, floodplain slopes forty
percent (40%) or greater, very high landslide hazard areas, and critical habitat if
the activity is exempt or allowed by the critical areas regulations in RMC 4-3-
050.0 5, Specific Exemptions—Critical Areas and Buffers;,
�p. Show all trees to be retained in critical area buffers;�and
fg. In all other areas of the site, trees to be removed may be indicated
generally with clearing limit lines except for protected trees. The location, size,
and species of all protected trees on a site shall be shown. The plan shall also
32
• ORDINANCE N0.
�k�� r!w::::� differentiate anv approved replacement trees from the
protected trees. Replacement trees mav be authorized in accordance with RMC
4-4-130.H.1.e, Replacement Requirements. and the number of replacement
trees shall be determined qursuant to any planned replanting areas in
accordance with RMC 4-4-130.H.1#.c, Calculatin�Tree Retention.
SECTION IV. The definition of "Hazard Tree" in subsection 4-11-080, Definitions H, of
Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code is
deleted.
SECTION V. Section 4-11-200, Definitions T, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended so the definitions of
"Tree", "Tree Removal" and "Tree Trimming" are revised as shown below. This section is
further amended to add new definitions of "Tree Protection Tract" and "Tree Topping" in
alphabetical order, and to read as shown below.
TREE: A ." +.w"!: •"•�';+r�g
��•��- �� +,.,^ ����^� ��"L�- ^-�,+�-, woodv perennial usuallv havin� one (1)
dominant trunk, or, for certain species, a multi-stemmed trunk system �a
, with a potential minimum height of ten feet (10') at
maturity. Anv trees listed on the Complete Kin� Countv Weed List shall not
qualifv as a tree.
A. Tree, Dangerous: Any tree that has been certified, in a written report, as
dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or
33
ORDINANCE N0. •
propertv by a ^��F������,' {^�^�+^�, licensed landscape architect, or certified �
arborist.
B.Tree, Landmark: A tree with a caliper of thirty inches (30") or�reater.
C. Tree. Protected: A si�nificant tree identified to be retained as a condition
of approval for a Land Development Permit.
D.Tree, Si�nificant:A tree with a caliper of at least six inches (6"), or an alder
or cottonwood tree with a caliper of at least ei�ht inches (8"). Trees qualified as
dan�erous shall not be considered si�nificant. Trees planted within the most
recent ten (10) vears shall qualifv as si�nificant trees, re�ardless of the actual
caliper•
TREE PROTECTION TRACT: A restrictive area where all retained and/or
replacement trees are protected, and development. alteration, or disturbance
within the tract, or tree removal, is prohibited without the explicit approval of
the CitV. Tree protection tracts may contribute to any required open space.
TREE REMOVAL. T�„ .,,.�.,.,� . -.� „�+�„ -,h,,..,,.,.,,,,.,., ..�...,. .....M�,,.:.,�,'-^o,{�.
. ., r,.,.... . .
+-^^ *"-^���" �"^����' ,' � ^�",�'�,' �^*"^a� The removal of a tree„
.. ., .....,.
throu�h either direct or indirect actions, includin� but not limited to: (1) clearin�„
dama�in� or poisonin� resulting in a dan�erous tree; (2) removal of more than
forty percent (40%) of the live crown; or (3) dama�e to roots or trunk that is
likelv to destrov the tree's structural inte�ritv.
TREE TOPPING: The act of removin� whole tops of trees, or lar�e branches
and/or trunks from the tops of trees. and leavin� stubs or lateral branches that
34
' ORDINANCE NO.
result in the disfi�urement of the canopv. Tree toppin� is considered to be tree
removal. Other common names for the practice include hat-rackin�, loppin�,,
headin�, roundin�over, and tippin�.
TREE TRIMMING: The ����~�~R ^{ +"^ +~^^ intentional removal of a tree's
branches in order to reduce the live canopy of the tree� no more
than forty percent (40%) ^�+"^ '��•^ � �"�" "^ ' ^�' during any �g
consecutive twelve (121 months. Trimmin� more than fortv percent (40%) of a
' tree's canopv durin� anv consecutive twelve (121 months shall be considered
"tree toppin�."
, SECTION VI. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five (5)
calendar days after publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2015.
lason A. Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2015.
Denis Law, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence 1. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
ORD:1853:12/15/14:scr
35
' � I
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION
4-1-160 OF CHAPTER 1, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT, SECTIONS 4-2-
080 AND 4-2-110 OF CHAPTER 2, ZONING DISTRICTS - USES AND STANDARDS,
SECTION 4-3-050 OF CHAPTER 3, ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND
OVERLAY DISTRICTS, SECTIONS 4-4-070 AND 4-4-100 OF CHAPTER 4, CITY-WIDE
PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTIONS 4-5-040 AND 4-5-060 OF
CHAPTER 5, BUILDING AND FIRE PREVENTION STANDARDS, SECTION 4-6-030
OF CHAPTER 6, STREET AND UTILITY STANDARDS, SECTION 4-8-120 OF
CHAPTER 8, PERMITS — GENERAL AND APPEALS, SECTIONS 4-9-060, 4-9-150, 4-
9-200, AND 4-9-250 OF CHAPTER 9, PERMITS — SPECIFIC, AND SECTIONS 4-11-
030, 4-11-040, 4-11-120, AND 4-11-150 OF CHAPTER 11, DEFINITIONS, OF TITLE
IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS), AND SECTION 8-7-8 OF CHAPTER 7, NOISE
LEVEL REGULATIONS, OF TITLE VIII (HEALTH AND SANITATION), OF THE
RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE, BY AMENDING CERTAIN REGULATIONS, AND
AMENDIN6 SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS PURSUANT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT'S ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
INTERPRETATIONS.
P-I I 2
WHEREAS, pursuant to Renton Municipal Code Section 4-1-080, interpretation, the
Community and Economic Development Administrator is authorized to make interpretations
regarding the implementation of unclear or contradictory regulations contained in this Title;
and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes that the regulations identified in Title IV contain unclear
and/or contradictory language; and
WHEREAS,this matter was referred to the Planning Commission for investigation, study,
and the matter having been considered by the Planning Commission, and the text amendment
requests being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended; and
1
ORDINANCE N0. ♦ `
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 5, 2014, and
considered all relevant matters, and all parties were heard appearing in support or in
opposition;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Subsection 4-1-160.E.3, of Chapter 1, Administration and Enforcement, of
Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
3. For all new dwelling units, the total amount of the school impact fees
shall be assessed and collected from the applicant at the time of building permit
issuance, using the fee schedule�#e�in effect at the time a complete application
for the buildin� permit is submitted. No permit shall be issued until the required
school impact fees set forth in the fee schedule have been paid.
SECTION II. Subsection 4-2-080.A.18, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts – Uses and
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
18. -N•0:.".°.. .. �+.,.,.,�.�;,..��.,+.,;.,;..,� ..�
... .. .b
�#e-g�e�rr�#-#�ee� Commercial space must be �� provided on the ground
floor at a minimum of thirty feet (30') in depth along any street frontage.
Avera�in� the minimum depth mav be permitted throu�h the Site Plan Review I,
process, provided no portion of the minimum depth is reduced to less than i,
twentv feet (20'1. Residential uses shall not be located on the ground floor alon� I�
anv public street fronta�e. e�ee���—r�es4d�:::'.�! ..::���a��–��3
2 �
� ORDINANCE N0.
�+..,,,,+s.,,�+.,.,,,
Residential uses are not permitted in the Employment Area Valley (EAV)
land use designation.
SECTION III. Subsections 4-2-110.D.10 and 4-2-110.D.11, of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts
– Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, are
amended as follows:
10. Cluster Development, with a maximum of
fifty (50) lots`shall be allowed within the R-4 zone; when at least thirty percent
30% of the site is ermanentl set aside as " ' '�'�,^' "o en s ace ." as
( ) p Y �*"s*�*� _ P P r —
defined in RMC 4-11-150. Such open space shall be situated to act as a visual
buffer between st�a�� lot clusters and other development in the zone. The
percentage of reauired open space �e��e� may be reduced to twenty percent
(20%)of the site when:
a. Public access is provided to open space; and
b. If Ssoft surface trails are provided within �d critical areas or
critical area buffers pursuant to RMC 4-3-050; and
C. C+.�..w. . .�.+nr r� n.J� -. i. rine�iRr�nrl +r� �limin-�+o nr�rrir�e�rorl rl�.rsoc
., �......:.... .....J .,..L.-....-.,.1 +., .,II.,... ., ...�1/.,r -,r+�..n r �,-,+i.,.,. p1��
portions of a site that are not dedicated to platted single family lots� e�a
dedicated right-of-way, or utilitv improvements shall be set in a separate tract
and/or tracts to preserve existing viable stands of trees or other native
3
ORDINANCE N0. �
vegetation. The tract may also be used as a receiving area for�tree replacement
requirements in accordance with RMC 4-4-130_H. Such tracts shall be shown and
recorded on the face of the plat to be preserved in perpetuity. Such tracts may
be included in contiguous open space for the purposes of qualifying for �w:�!! !�+
clustere� development. Where trees are removed, they shall be replaced in
accordance with RMC 4-4-130.H.
All portions of a site that are not dedicated to platted single family
lots or a dedicated right-of-way shall be set in a separate tract and/or tracts to
preserve existing viable stands of trees or other native vegetation. The tract may
also be used as a receiving area for tree replacement requirements in
accordance with RMC 4-4-130.H.
Such tracts shall be shown and recorded on the face of the plat to
be preserved in perpetuity.
Such tracts may be included in contiguous open space for the
purposes of qualifying for sfwa�l-�e�clustere�development.
Where trees are removed, they shall be replaced in accordance
with RMC 4-4-130.H.
11. Deleted. A�arev�a�f,,.����� .,;,�+� .,a a,,..+� .,,,�,,,.�,,..,� w, , �„
, ,
, ,
�F�C�I�F}�l--tic�trtit�l/�. TL,., .,.d� .-+�v.. J6.y11 L.r--ett: ..........
............... �FFi�2fl�FA�?�r.
4
' ORDINANCE NO.
.� l� �nn1 ,. �+
�6�-S�F��Ti�-�Af#Saf�-�W6-�}R�FcaT�z o v�c�i r.
�6�-WTc�1— t..+.,i.,.,+ lGn�1
�6����cvcTr�cci-T'�fT
- i n throu h Variance of Cha ter 3
SECTION IV. Subsection 4-3 050.J.S.c Exce t o s , ,
, p g p
Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the
Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
c. Exceptions through Variance: Exceptions to the prohibition may be
granted , , ,
�+ + � � ^�^ ��m��.. �^�^ ^ ��+�^rt ��R��-��f pursuant to a variance
as stated in RMC 4-9-250.B.1 and 4-9-250.B.6.
SECTION V. Subsection 4-3-050.J.7.a, Prohibited Development, of Chapter 3,
Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the
Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
a. Prohibited Development: Development shall not be permitted on
land designated with very high landslide hazards, except by variance,
pursuant to RMC 4-9-250_B.1�
�,,,.,,,,, „ :�+;...,i,,,..,i i„+
SECTION VI. Subsection 4-4-070.B.1.b, of Chapter 4, City-Wide Property Development
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
b. All new buildings and new storm draina�e facilities; or
5
ORDINANCE NO. '
SECTION VII. Subsection 4-4-070.F, Areas Required to be Landscaped, of Chapter 4,
City-Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the
Renton Municipal Code, is amended to add a new subsection 4-4-070.F.8, to read as shown
below. The current subsection 4-4-070.F.8 shall be renumbered as subsection 4-4-040.F.9, and
amended as follows:
8. Storm Draina�e Facilities: The perimeter of all new flow control
and/or water qualitv treatment stormwater facilities shall be landscaped in
accordance with the provisions of this section and the Surface Water Desi�n
Manual, unless otherwise determined throu�h the site plan review or
subdivision review process.
9S. Urban Separator Properties: Properties within urban separators
are subject to landscaping requirements of RMC 4-3-110.E in addition to the
requirements of this Ssection.
SECTION VIII. Subsection 4-4-070.H, Description of Required Landscaping Types, of
Chapter 4, City-Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of
the Renton Municipal Code, is amended to add a new subsection 4-4-070.H.6, to read as
foltows:
6. Storm Drainage Facilitv Landscapin�:
a. Trees are Prohibited on Berms: Trees are prohibited on anv berm
servin� a draina�e-related function, however. �roundcover is required and
subiect to City review/approval.
b. Additional Locations Where Trees and Shrubs are Prohibited:
6
I
� ORDINANCE NO.
i. Within the fenced area; and ,
ii. Within ten feet (10') of anv manmade drainage structure (e.�.,
catch basins, ditches, pipes, vaults, etc.).
c. Perimeter Landscaping Required: A landscapin� strip with a ,
minimum fifteen feet (15') of width shall be located on the outside of the fence. III
unless otherwise determined throu�h the site plan review or subdivision review
process.
d. Tvpe of Plantin�s Required: Plantin�s shall be consistent with the
Surface Water Design Manual and this section. Additionallv, trees must be
saaced as determined bv the Department of Communitv and Economic
Develoqment.
e. Conflicts: In the event of a conflict between this section and the
Surface Water Desi�n Manual, the landscaping provisions of this section shall
prevail. Refer to Chaqter 5 of the Surface Water Desi�n Manual.
SECTION IX. Subsection 4-4-100.E.4.a, Churches, Apartments, Subdivisions, and
Existing Legally Established Nonconforming Businesses within Residential Zones, of Chapter 4,
City-Wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the
Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
a. Churches, Apartments, Subdivisions, and Existing Legally
Established Nonconforming Businesses within Residential Zones: Churches,
apartment buildings, subdivision developments, and existing legally established
nonconforming businesses within residential zones and similar occupancies
7
ORDINANCE NO. �
located in residential and mixed-use zones may have two (2) on-premises
identifying signs of not over thirty_two (32) square feet in area on one (1) face.
The signs may be illuminated but not animated, shall be for location
identification only and shall display no copy, symbol or device other than that in
keeping with the development. Freestanding signs shall #e not �+g#�e� have a
hei�ht greater than six feet (6') above any established grade and shall be no
closer than #-e�� five feet (�8 S') to any ���+ �'a!:+ �{ � � ��•�^ {^^} ��'` +^ �
�'�'^ ^ ^�*•• lot line.
SECTION X. Subsection 4-4-100.L.1.b, of Chapter 4, City-Wide Property Development
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
b. Within nonresidential zones, �ground signs that �#i�i� are six feet
(6') or less in height may be installed within the F�^^+ „��a �^+",�� �^ the
landscape strip of the front vard setback �;-t#a� if the clear vision area
described in subsection C 6 of this Ssection is kept clear. Within residential
zones, �round si�ns six feet (6') or less in hei�ht mav be located within the
landscape strip of the front vard setback if the si�n is set back at least five feet
(5'1 from anv lot line.
SECTION XI. Section 4-5-040, Renton Electrical Code, of Chapter 5, Building and Fire
Prevention Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
8
� ORDINANCE N0. I
� The �����80} most recentiv published �edition of The �Washington i
Cities Electrical Code, Parts 1, 2 and 3, as published by the Washington
Association of Building Officials and amended bv the Citv of Renton, is-k�e�e�� I
adopted by reference, and shall be known as the Renton Electrical Code.
The City shall at all times keep on file with the City Clerk, for reference by the
general public, not less than one �copy of The Washington Cities Electrical
Code.
SECTION XII. Subsection 4-5-060.A.2, 101.2 Scope, of Chapter 5, Building and Fire
Prevention Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
2. 101.2 Scope. The provisions of this Construction Administrative Code
shall apply to building, plumbing, and mechanical permits and the following
"Construction Codes":
a. 2012 International Building Code—WAC 51-50
b. 2012 International Residential Code—WAC 51-51
c. 2012 International Mechanical Code—WAC 51-52
d. 2012 National Fuel Gas Code (ANSI Z223.1/NFPA 54) —WAC 51-52
e. 2011 Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code (NFPA 58)—WAC 51-52
f. 2012 Uniform Plumbing Code—WAC 51-56 and 51-57
g. 2014�A88 National Electrical Code
h. 2012 International Property Maintenance Code,
9
____ .
ORDINANCE N0. �
SECTION XIII. Subsection 4-5-060.G.2.h.v(d) of 4-5-060.�.2.h.v, Plan Review Required,
of Chapter S, Building and Fire Prevention Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of
the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
(d) Installations in occupancies, except one (1) - and two (2) -
family dwellings, where a service or feeder rated e+�e four hundred {�89� 400
amperes or greater is installed or altered or if more than et�e four hundred {-�AA�
400 amperes is added to the service or feeder.
SECTION XIV. Subsection 4-6-030.A, Purpose, of Chapter 6, Street and Utility
Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
A. PURPOSE:
1. The purpose of this �section is
�� ,.,;��. . ,,,.. +„ +�., �;+.;� . .-,+,,.,.,,,,.�„� � to preserve �e�-the Citv's
watercourses by minimizing water quality degradation from
siltation, sedimentation and pollution of creeks, streams, rivers, lakes and other
bodies of water, a�►d-�e protect �e�y-�� :�:'�:::�
�eE� propertv from increased runoff rates� and to ensure ublic
safety
2. It shall also be the purpose of this�section to reduce flooding, erosion,
and sedimentation; prevent and mitigate habitat loss; enhance groundwater
recharge; and prevent water quality degradation through permit review,
10
� ORDINANCE N0.
construction inspection, enforcement, and maintenance of draina�e
facilities/svstems. ^��^�+^ ^ �+�+"� ^�^,.�^,^^^« ^�}"^ � ^."^^}`
3. It shall also be the a purpose of this�section to regulate the Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) regarding the contribution of pollutants,
consisting of any material other than stormwater, including but not limited to
illicit discharges, illicit connections and/or dumping into any storm drain system,
including surface and/or groundwater throughout the City that would adversely
impact surface and groundwater quality of the City and the State of Washington,
in order to comply with requirements of the National Pollutants Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II Municipa) Stormwater Permit.
4. It shall also be the purpose of this section to create attractive and
, functional draina�e facilities that do not reduce public safetv.
SECTION XV. Subsection 4-6-030.C, Adoption of Surface Water Design Manual, of
Chapter 6, Street and Utility Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
C. ADOPTION OF SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL:
The 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), as now or as
hereafter� may be amended by King County or the City of Renton, and hereby
referred to as the Surface Water Design Manual, is#e�e�adopted by reference:
,
A�!v~w�! �::mr�Q�-�de}��ed—C-�a�r�ef� r-a� � e � -��r aEo ���.,.,,. r,,,�,R.,
A�4�....�!, ..
11
ORDINANCE N0. "
„ .J t; l, �I +., � � � n n
pi vccaaic3�i c �ici cr��y-aavpzc� ��fzf�renEe. R�eferenee�zT�, 4r�4$� 4v���
�� � $� o -...a �n „� +�.,, v�.... �..���+„ c��.�-,.,,, �ni-.+,,. n„��rt� nn...,,�.,� ., „+
�� � ��
a�e�ec�One�copy of the Surface Water Design Manual shall be filed with the
City Clerk. ; ,.�,.,�,..,, ., ..,�w.,,�+.-��,,.,,�.,
SECTION XVI. Subsection 4-6-030.E.4.d, Special Requirement 4, of Chapter 6, Street
and Utility Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
d. Special Requirement 4—Source Control: All commercial, industrial
and multifamily projects (irrespective of size) undergoing drainage review are
required to implement applicable source control in accordance with the King
County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Manual and the Surface Water Design
Manual.
SECTION XVII. Section 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards, of Chapter 6, Street
and Utility Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended to add two new subsections 4-6-030.F and 4-6-030.G, to read as shown below. The
remaining subsections shall be re-lettered accordingly.
F. CREATION OF TRACTS AND/OR EASEMENTS:
1. Method of Creation for Citv-Maintained Facility for New Residential
Subdivisions with Draina�e Facilities that Collect Public Runoff: New residential
subdivisions shall place stormwater flow control and water qualitv treatment
ponds, vaults and other similar draina�e facilities, alon� with the reauired
perimeter landscapin�, in a stormwater tract that is �ranted and conveved with
12
' ORDINANCE N0.
all ownership and maintenance obli�ations (excludin� maintenance of the
draina�e facilitiesl to the subdivision's lot owners, their assi�ns, heirs. and
successors. An easement under and upon said tract shall be dedicated to the
Citv for the purpose of operatin�, maintainin�, improving, and repairin� the
draina�e facilities contained in the stormwater tract. Onlu the chain link fence (if
reauired bv subsection G of this sectionl, flow control, water qualitv treatment
and convevance facilities will be considered for formal acce�tance and
maintenance bv the Citv; maintenance of all other improvements and
� landscapin� in said stormwater tract shall be the responsibilita of the tract
owner(s).
a. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions: Covenants, conditions
and restrictions. which are approved bv the Administrator, shall be recorded
with the Kin� Countv Recorder's Office prior to recording the plat. The applicant
shall provide a copv of the recorded document. These covenants shall specifv, at
a minimum,the followin�:
i. Ownership. maintenance, and reoair for the commonlv owned
tract, landscapin�, and facilities (excludin� maintenance of the draina�e
facilitiesl; and
ii. No modification of the tract or landscapin� within the tract
shall be allowed without the Citv's prior written a�proval.
iii. These covenants shall be irrevocable and bindin� on all the
propertv owners, includin�their assi�ns, heirs, and successors.
13
ORDINANCE N0. �
b. Stormwater Easement: A stori'nwater easement shall be �ranted
and conveved to the Citv of Renton for the purpose of convevin�, storin�,
mana�in� and facilitating storm and surface water. The easement shall �rant the
Citv the ri�ht to enter said stormwater easement for the purpose of inspecting,
operatin�, maintainin�, improvin�, and repairing the draina�e facilities in the
stormwater tract.
2. Method of Creation for Privatelv Maintained Facilitv: As determined
bv the Citv. other tvpes of new development shall create stormwater facilities
either within an easement or within a tract not dedicated to City. In the case of
a tract, the developer and successors shall own the tract and associated
development site with an equal and undivided interest.
3. Method of Creation for Other Developments: As determined bv the
Citv, the Citv mav take over maintenance of the draina�e facilities located within
either an easement to the Citv or within a tract owned bv the devetoper and his
successors in ownership to�ether with an easement to the Citv.
G. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR FENCING AND LANDSCAPING:
1. Landscapin�: Landscapin� shall be consistent with the provisions of
Section 5.3 of the Surface Water Desi�n Manual, except that within the Citv of
Renton, landscaqin� of draina�e facilities is not optional; it is required.
Additionallv, landscapin� shall comply with the requirements of RMC 4-4-
070.F.8, Storm Draina�e Facilities.
14
� ORDINANCE NO.
2. Fencin�Around New or Expanded Storm Draina�e ponds and Si�na�e
Required: All flow control and water qualitv treatment ponds and similar
facilities, as determined bv Citv Development Services. shall be fenced with a six-
foot (6') tall chain link fence and access �ate. Fencin� is reauired immediatelv
outside each new stormwater flow control and/or water qualitv treatment pond
and other similar facilities, as determined bv Citv Development Services. For
stormwater ponds. the fence shall be placed at the top of the berm with the
maintenance access road on the inside of the fence; or five feet (5') minimum
from top of berm if there is no maintenance access road to allow access for
proper maintenance of the facilitv.
The chain link fence shall be coated with black or�reen bonded vinvl and
installed as determined bv the Citv between the facilitv and the reauired
landscapin�. Unless otherwise determined bv the Citv, the fence �ate must be
posted with a twelve inch (12") bv ei�hteen inch (18"1 "No Trespassin�" si�n.
Cedar or other fencin� materials mav be installed onlv if the stormwater
facilitv is a privatelv maintained facilitv that is owned and oqerated by the
owner(s) of the tract.
3. Maintenance of Existin� Facilities Reauired: Owners of existin�
draina�e facilities not maintained bv the Citv are reauired to continue to
maintain existin� landscapin� and fencin�. Replacement of deteriorated fencin�
and failed plantin�s is required.
15
ORDINANCE N0. '
SECTION XVIII. Subsection 4-6-030.1.3.c, currently codified as 4-6-030.H.3.c, of Chapter
6, Street and Utility Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal
Code, is amended as follows:
c. Compliance with this subsection ## shall be achieved through the
implementation and maintenance of best management practices (BMPs)
described in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Manual. The Administrator e�
�es+g�►ee shall initially rely on education and informational assistance to gain
compliance with this subsection �k, unless the Administrator �� �'���R���
determines a violation poses a hazard to public health, safety, or welfare,
endangers any property and/or other property owned or maintained by the City,
and therefore should be addressed through immediate penalties. The
Administrator ^��� may demand immediate cessation of illicit discharges
and assess penalties for violations that are an imminent or substantial danger to
the health or welfare of persons or danger to the environment.
SECTION XIX. Subsection 4-6-030.1.7, currently codified as 4-6-030.HJ, of Chapter 6, ,
Street and Utility Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal ,
Code, is amended as follows:
7. Record Retention Required: All persons subject to the provisions of
this�section shall retain and preserve for no less than �ee-�3�five 5 years any I
, records, books, documents, memoranda, reports, correspondence, and any and ',
all summaries�ee#, relating to operation, maintenance, monitoring, sampling,
remedial actions and chemical analysis made by or on behalf of a person in
16
' ORDINANCE N0.
connection with any illicit connection or illicit discharge. All records which
pertain to matters which are the subject of administrative or any other
enforcement or litigation activities brought by the City pursuant to this Code
shall be retained and preserved by the person until all enforcement activities
have concluded and all periods of limitation with respect to any and all appeals
have expired.
SECTION XX. Subsection 4-6-030.K.2, Fees, currently codified as 4-6-030.1.2, of Chapter
6, Street and Utility Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal
Code, is amended as follows:
2. Fees: Fees shall be as listed in °""'' ^ ' '°^Q the Citv of Renton Fee
( Schedule Brochure on file with the Citu Clerk's Office.
SECTION XXI. Subsections 4-6-030.L.2, Maintenance Bond (required only for those
facilities to be maintained and operated by the City of Renton), and 4-3-030.L.3, Liability Policy,
currently codified as 4-6-030.J.2 and 4-6-030.J.3, of Chapter 6, Street and Utility Standards, of
Title IV (Development Regulatiohs) of the Renton Municipal Code, are amended as follows:
2. Maintenance and Defect Bond (required only for those facilities to be
maintained and operated by the City of Renton): After satisfactory completion
of the facilities and prior to the release of the construction bond by the City, the
person constructing the facility shall commence a two (2) year period of
satisfactory maintenance of the facility. A cash bond, surety bond or bona=fide
contract for maintenance and defects with a third_party for the duration of this
two (2) year period, to be approved by the City of Renton and to be used at the
17
ORDINANCE NO. "
discretion of the City of Renton to correct deficiencies in said maintenance I,
affectin ublic health, safety and welfare, must be posted and maintained 'I
g P
throughout the two (2) year maintenance and defect period. The amount of the
cash bond or surety bond shall be in the amount equal to twenty percent (20%)
of the estimated cost of construction for a two (2) year period calculated using
the Bond Quantity worksheet as described in the Surface Water Design Manual.
The owner of the property shall throughout the maintenance and defect
period notify the City in writing if any defect or malfunction of the drainage
system has come to his or her notice. Failure to notify the City shall give the City
cause to reject assumption of the maintenance of the facility at the expiration of
the two (2) year maintenance and defect period, or within one �year of the '
discovery of the defect or malfunction of the drainage system, whichever period
is the latest in time.
3. Liability Policy: Before a permit shall be issued for any construction,
insurance will be required as follows:
a. Duration and Limits: The applicant shall secure and maintain in
force throughout the duration of the permit commercial general liability
insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than one million
dollars ($1,000,000.00) for each � occurrence/two million dollars
($2,000,000.00) aggregate.
b. Additional Insured: Copies of such insurance policy or policies
shall be furnished unto the City with a special endorsement in favor of the City
18
� � ORDINANCE N0.
with the City named as a primary and noncontributory additional insured on the
insurance policy and an endorsement stating such shall be provided to the City.
c. Cancelation Notice Required: The policy shall provide that it will
not be canceled or reduced without thirty (30) calendar days' advance written
notice to the City.
d. Waiver: Upon showing of a hardship and at the discretion of the
Administrator ^��-�.�, the insurance requirements may be reduced or
waived for single family or two-family residential applications.
SECTION XXII. Subsection 4-6-030.M, Maintenance of Drainage Facilities, currently
codified as 4-6-030.K, of Chapter 6, Street and Utility Standards, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
�4M. MAINTENANCE OF DRAINAGE FACILITIES:
1. Drainage Facilities Accepted by the City of Renton for Maintenance:
a. Resaonsibilitv for Maintenance of Accepted Facilities:, The City of
Renton is responsible for maintenance, including performance and operation of
drainage facilities i+�sic�t�x.1-���� that have formally been accepted by the
Administrator. The Citv will also maintain anv chain link fence surroundin�
accepted draina�e facilities if the fencin� is required per subsection G of this
section. All landscaped areas, wooden fencin�. or fencin� constructed for a
purpose other than safetv within the tract, must be maintained bv the ownerfs)
of the tract.
�, 19
ORDINANCE NO. �
b. Citv Assumption of Maintenance Res�onsibilitv for Existin�
Facilities: The City of Renton may assume maintenance of privately maintained
drainage facilities, including the perimeter fencing, after the expiration of the
two (2) year maintenance period in connection with the subdivision of land if the
following conditions have been met:
i. All of the requirements of subsection E of this �section have
been fully complied with;
ii. The facilities have been inspected and any defects or repairs
have been corrected and approved by the Department prior to the end of the
two (2)year maintenance period;
iii. All necessary easements entitling the City to properly maintain
the facility have been conveyed to the City;
iv. The facility is constructed on a plat with public streets and
located on tracts or easements dedicated to the City; and
v. It is recommended by the Administrator and concurred in by
the City Council that said assumption of maintenance would be in the best
interests of the City.
c. Facilities not Eligible for Transfer of Maintenance Responsibilitv:
A drainage faci�ity which does not meet the criteria of this subsection shall
remain the responsibility of the applicant required to construct the facility and
persons holding title to the property for which the facility was required.
2. Drainage Facilities Not Accepted by the City for Maintenance:
20
� ORDINANCE N0.
a. The person or persons holding title to the property and the
applicant required to construct a drainage facility shall remain responsible for
the facility's continual performance, operation and maintenance in accordance
with the standards and requirements per subsection C of this �section and
remain responsible for any liability as a result of these duties. This responsibility
includes maintenance of a drainage facility which is:
i. Under a two (2)year maintenance bond period;
ii. Serving a private road;
iii. Located within and serving only one ll single family residential
lot;
iv. Located within and serving a multi-family, commercial site,
industrial or mixed use property site;
v. Not otherwise accepted by the City for maintenance.
b. A declaration of covenant as specified in the Surface Water Design
Manual shall be recorded. The restrictions set forth in such covenant shall
include, but not be limited to, provisions for notice to the persons holding title to
' the property of a City determination that maintenance and/or repairs are
necessary to the facility and a reasonable time limit in which such work is to be
completed.
� v nt that the titleholders do not effect such
i. In the e e
maintenance and/or repairs, the City may perform such work upon due notice.
The titleholders are required to reimburse the City for any such work, with
'� 21
ORDINANCE NO. '
interest and includin� the cost of labor, benefits, materials, time and any other
related costs or fees. The restrictions set forth in such covenant shall be included
in any instrument of conveyance of the subject property and shall be recorded
with the King County Recorder's Office 5++�+sier�.
ii. The City may enforce the restrictions set forth in the
declaration of covenant provided in the Surface Water Design Manual.
3. Separate Convevance Svstem Required for Off Site Draina�e:
f�.,.�..,.,,,�.,�., � ,�+,,,,,,� +., t,,, .,., ;.,+-,�..n.d -..,.d ., r-.+.,.J L,,,+4,,, r�+„ ..,, ��+ 1,,, I.,��+.,.J
�'~ R �+ `� �+ ��^"+ �{ , �}��' *^ �;'„ Offsite areas that
... v .v...vb� � �
naturally drain onto the project site must be intercepted at the natural drainage
course within the project site and conveyed in a separate conveyance system
and must bypass onsite stormwater facilities. Separate conveyance systems that
intercept offsite runoff and are located on private property must be located in a
drainage easement that may be dedicated to the City if the City deems it
appropriate depending on the upstream tributary area.
4. Maintenance of Landscapin� and Other Improvements Located in the
Draina�e Facilitv / Landscapin� Tract: The owner(s) of the tract shall maintain
the landscapin�, and other improvements installed within the tract. All
imqrovements to the draina�e facilitv/landscapin� tract, includin� landscapin�,
shall require the submittal of a landscape and/or recreation plan approved bv
the Citv.
22
� ORDINANCE NO.
�5. Other Cases: Where not specifically defined in this subsection, the
responsibility for performance, operation and maintenance of drainage facilities
and conve ance s stems shall be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Y Y
SECTION XXIII. Subsection 4-6-030.N, Retroactivity Relating to City Maintenance of
Subdivision Facilities, currently codified as 4-6-030.L, of Chapter 6, Street and Utility Standards,
of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
�N. RETROACTIVITY RELATING TO CITY MAINTENANCE OF SUBDIVISION
FACILITIES:
If any person constructing drainage facilities pursuant to this�section and/or
receiving approval of drainage plans prior to the effective date of the ordinance
codified in this Ssection reassesses the facilities and/or plans so constructed
and/or approved and demonstrates, to the Administrator's satisfaction, total
compliance with the requirements of this �section, the City may, after
inspection, approval and acknowledgment of the proper posting of the required
bonds as specified in subsection A� O of this �section, assume maintenance of
the facilities.
SECTION XXIV. Subsection 4-6-030.R, Violations of This Section and Penalties, currently
codified as 4-6-030.P, of Chapter 6, Street and Utility Standards, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of the Renton Municipat Code, is amended as follows:
�R. VIOLATIONS OF THIS SECTION AND PENALTIES:
A violation of any of the provisions of this �section shall be a civil infraction
�*"^{'��+ ��^^�^ pursuant to RMC 1-3-2. See also RMC 4-6-110.
23
ORDINANCE N0. �
SECTION XXV. The subsection entitled Affidavit of Installation of Public Information
Sign, of subsection 4-8-120.C, Table 4-8-120_C — Land Use Permit Submittal Requirements, of
Chapter 8, Permits —General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton
Municipal Code, is amended as shown below. The rest of the subsection shall remain as
currently codified.
LAND USE APPLICATIONS
TYPE OF PUD
APPLICATION/ PUD, Final
PERMIT Preliminary
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Affidavit of Installation of Public Information Sign 2 �
SECTION XXVI. Subsection 4-9-060.C.9.d, Amount of Payment of Fee in Lieu of Street
Improvements, of Chapter 9, Permits - Specific, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the
Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
d. Amount of Payment of Fee in Lieu of Street Improvements: In
each instance where the City approves a proposed fee-in-lieu under the
provisions of this �section, the amount of the fee-in-lieu shall be ��
per'ccn��l�O�v�ttt �k►��her�-esz�rate� EA�5�6# c^vt13cCElcctt��—�FC��FC�cc
�� * ^���: .w:r~.,�:��....��:..��:a� established at one hundred thirtv-
three dollars ($1331 per linear foot for sidewalks onlv and two hundred two
dollars ($202) per linear foot for curb, �utter and sidewalk. An additional thirtv
24
� ORDINANCE NO.
dollars (530) per linear foot would be assessed where there is an existin� ditch
that would be piped with actual fronta�e imqrovements. Additional fee
amounts will be determined on a case-bv-case basis for other si�nificant street
elements, such as catch basins and curb ramps.
SECTION XXVII. Subsection 4-9-150.B.2, Code Provisions That May Be Modified, of
Chapter 9, Permits - Specific, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal
Code, is amended as follows:
2. Code Provisions That May Be Modified:
a. In approving a planned urban development, the City may modify
any of the standards of chapter 4-2 RMC, RMC 4-3-100, chapter 4-4 RMC, RMC 4-
6-060 and chapter 4-7 RMC, except as listed in subsection B_3 of this�section. All
modifications shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban
development.
b. An applicant may request additional modifications from the
requirements of this Title, except those listed in subsection B 3 of this �section.
. +L.-..., +4.3�., � .-ti��.,ll., .J.,«.ib..,.d i., ���h��t�ea
Q7.. .,C+l,�� c.,..+i.... �L.-.II L,
�'�"M"I""�'+ Y!=". All modifications shall be considered simultaneouslv as
part of the planned urban development.
SECTION XXVIII. Subsection 4-9-200.D.1, of Chapter 9, Permits - Specific, of Title IV
(Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
25
ORDINANCE NO. �
• 1. All master plans except those covered by a planned action ordinance
that included a public hearing that was determined by the Community and
Economic Development Administrator to have provided the public and decision-
makers with sufficient detail regarding the project's scale, design, bulk and uses.
Where a Master Plan is approved, subsequent Site Plans submitted for future
phases mav be submitted and approved administrativelv without a public
hearin�.
SECTION XXIX. Subsection 4-9-250.B.c.iii, Steep Slopes Forty Percent (40%) or Greater
and Very High Landslide Hazards, of Chapter 9, Permits - Specific, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
iii. Steep Slopes Forty Percent (40%) or Greater and Very High
Landslide Hazards• T"^ � ^�*��.�+�^^ ^{^ �-'� �,m:'., �^^�^ ^ ��+:^^
^���e�-Ee�w#er-�-t�c�e-i�s-�e�e�e�gk�deuek�a�le a�ea e4s�ea�k�e��e� t#��;�a
;.�..�+?��' �e�* r�rL:"a Variances
from the �eolo�ic hazard requirements of RMC 4-3-050, Criticat Areas
Re�ulations.
SECTION XXX. The definition of "Cluster, Residential" in section 4-11-030, Definitions C,
of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code,
is amended as follows:
CLUSTER o�einrw�r�n� DEVELOPMENT: �T�,"�.^--^��.�Ee�e�+ „F ..,, „ +��
�� �Irl�.-� i+l� ..I� Ir.+ .. �I ����.�� f.�r*hc� r���rr�e�eo n�ci+..r4. .�4i.n.Q
.mTg�-�—Fesideat�+a��w{.�I+����i�s in ei�h�er���aEk�e� a^+���^a
26
ORDINANCE N0.
�fE�F�:: ......:'.��:::�, ,.::a�r2FCi�-�fA�}�7--^vrTrcFS�lip^ Atln I�2-�k}2
� . A residential subdivision comprised of a �rouping of sin�le familv
dwellin�s on small lots desi�ned to include si�nificant open space or preserve
si�nificant natural features. which are commonlv held bv the residents, in
� exchan�e for modifications to certain development standards le.�., lot
dimensions, setbacks. and buildin�standards).
SECTION XXXI. The definition of "Density, Net" in section 4-11-040, Definitions D, of
Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
DENSITY, NET: A calculation of the number of housing units and/or lots that
would be allowed on a property after critical areas, i.e., very high landslide
hazard areas, protected slopes (except evaluate on a case-by-case basis those
protected slopes created by previous development), wetlands, Class 1 to 4
streams and lakes, or floodways, and public rights-of-way and legally recorded
' private access easements are subtracted from the gross area (gross acres minus
streets and critical areas multiplied by allowable housing units per acre).
Developments meetin� the definition of a Shoppin� Center are not reauired to
deduct areas within access easements from the �ross site area for the purqose of
calculatin� net densitv. Required critical area buffers, streams that have been
daylighted including restored riparian and aquatic areas, public and private
alleys, and trails, shall not be subtracted from gross acres for the purpose of net
27
ORDINANCE N0. '
density calculations. All fractions which result from net density calculations shall
be truncated at two (2) numbers past the decimal (e.g., 4.5678 becomes 4.56).
Calculations for minimum or maximum density which result in a fraction that is
0.50 or greater shatl be rounded up to the nearest whole number. Those density
calculations resulting in a fraction that is less than 0.50 shall be rounded down to
the nearest whole number.
SECTION XXXII. The definition of "lot, Smal) Cluster" in subsection F of the definition of
Lot Types in section 4-11-120, Definitions L, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as follows:
F. Lot, Small Cluster: " ��� .,...v!! 5�:� ... ��, �'�+� +►,M� ,.�o ,�^ ^,� +^
.,�a„ -. +.-,.,��+c.,., �.,.J t,,,�c,,. t,,,+,.,.,,,., � ., +1,,, o n 7.,h„V c..,M�� ���.,-trcnic�iv�c-`� �
2fLid�v�r'2� F I} ��'1 e—�r4—�Ai�c�v�'1 ei�—i 6 cd cc��i�11 FI�Hf f}Hii aTc� �cc�v o�ToT
�crvcicc'm^s—c'r�i v E6i1�IgEI A Li3�f9��C�F25�F�����r25I�2FF�Fd�i�C���� �I., I-,...d �
��+;,,., „� +�„ �em�r�he���' ..... .,.,
r��
.-I,..J.,� ., ..:f�..-....+ .. -,I+., -,+ I.,-.�+*..,.,..F., ., .,+ l�noi► ..i�
s+#�See CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT.
SECTION XXXIII. The definition of "Open Space" in section 4-11-150, Definitions 0, of
Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is
amended as follows:
OPEN SPACE: Any physical area that provides visual relief from the built
, environment for environmental, scenic or recreational purposes. Open space
may consist of developed or undeveloped areas, including urban plazas, parks,
28
� ORDINANCE NO.
pedestrian corridors, landscaping, pastures, woodlands, greenbeits, wetlands
and other natural areas, but excluding stormwater facilities, driveways, parking
lots or other surfaces designed for vehicular travel.
SECTION XXXIV. Section 8-7-8, Variances and Appeal, of Chapter 7, Noise Level
Regulations, of Title VIII (Health and Sanitation) of the Renton Municipal Code, is amended as
follows:
8-7-8 VARIANCES AND APPEAL:
A. Jurisdiction: The Community and Economic Development Administrator�
or his/her designee� shall hear and decide requests for variances from the
requirements of this Chapter that do not require a public hearin�. The Hearin�
Examiner shall hear and decide requests for variances from the reauirements of
this Chapter that reauire a public hearin�.
B. Application: Parties seeking a variance from this Chapter, or a duly
authorized representative of the parties seeking the variance, shall file an
application for the variance, which application shall set forth fully the grounds
therefor and the facts the applicant deems material to justify the granting of
such a variance. The applicant for a noise variance must be the owner or
jurisdiction in charge of the project. In no cases shall the applicant for the noise
variance be the contractor for the construction project.
C. Public Notice and Hearing: A public hearing shall be required for all noise
� variances which are greater than two (2) days in duration. For those variance
requests of two (2) days or less in duration, the variance decision shall be made
29
ORDINANCE N0. �
by the Administrator or his/her designee following the public notice process. If
required, the hearing for a noise variance shall be a public hearing, the date of
which shall be not more than forty_five (45) days from the date of filing and
acceptance of the application for the variance. Notice of the time and place of
public hearing shall be given in at least one �publication in the City's legal
newspaper, which publication shall be not less than ten (10) days prior to the
date of said public hearing. In addition, three (3) written notices of such public
hearing shall be posted at least ten (10) days prior to such hearing within, on or
about the location which will generate such noise. Additionally, written notice of
the hearing shall be given to any resident or property owner that will experience
an increase in noise, or potentially have an increase in noise, such that this
variance will increase the quantity of noise received by that property owner or
resident. The burden of providing this written notice shall be upon the applicant.
The � .,�+., -,.,a r,-,,.,,,,,,,�� n,,,,,,�,,.,.,,,,.,+ na.,..a..,.-+..,+,.. ,,. w:���,,. ,�„�.,,..,,,,
decision maker shall not consider any variance for which written notices have
not been given, or grant any variance that would cause an increase in noise
levels beyond that permitted in this Chapter unless the affected property owner
or resident has been notified.
D. Factors For Granting Variance: The
r,,,.,,,�„�.�,,,.,+ �,�.,...:.,;�+..,+,,. ,,. �;�i�,,. .�„�,�,.,,,,, decision maker, in passing upon
an application for a variance, shall consider all technical evaluations, all relevant
factors and standards specified in other sections of this Chapter, and in addition
30
� ORDINANCE N0.
thereto shall consider the following, none of which is mandatory for the granting
of the variance:
1. That the applicant ad+� suffers practical difficulties and unnecessar�r
a+�--�� hardship and the variance is necessary because of special
circumstances applicable to the applicant's property or project, and that the
strict application of this Chapter will deprive the subject property owner or
applicant of rights and privileges enjoyed by others.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to
the public health, welfare or safety, or unduly injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity of the location for which this variance is sought.
3. That the variance sought is the minimum variance which will
accomplish the desired purpose.
4. That the variance contains such conditions deemed to be necessary
to limit the impact of the variance on the residence or property owners impacted
by the variance. The variance approval may be subject to conditions including,
but not limited to, the following:
a. Implementation of a noise monitoring program;
b. Maximum noise levels;
c. Limitation on types of equipment and use of particular
equipment;
d. Limitation on back-up beepers for equipment;
e. Required use of noise shields or barriers;
31
,
ORDINANCE N0. �
f. Restrictions to specific times and days;
g. Specific requirements for documentation of compliance with the
noise variance conditions;
h. Specific requirements for notification to nearby residents;
i. Required cash security to pay for inspection services to verify
compliance;
j. Required access to the project by the City to verify compliance
with the noise variance conditions;
k. Specific program to allow for temporary hotel vouchers to
effected residents;
I. Requirements for written verification that all workers understand
the noise variance conditions for the project; and
m. Provision allowing the City to immediately revoke the variance �
approval if the variance conditions are violated.
5. The importance of the services provided by the facility creating the
noise and the other impacts caused to the public safety, health and welfare
balanced against the harm to be suffered by residents or property owners
receiving the increased noise permitted under this variance.
6. The availability of practicable alternative locations or methods for the
proposed use which will generate the noise.
7. The extent by which the prescribed noise limitations will be exceeded
by the variance and the extent and duration of the variance.
32
1
' ORDINANCE N0.
E. Findings and Conclusions
�,�..�,'.�',+��+� of the Decision Maker: The
n , ^�^^^�^�* ^��;^��*�,*^- ^� "���"^� ������ decision maker shall reduce his
or her decision to written findings, conclusions and a decision. The written
findings, conclusions and decision shall include a section noting the right of
appeal from the decision to the City Council.
F. Appeals: Any party participating in the public hearing feeling aggrieved
�,......,.,,..,•�.
� by the decision of the � � ,^� ��^ ^��� ^",.^'^^w'^^+ ^''^';^:`}"`"' ^'
..,.,.............,
�;��"^� �'^�;^^^^ Hearin� Examiner may appeal the decision
to the Citv Council within fourteen (14) calendar days of the decision. The appeal
document shall note the errors in findin s or conclusions which the a pellant
g P
believes are material to the appeal. The #ea�+r�a �::�:�:^?^� Citv Council shall
consider the appeal and shall affirm the decision of the Hearin�
Examiner unless the ��� Citv Council finds that there are material
errors in the findings or conclusions, or that the decision is not supportable by
the findings and conclusions. If the ++ea�+�g-€��e� Citv Council finds such
errors it shall reduce its decision to writing specifying the findings and
conclusions that are in error or stating that the decision is not supportable by the I
findings and conclusions. Any party remaining aggrieved by the decision of the
�g�i�F Citv Council may further appeal to the King County Superior
Court within twenty-one (21) calendar days from the date of the �4ea�+�g
��Citv Council's decision.
33
ORDINANCE N0. '
SECTION XXXV. This ordinance sliall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five (5)
calendar days after publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2015.
Jason A. Seth, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2015.
Denis Law, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
ORD:1849:12/15/14:scr
34
Jason Seth
From: Julia Medzegian
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 7:21 PM
To: Jason Seth
Subject: FW: Seahawks Fan Rally at City Hall January 9
Jason,
This is what Jay was supposed to read for the admin report
Julia ;
From: Preeti Shridhar
Sent: Monday, January O5, 2015 12:36 PM
To: Preeti Shridhar
Subject: Seahawks Fan Rally at City Hall January 9
Dear Employees,
The Seahawks will host a Blue Friday Playoff Rally at Renton City Hall on January 9, at the lobby level parking area in
preparation for the NFC Divisional Game on Saturday, January 10 at CenturyLink Field. Enjoy free hot dogs, Seahawks
alumni, the Sea Gals, Blitz, Blue Thunder, Seahawk Fans, prizes for the best Seahawks Spirit costume, and more.
Activities will begin at 11:30 a.m.
We are also excited to have 710 ESPN who are broadcasting their show live from City Hall.
Visitors and public are being directed to park at Sam's Club main parking lot(no parking at City Hall lobby level). If you
know of groups or organizations that have meetings scheduled at City Hall on lanuary 9, please inform them of the rally
and to consider other options during that time since parking will be a challenge.
Preeti Shridhar
Deputy Public Affairs Administrator
, City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way,
Renton,WA 98057
425-430-6569; cell 206-491-8158
1
�genda Item No.: ,(� .
- ' ` `
RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING '
. AUDIENCE COMMENT
SIGN-UP SHEET
(Page 1)
CITIZENS MUST PROVIDE NAME AND ADDRESS IN ORDER TO BE CONTACTED OR TO BE
A PARTY OF RECORD WHEN APPROPRIATE
DATE: (/� '2� �5 PLEASE PRINT 5 Minute Time Limit
. 1 ' S ' �
Name: � Name: Z � y'�-I�
. . , .
Address: ✓e 1o��i�^ Address: ( ��P�� �(,( ����SL
��, � �
City: �� n,,��ip.C�c��lE'"��" City: �CS��/�ITD 6V Zip Code: �
Email• '—+�w�.i i����'' EmaiL• �O �Q ,r�o ��t' �*� �
Topic: ��,�j�j,�1 •.._ . � J j Topic: � J ti �C�(6'VS o c.�/�9S/z��
' /('1 ",L"' `�` ��.-� _ ��CInJ6 � � /�
(3� ' 6 " '
Name: /T�CUCf(�� f�v`�Q kf�����r • Name:
Address: ���v (�(/�ID,(J ��v� � Address:
City: ,�c�l�'l� Zip Code: `��D� City: Zip Code:
Email: Email:
ToP'�: G I�a�� ��/ Topic: I
�� �
Name:.l�( l x vl/���d �� Name:
Address: �5� ,`L 6��` ��� g � Address:
City: ��/IvKL Zip Code: City: Zip Code:
Email: �1 r�v�f�"� � '���1���� Email:
Topic: ����' Topic:
a.
,4�� 8
� � n� �
Name: �yn�G `�" �� Name:
l - q t� �� '�
Address: �'�3 � � �U�° Address: �
City: ��� Zip Code: `���/ City: Zip Code:
EmaiL•�yti%1�t:k-`"���'�����,C6Lvv EmaiL•
U '
Topic: �y��?�rs��� Topic:
, }
U ��
(CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE)
�c:ontinued from Reverse Side- Page�� • .. __ „
RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUDIENCE COMMENT
SIGN-UP SHEET
CITIZENS MUST PROVIDE NAME AND ADDRESS IN ORDER TO BE CONTACTED OR TO BE
A PARTY OF RECORD WHEN APPROPRIATE
PLEASE PRINT 5 Minute Time Limit
9 13
Name: Name:
Add'ress: Address: -.
City: Zip Code: City: Zip Code:
Email: Email:
Topic: Topic:
10 14
Name: Name:
Address: Address:
City: Zip Code: City: Zip Code:
Email: Email:
Topic: Topic:
11 15
Name: Name:
Address: Address:
City: Zip Code: City: Zip Code:
Email: Email:
Topic: Topic:
12 16
Name: Name:
Address: Address:
City: Zip Code: City: Zip Code:
Email: Email:
Topic: Topic:
. - � �
FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT APPR�VED BY
C�TY COUNCIL
January 5, 2015 ���� � �/���
�
APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND PAYROLL VOUCHERS
The Finance Committee approves for payment on January 5, 2015 claims vouchers 334564 —
335357, 7 wire transfers and 2 payroll runs with benefit withholding payments totaling
$10,840,462.83 and payroll vouchers include 1,446 direct deposits and 116 payroll checks
totaling$3,267,293.80.
CsYI
�
Don Persson, Chair '
�
� �
Greg Ta��ice-Chair
Arr�do Pavone, Member
�
. ,
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
January 5,2015 Council Chambers ,
Monday, 7:00 p.m. M t N U T E 5 Renton City Hall
CALL TO ORDER Mayor Denis Law called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led
the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
ROLL CALL OF ED PRINCE,Council President; RUTH PEREZ; ARMONDO PAVONE; GREG
COUNCILMEMBERS TAYLOR; RANDY CORMAN; MARCIE PALMER; DON PERSSON.
CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE DENIS LAW, Mayor;JAY COVINGTON,Chief Administrative Officer; LAWRENCE J.
WARREN,City Attorney;JASON SETH, City Clerk; CHIP VINCENT, Community and
Economic Development Administrator; IWEN WANG,Administrative Services
Administrator;GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Public Works Administrator;TERRY
HIGASHIYAMA, Community Services Administrator; PREETI SHRIDHAR, Deputy
Public Affairs Administrator; DEPUTY CHIEF ERIK WALLGREN, Fire & Emergency
Services Department; COMMANDER KATIE MCCLINCY, Police Department.
SWEARING-IN CEREMONY Mayor Law announced that newly appointed Councilmember Ruth Perez would
Ruth Perez, Council Position#6 be sworn in at tonight's meeting. He noted that her family and friends, and
former Councilmember Toni Nelson,were in attendance.
City Clerk Jason Seth administered the oath of office to appointed
Councilmember Ruth Perez, Council Position No. 6.
Ms. Perez expressed appreciation for being appointed to serve the citizens of
Renton. She remarked that she looks forward to working collaboratively with
her Council colleagues and City staff. She stated that she will work hard to
continue Terri Briere's legacy of commitment to the community.
RECESS MOVED BY PRINCE,SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL RECESS FOR
APPROXIMATELY 15 MINUTES FOR A SPECIAL RECEPTION TO WELCOME NEW
COUNCILMEMBER RUTH PEREZ. CARRIED. Time: 7:04 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 7:18 p.m.; roll was called; all Councilmembers
present.
PROCLAMATION A proclamation by Mayor Law was read declaring January 2015 to be"National
National Mentoring Month— Mentoring Month" in the City of Renton in tribute to the many dedicated
January 2015 individuals who volunteer their time,compassion, and talents to mentor young
people,and encouraging all citizens to join in this special observance and give
back to the community as mentors. MOVED BY PALMER,SECONDED BY
PRINCE,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PROCLAMATION. CARRIED.
Community In Schools of Renton (CISR) Mentor Program Manager Mara Fiksdal
accepted the proclamation with appreciation. She recognized CISR mentors
and board members in attendance, and reported that 112 volunteers provided
2,357 hours of service to Renton's children during the 2013-2014 school year.
Ms. Fiksdal stated that mentors are matched with children who are at risk for
academic failure. She explained that mentors meet with their mentees for one
hour per week. Ms. Fiksdal introduced CISR mentor Akeem Blake.
Januarv 5, 2015 Renton City Council Minutes Pa�e 7
Mr. Blake stated that growing up he had did not have a father figure in his life.
He remarked that he decided to make a positive impact on a child's life because
of his own life experiences. He encouraged everyone,especially men,to
mentor a child. Ms. Fiksdal added that anyone interested in becoming a
mentor can contact her at 425-430-6659. She challenged Council to recruit at
least one mentor over the next year.
' Mayor Law thanked Mr. Blake for his commitment to the CISR mentor program.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Chief Administrative Officer 1ay Covington reviewed a written administrative
report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work
programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2014 and beyond. Item noted
was:
� Seattle Seahawks will host a Blue Friday playoff rally at City Hall this Friday,
January 9, beginning at 11:30 a.m. Folks are encouraged to come enjoy
free hotdogs; Seahawks alumni,Sea Gals, Blitz, Blue Thunder, and others
will be present.There will be prizes for best costume and more.
Additionally,the City is excited to announce that 710 ESPN Radio will be
broadcasting from City Hall. Parking is a challenge, but gratefully Sam's
Club has opened up their parking lot area for attendees.
AUDIENCE COMMENT Howard McOmber(Renton) stated that changes have been made to the
Citizen Comment: McOmber— Salvation Army homeless feeding program dinner. He explained that the meals
Homeless Feeding Program will be served Monday through Thursday at the Salvation Army, and Friday
Changes through Sunday at the new location of the old Chamber of Commerce building
at 300 Rainier Ave. N., at 5:30 p.m.each night. He thanked Mayor Law and
Chief Administrative Officer Covington for providing this new place to feed
hungry people in the community.
Citizen Comment: Wilford— Alex Wilford (Bellevue), representing the Master Builders Association of King
Proposed Development and Snohomish Counties (MBA), stated that the organization is concerned
Regulations Changes about the proposed changes to the City's development regulations. He
remarked that the proposed downzoning will result in a loss of taxes, revenue,
� and jobs for Renton and its residents. Mr.Wilford reported that the MBA took
the request from Council to consider the effects of increased density on existing
home values seriously, and found that studies indicate that home values tend
increase in areas of high density. He remarked that he has over 30 pages of
comments from Renton residents and stakeholders concerned about how the
proposed changes will affect their future property values and investments. He
requested that Council consider alternatives to the proposed deve�opment
regulation changes.
Citizen Comment: Carver— Cyndi Carver(Renton) stated that she works for lohn L.Scott and is
Proposed Development representing a client who owns property in the Kennydale neighborhood. She
Regulations Changes remarked that her client's wife is undergoing cancer treatment and he is
requesting that Council allow him enough time to process the sale of his
property before enacting the proposed development regulations. Ms.Carver
added that her client understands how congested the area has become, but
needs the money from the property sale to pay for the cancer treatments.
, • Januarv 5, 2015 Renton Citv Council Minutes Pa�e 8
Citizen Comment: Boyer— Roy Boyer(Renton) stated that he has lived in the Renton area for over 33 years
Proposed Development and lives next to the family who owns the Alpine Nursery which recently closed
Regulations Changes due to competition. He stated that the nursery and adjacent properties,
' including his own,were recently annexed to Renton. He indicated that his
intention was to sell the land to developers to supplement his retirement. Mr.
Boyer stated that three willing buyers have backed out of sales due to the
uncertainties of the proposed regulation changes.
Responding to Councilmember Corman's inquiry, Council President Prince
clarified that the City adopted interim zoning late last year,and noted these
proposed changes to the development regulations were thoroughly vetted by
the Planning Commission and Planning and Development Committee.
, Councilmember Palmer remarked that she believes that for every resident
unhappy with the proposed regulations there are just as many unhappy with
the type of homes the City has allowed since development has picked back up.
She added that she is sympathetic with the building community, but noted that
it is just as important to let the City's residents know they too are being heard.
Councilmember Taylor remarked that he understands that people on both sides
of this situation have high concerns and emotions about this topic. He stated
that it is difficult for him to ignore the concerns of those who have a vested
interest in the land as a retirement plan,especially after hearing a number of
people coming forward and making legitimate arguments about how they are
being impacted financially. Mr.Taylor stated that he appreciates the work that
has been done by staff,the Planning Commission and the Planning and
Development Committee. He added, however,that he is not satisfied with the
outcome and would like to spend more time reviewing this issue so as to get
closer to a win-win scenario for all parties involved.
Councilmember Persson stated that the intent of the interim zoning and these
new regulations is to give the City time to have a more studied approach on
land development. He remarked that this issue is a work in progress, and if not
, done,could result in someone being able to vest to regulations that do not fit
the character of a particular neighborhood. He added that he is empathetic to
residents who are hampered by the proposed regulations and remarked that
Council has made suggestions in several cases that staff look at how the City
could help property owners on an individual basis.
Mr.Taylor acknowledged that the City has attempted to help people, but would
like to know if more could be done for people who have a financial interest in
their future in terms of what they are allowed to do with their property. He
remarked that he had not attended all of the meetings held on this issue, but
noted that this issue had been vetted.
Council President Prince stated that as the he worked extensively with the MBA
last year to find that win-win situation. He remarked that everything received
from the MBA regarding zoning changes took the City back to where it was and
a middle-ground could not be found. He conceded that the MBA would say
that the City's regulations had moved too far from where they should be and
need to go back. Mr. Prince emphasized that something must be done to
create smart zoning that maintains the character of the City's neighborhoods.
• Januarv 5. 2015 Renton Citv Council Minutes Pa�e 9
Councilmember Taylor agreed with this assertion. He emphasized that he
wanted to make his feelings known that he appreciates all of the work that has
been done by staff,the commission and the committee on this issue. He added
that he still believes the outcome will result in some residents losing out and he
would hope that the City could have created a different outcome.
Councilmember Corman, current Planning and Development Committee Chair,
stated that he would be looking to further refine these regulations this year. He
remarked that he would be looking to match zoning to fit the character of each
neighborhood, and at the same time find solutions for property owners with
unique situations. Additionally, he outlined several scenarios that he believed
would warrant how property development could be prioritized.
' CONSENT AGENDA Items listed on the consent a enda are ado ted b one motion which follows
g P Y
the listing. Upon the request of Councilmember Persson, Item 7.i.was removed
for se arate consideration.
P
Council: 12/8/2014 Council Approval of Council meeting minutes of 12/8/2014. Council concur.
Meeting Minutes
' Appeal:Vuecrest Estates City Clerk reported appeal of the Hearing Examiner's final decision upon
Preliminary Plat, LUA-13- reconsideration regarding the Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat(LUA-13-
000642 000642) by Brent Carson,Van Ness Feldman, accompanied by required fee.
Refer to Plannin�and Development Committee.
Attorney: Memorandum of City Attorney recommended adoption of a resolution authorizing a
Agreement, PSERN Memorandum of Agreement regarding future operation of the Puget Sound
Emergency Radio Network(PSERN). Council concur. (See page 11 for
resolution.
)
CED: Review Structural Plans, Community and Economic Development Department recommended approvat
Reid Middleton of a contract in an amount not to exceed $100,000 with Reid Middleton, Inc.to
review structural plans through 12/31/2015. Council concur.
Appointment: Lodging Tax Community and Economic Development Department recommended appointing
Advisory Committee Michael Schabbing, General Manager of Marriott Renton and Southcenter
Hotels,and Brent Camann,Senior Asset Manager at SECO Development, Inc.,to
the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. Mr.Schabbing fills the vacancy left by
Brad Knutson, and Mr.Camann has made a change in employer. Council
concur.
CED:Amend RMC 4-1-210.C., Community and Economic Development Department recommended adoption
Rental Housing Incentive of an ordinance amending RMC 4-1-210.C., Rental Housing Incentive,to help
leverage additional public and private funds to support affordable multi-family
rental housing development in the Sunset Area. Refer to Plannin�and
Development Committee.
CED: Declare Sunset Area as Community and Economic Development Department recommended adopting a
Redevelopment& Investment resolution declaring the Sunset Area as a "Redeve�opment Area" and an
Priority Area "Investment Priority Area." Refer to Plannin�and Development Committee.
CED: HUD Choice Community and Economic Development Department recommended adopting a
Neighborhoods Initiative resolution to authorize application for a HUD Choice Neighborhoods Initiative
Implementation Grant Implementation grant for up to$30 million for the Sunset Area Transformation
Plan. Refer to Plannins and Development Committee.
� ___ _
� Januarv 5, 2015 Renton Citv Council Minutes Pa�e 10
CAG: 14-100,Cedar River Community Services Department submitted CAG-14-100,Cedar River Gabion
Gabion Repair,Jansen Inc Repair project; and requested approval of the project,commencement of a 60-
day lien period and release of retainage in the amount of$10,398.50 to Jansen,
Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur.
Public Works: Fill Lead Water Public Works Department requested authorization to fill a Lead Water Utility
Utility Pump Station Mechanic Pump Station Mechanic position at Step E of the Grade a18 salary scale.
at Step E Council concur.
Transportation: Duvall Ave. NE Transportation Systems Division requested approval of a Local Agency
(NE 4th St.to NE 10th St.) Agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation for the
Preservation, STP Grant obligation of Surface Transportation Program (STP) grant funding in the amount
Obligation of$1,237,000; and all subsequent agreements required to complete the Duvall
Ave. NE(NE 4th St.to NE 10th St.) Preservation project. Council concur.
Transportation: 116th Ave.SE Transportation Systems Division requested approval of a Local Agency
(SE Petrovitsky Rd.to SE 172nd Agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation for the
Ln.—extended), CMAQ Grant obligation of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality(CMAQ)grant funding in the
Obligation amount of$707,000; and all subsequent agreements required to complete the
116th Ave.SE (SE Petrovitsky Rd.to SE 172nd Ln.—extended)Sidewalk project.
Council concur.
Transportation: Main Ave.5./ Transportation Systems Division requested approval of a Fuel Tax Grant
Downtown Circulation (S. 3rd Distribution Agreement with the Washington State Department of
St.to Mill Ave. S.),TIB Grant Transportation Improvement Board for the obligation of grant funding in the
� Obli ation amount of 1024 750• and all subse uent a reements re uired to com lete
g $ , , , q g q p
the Main Ave. S./Downtown Circulation (5. 3rd St.to Mill Ave.S.) project.
Council concur.
Transportation: Rainier Ave. S. Transportation Systems Division requested approval of a Local Agency
Corridor Improvements— Agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation for the
Phase 4(S. 3rd St.to NW 3rd obligation of Surface Transportation Program (STP)grant funding in the amount
PI.), STP Grant Obligation of$2,600,000; and all subsequent agreements required to complete the Rainier
Ave.S. Corridor Improvements—Phase 4(S. 3rd St. to NW 3rd PI.). Council
concur.
Lease:Airport Storage Rent Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of Amendment#1 to
Reduction, Rainier Flight LAG-14-005,with Rainier Flight Service, LLC,for the use of a portion of their
Service, LAG-14-005 leased area for Airport equipment storage with a corresponding monthly rental
reduction in the amount of$161.33 per month. Refer to Transportation
(Aviation) Committee.
Lease:Airport Storage Rent Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of Amendment#2 to
Reduction, Rainier Flight LAG-14-005,with Rainier Flight Service, LLC,for lease language modification
Service, LAG-14-005 concerning the removal of movable office furniture or trade fixtures. Refer to
Transportation (Aviation) Committee.
MOVED BY PRINCE,SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR TO APPROVE
THE CONSENT AGENDA MINUS ITEM 7.i. CARRIED.
• Januarv 5. 2015 Renton Citv Council Minutes Pa�e 11
SEPARATE CONSIDERATION Community and Economic Development Department requested authorization
ITEM 7.i. to waive development and mitigation fees for Renton Housing Authority's four
CED: Fee Waiver Request for Sunset Area Transformation Plan housing projects, contingent upon the receipt
Sunset Area Transformation of a HUD Choice Neighborhoods Initiative Implementation grant. The
Plan, Renton Housing requested fee waivers expire 12/31/2020 unless otherwise extended by
Authority CounciL Qe'er+„ o�.,.,..,.,,, ....,� r,,,,,e�,,.,w,,,.,*r,,......,,;«+e„
MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM 7.i.TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval
Finance Committee of Claim Vouchers 334564-335357, seven wire transfers and two payroll runs
Finance:Vouchers with benefit withholding payments totaling$10,840,462.83 and payroll
vouchers including 1,446 direct deposits and 116 payroll checks totaling
$3,267,293.80. MOVED BY PERSSON,SECONDED BY TAYLOR, COUNCIL
CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED.
RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption:
ORDINANCES
RESOLUTION#4237 A resolution was read authorizing the Mavor and Citv Clerk to enter into a
Memorandum of Agreement with King County and the cities of Auburn,
Bellevue, Federal Way, Issaquah, Kent, Kirkland, Mercer Island, Redmond,
Seattle,and Tukwila related to the future negotiations of a Puget Sound
Emergency Radio Network operator interlocal cooperation agreement. MOVED
BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY PRINCE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS
READ. CARRIED.
The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the
1/12/2015 Council meeting for second and final reading and adoption:
CED:Title IV(Development An ordinance was read amending Subsection 4-3-100.6.1. of Chapter 3,
Regulations) Docket D-101, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts,of Title IV(Development
Applicability of Urban Design Regulations), of City Code, by amending the applicability of the Urban Design
Regulations Regulations. MOVED BY CORMAN,SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL REFER
THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 1/12/2015. CARRIED.
CED:Title IV(Development An ordinance was read amending Sections 4-2-010,4-2-020,4-2-060,4-2-100,
Regulations) Docket D-104, Lot 4-2-110,4-2-115,4-2-120,and 4-2-130,of Chapter 2,Zoning Districts—Uses
Areas, Building Coverage, and Standards, Section 4-4-080,4-4-090,4-4-095,4-4-100 and 4-4-110 of
Impervious Surface Chapter 4, City-wide Property Development Standards, of Title IV(Development
Regulations), and Section 8-7-4 of Chapter 4, Noise Leve� Regulations,of Title
VIII (Health and Sanitation), of City Code, by amending the regulations related
� to maximum lot area, building coverage and impervious surface area and
creating a new Residential Six Dwelling Units per Acre (R-6) zone. MOVED BY
CORMAN,SECONDED BY PAVONE, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR
SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 1/12/2015.*
Councilmember Taylor abstained.
Responding to Mayor Law's inquiry, City Attorney Warren explained that a
Councilmember who abstains on a majority vote is deemed to have voted with
the majority. At Mr.Taylor's request, Mr.Warren repeated that when
someone abstains from the vote,and the motion carries,that person is deemed
to have voted with the majority.
� Januarv 5, 2015 Renton Citv Council Minutes Pa�e 12
Mr.Taylor changed his abstention to a no vote.
*MOTION CARRIED.
CED:Title IV(Development An ordinance was read amending Section 4-3-050,of Chapter 3, Environmental
Regulations) Docket D-105, Regulations and Overlay Districts,Section 4-6-030,of Chapter 6, Street and
Utilities&Open Spaces in Utility Standards, Sections 4-7-130,4-7-190,4-7-200,and 4-7-220, of Chapter 7,
Tracts Subdivision Regulations, and Section 4-8-120, of Chapter 8, Permits-General
and Appeals, of Title IV(Development Regulations), of City Code, amending the
regulations regarding the creation of tracts to contain utilities, open space,
critical areas, and other similar areas that warrant protection or serve a public
purpose. MOVED BY PERSSON,SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THE
ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 1/12/2015. CARRIED.
CED:Title IV(Development An ordinance was read amending Sections 4-2-060, 4-2-080,4-2-120 and 4-2-
Regulations) Docket D-106, 130 of Chapter 2,Zoning Districts-Uses and Standards, Sections 4-4-095 and 4-
Wireless Communication 4-140 of Chapter 4,City-wide Property Development Standards, Section 4-9-
Facilities 030 of Chapter 9, Permits-Specific,and Section 4-11-230 of Chapter 11,
Definitions, of Title IV(Development Regulations), and Section 5-19-5 of
Chapter 19,Telecommunications Licenses and Franchises,of Title V(Finance
and Business Regulations),of City Code,amending the wireless communication
facilities regulations. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PAVONE, COUNCIL
REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 1/12/2015.
CARRIED.
CED:Title IV(Development An ordinance was read amending Section 4-4-040 of Chapter 4, City-wide
Regulations) Docket D-108, Property Development Standards, and Sections 4-11-060 and 4-11-180, of
Fences, Hedges& Retaining Chapter 11, Definitions,of Title IV(Development Regulations), of City Code,
Walls amending the regulations regarding fences, hedges, and retaining walls, and
adding new definitions of"Fence," "Retaining Wall," "Retaining Wall Height," .
"Retaining Wall Height, Exposed," and "Rockery." MOVED BY CORMAN,
SECONDED BY PAVONE, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND
FINAL READING ON 1/12/2015.*
TAYLOR: OPPOSED
*MOTION CARRIED.
CED:Title IV(Development An ordinance was read amending Section 4-4-130, of Chapter 4, City-wide
Regulations) Docket D-109, Property Development Standards,Section 4-8-120 of Chapter 8 Permits-
Tree Retention & Land General and Appeals, and Sections 4-11-080 and 4-11-200 of Chapter 11,
Clearing Definitions,of Title IV(Development Regulations), of City Code, amending the
regulations regarding tree retention and land clearing,and adding, amending,
and deleting certain definitions related to trees. MOVED BY CORMAN,
SECONDED BY PAVONE,COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND
FINAL READING ON 1/12/2015.*
TAYLOR: OPPOSED
*MOTION CARRIED.
CED: Title IV(Development An ordinance was read amending Section 4-1-160 of Chapter 1,Administration
Regulations) Docket D-112, and Enforcement,Sections 4-2-080 and 4-2-110 of Chapter 2,Zoning Districts-
Administrative Code Uses and Standards,Section 4-3-050 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations
Interpretations and Overlay Districts,Sections 4-4-070 and 4-4-100 of Chapter 4, City-wide
• Januarv 5. 2015 Renton Citv Council Minutes Pa�e 13
Property Development Standards, Sections 4-5-040 and 4-5-060 of Chapter 5,
Building and Fire Prevention Standards, Section 4-6-030 of Chapter 6,Street
and Utility Standards, Section 4-8-120 of Chapter 8, Permits—General and
Appeals,Sections 4-9-060,4-9-150,4-9-200,and 4-9-250 of Chapter 9, Permits
—Specific,and Sections 4-11-030,4-11-040,4-11-120,and 4-11-150 of Chapter
11, Definitions, of Title IV(Development Regulations),and Section 8-7-8 of
Chapter 7, Noise Level Regulations,of Title VIII (Health and Sanitation),of City
Code, by amending certain regulations,and amending specific definitions
pursuant to the Department of Community and Economic Development's '
Administrative Code Interpretations. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY
PAVONE,COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING
ON 1/12/2015.*
TAYLOR:OPPPOSED
*MOTION CARRIED.
NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY PRINCE,SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL REFER THE CITY CENTER
Lease: City Center Parking PARKING GARAGE METRO LEASE TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR A
Garage, King County METRO BRIEFING. CARRIED.
MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PRINCE,COUNCIL REFER THE CITY CENTER
PARKING GARAGE METRO LEASE TO THE TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION)
COMMITTEE FOR A BRIEFING. CARRIED.
Council: Service Award, 2014 Additionally, Mr. Prince presented a plaque to Mr. Persson to commemorate
Council President-Persson his service as the 2014 Council President. Mr. Persson expressed appreciation
for the award.
Police: Community Councilmember Persson shared a story of a Renton police officer offering to
Involvement haul Christmas trees to a resident's home in the back of his SUV after they had
fallen off the top of her vehicle. He remarked that the woman was worried she
would be ticketed when the officer pulled up, but was genuinely touched by his
display of compassion that night. Mr. Persson thanked the officer and
remarked that this is the type of story the public should hear.
AUDIENCE COMMENT Mark Martinez (Renton) expressed appreciation for Council's refreshing
Citizen Comment: Martinez— discussion regarding the proposed development regulation changes. He shared
Proposed Development that he is looking to purchase a home in Renton and lamented that at$500,000
Regulations Changes most of them are out of his price range. He reiterated that he appreciates that
Council is delving into this issue.
ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY PERSSON,SECONDED B PRINCE,COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED.
TIME: 8:19 p. .
Jason A.Se ,CM , Ci lerk
Jason Seth, Recorder
January 5, 2015
Council Committee Meeting Calendar
7anuary 5, 2015
[ January 12, 2015 �
f Monday
3:30 PM Planning & Development Committee, Chair Corman
Council Conference Room
1 . 2015 Comprehensive Plan
2. Choice Neighborhoods Initiative Resolution
3. Sunset Area Redevelopment Resolution
4. Amendment to RMC 4-1-210C Rental Housing Incentive for the "affordable
housing" definition
CANCELED Community Services Committee, Chair Perez
CANCELED Utilities Committee, Chair Taylor
6:00 PM Committee of the Whole, Chair Prince -- Council Chambers
1. City Center Parking Garage—Metro Lease
. . { � _.
Denis Law Clt Of
Mayor D �'
�
� V �ri>
s
� • � +
► 'i��,N���
January 6, 2015 CityClerk -Jason A.Seth,CMC
King County Elections Division
Attn: Election Operations
919 SW Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
Re: Councilmember Appointment
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
, Attached please find one signed original each of a Certificate of Appointment and of an Oath of
Office certificate, indicating the appointment of Ruth Perez to the Renton City Council, Position
No. 6, effective lanuary 5, 2015, for an unexpired term expiring December 31, 2017. Ms. Perez
replaced Terri Briere who passed away late last year. Ms. Perez will serve on the Council until
such time as a person is elected and certified to fill the vacancy for the remainder of the
unexpired term at the next regular municipal election.
If I can provide further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely, '
l c
J son A. Seth, CMC
ity Clerk .
Enc.
1055 South Grady Way•Renton,Washington 98057• (425)430-6510/Fax(425)430-6516•rentonwa.gov
, ',
,\
�
a� �
;�
, ,
;
- ,
�
�o�
,, e� �.
. � . e� rebY
`' � he
� �� 'n9t°n
�� 1 �� ash�
C C} W
� CQUnty, �' and
�� in9 201
� � K er
� � Q Ren�on, ecemb
._--- ' C�" � ;ty �f �d in �
��,�`Ci tihe C a$ he
. and f°r Gess w
Ge �;I �n , nt pr°
and �ity �°an appo�nt+�'e reZ . �
he M°y�r ert�fy that u�h pe o f��e °f
1 c
. ed to �he f. � n No� 6 d qnd
o�nt a,�tt� n
WaS:aPp �ouncil P n�o Set my ha , o��he
'ty Of Renton, ,.i�ha�e hereu he off��ia� Sea of
C _ EREFpRE, on �h�s 5cn daY
t
5 TN a f f ixed ent 2�15.
tN W�TNES ��ty °f R anUary�
� M�yor
Denis �aw,
,
res�dent
- �oUn��� P r�
` Ed Pr,nce'
,
,
,
,
,\
� �
,
\` �
\ -
� _
�
�
\
\
�
Y \
\
\
• �
Q \\
� `
,, '���e
�
�
�
ha
�
a
at
,�e of
. n ) the off.
Wash�n9�o } 55, o�nted to
state of } dU�y app . n No. 6
een sit�� he dUtje� �f
n�Y o� K�n9 ha��ng b Une�� po '$�harge t oC.� and
c�u th PQre1� en�°n' C� 'mpart'ally d a� � wtll suP�mer��a.
t, Ru R d � th d Stptes °�
��ty �f •thf Ui1y an b�lity� and te
�hat � ,�,i1i f e'best of my °an the �n�
r {or qf f irm�W and to �h Washin9t°n Uth pereZ
mn�y Swea r�b�d by �a he Sta.�e of R
Do 5°�e ��e ps Pres 5��.�ution °f �
tihis °ff in �he ��n S�gned� me
mainta d �worn before r
�n o15� Nota y
_ SUbscribed of�anuarY �, `�y �1erk1 t0�
This 5cn daY A Seth, C of Ren �
_ Son Cit�
. a � -
,
Denis Law � '
Mayor � City �� �'Cy
� � � Ua
♦ � •
` � �,..� �� . �P�,N �
City Clerk -Jason A.Seth,CMC
January 7, 2015
Mike Schabbing
17732 160th Ave SE
Renton, WA 98058
Re: Appointment to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee
Dear Mr. Schabbin :
g
At the regular Council meeting of January 5, 2015, the Renton City Council concurred in
your appointment to an unspecified term on the Renton Lodging Tax Advisory
Committee, filling the position vacated by Brad Knutson, General Manager of Hilton
Garden Inn.
Congratulations on your appointment. Your service on the Committee is sincerely
appreciated and valued by committee members, City officials and staff. If I can provide
additional information or assistance, please feel free to contact me.
Sin rely,
6'
Jas n A. S th .
City Clerk
cc: Mayor Denis Law
Council President Ed Prince
Chip Vincent, CED Administrator .
Judith Subia,Administrative Assistant,CED
April Alexander, Executive Assistant- Mayor Office
1055 South Grady Way•Renton,Washington 98057• (425)430-6510/Fax(425)430-6516•rentonwa.gov
• �r� �--....�_
°e;��'" � City of �.�Y
�° � .
� � � �
Mayor's Olfice
��oclamation
`G1�Fe�eas,our success as a community depends on helping every child succeed in school and
reach their full potentiai in life,and we realize that yaung people need a solid foundation of
support to help them become well-educated,con�dent,and productive citizens;and
'Gl�lteteas,Communities In Schools is the oniy dropout-prevention p�ogram in the nation proven
to increase graduation rates,and this research sfiows that mentoring has beneficia!and long-
term effects on youth by increasing their cha�ces of high school greduation and coliege
attendance and decreasing the likelihood of substance abuse and other�isky behavion;and
'W(ereas,thousands of Renton's children are in need of a caring adult mentor in their lives,and
closing this mentoring gap will require more investment,partnerships,and volunteers ready to
make a difference in a child's life;and
�tereas, National Mentoring Month is an oppertunity to raise public awareness of the
importance of inentoring,�ecognize the dedicated individuals who serve as mentors,and
encourage more citize�s to help buil8 a brighte�future for Renton's y�uth through mentoring;
and
�ereas,the mission of Communities In Schools of Renton is to surround stude�ts with a
community of support,empowering them to stay in school and achieve in life;
Now, therefore,I,Denis Law, Mayor of the City of Renton,do hereby proclaim/anuary 2015 to
be �
�1r'ationaC�Vlentorin� �Vlonth
in the City of Renton, in tribute to the many dedicated individuals who volunteer their time,
compassion,and talents to mentor young people, and{encourage all citi2ens to join me in this
spedal observance and to consider giving back to our community as mentors.
In witness whereof, I have he�eunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of Renton to
be affixed this Sth day of January,2015.
�
�
Denls Law, Mayor
CTty of Renton, Woshingion
Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washingmn 98057 • rentonwa.gov