Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Council 05/22/2006
AGENDA RENTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING May 22,2006 Monday, 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATION: Fire Department Employee Recognition 4. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 5. AUDIENCE COMMENT (Speakers must sign up prior to the Council meeting. Each speaker is allowed five minutes. The comment period will be limited to one-half hour. The second audience 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 address for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME. 6. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further discussion if requested by a Councilmember. a. Administrative, Judicial and Legal Services Department requests the following: waiver of permit fees for 2006 Renton River Days activities endorsed by Renton River Days Board of Directors; waiver of City Center Parking garage fees from July 21 to July 23; and authorization to install River Days banners on City light poles from June 12 to July 24. Council concur. b. Community Services Department submits CAG-05-114,Riverview Bridge Renovation Project; and requests approval of the project, commencement of a 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of$9,535.85 to Marine Vacuum Service, Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. c. Community Services Depai talent recommends approval of the 2007/2008 Human Services funding criteria for allocation of Community Development Block Grants and General Funds. Refer to Community Services Committee. d. Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recommends a public hearing be set on 6/5/2006 to consider the 60%Petition to Annex and R-8 and R-10 zoning for the proposed Hudson Annexation; approximately 13.69 acres generally bounded by 107th Ave. SE, 111th Ave. SE, SE 166th St. and SE 169th St. Council concur. e. Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recommends a public hearing be set on 6/5/2006 to consider the 60%Petition to Annex and R-4 zoning for the proposed Perkins Annexation; approximately 15.47 acres located along the east and west sides of Union Ave. NE, if extended,between NE 27th St., if extended, on the north and NE 26th St., if extended,on the south. Council concur. f. Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recommends a public hearing be set on 6/5/2006 to consider the potential extension of the moratorium on sewer availabilities for new subdivisions within the East Renton Plateau potential annexation area. Council concur. g. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recommends approval of the multi-family housing property tax exemption agreement for the Chateau de Ville project, 110 Williams Ave. S. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. (CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE) 1 h. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of Supplemental Agreement#6 to CAG- 04-013, W&H Pacific, Inc., for design and construction engineering support for the South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements Project in the amount of$468,873.95. Refer to Transportation(Aviation) Committee. ikosse 7. CORRESPONDENCE 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; Temporary Interfund Loans*; 2006 Budget Amendment Ordinance for Infrastructure Improvements Regarding the.Landing*; 2006 Budget Appropriation Amendments Ordinance for New Programs and Projects* b. Planning&Development Committee: Garages and Carports within Setbacks c. Utilities Committee: Reimbursement Request for Water Line Oversizing; Water and Wastewater Billing Adjustment for Water Leaks* 9. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Resolution: Granting authority for temporary loans between City funds(see 8.a.) Ordinances for first reading: a. Creating a fund for the South Lake Washington Infrastructure Improvements Project(see 8.a.) b. Amending the 2006 Budget to appropriate new programs and projects (see 8.a,) c. Allowing certain water and wastewater billing adjustments for water Ieaks (see 8.c.) 10. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded information.) 11. AUDIENCE COMMENT 12. ADJOURNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA (Preceding Council Meeting) Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. Update on WSDOT Projects in the Renton Area; King County"Transit Now"Briefing • Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available request upon to the CityClerk • P CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21 AND ARE RE-CABLECAST TUES.&THURS.AT 11:00 AM&9:00 PM,WED.&FRI. AT 9:00 AM&7:00 PM AND SAT.&SUN.AT 1:00 PM&9:00 PM CITY COUNCIL May 22, 2006 City Clerk Division Referrals ADMINISTRATION Jeff Colee, 330 Park Ave. N., Renton, request for variance application fee waiver re: fence height COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE Human Services funding criteria for Community Development Block Grants and General Funds PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Agreement for multi-family housing property tax exemption for Chateau de Ville TRANSPORTATION(AVIATION) COMMITTEE Supplement to agreement with W&H Pacific for South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements fir✓ PUBLIC HEARINGS 6/5/2006 - Hudson Annexation - 60% Petition to Annex and R-8 and R-10 zoning 6/5/2006 - Perkins Annexation - 60% Petition to Annex and R-4 zoning 6/5/2006 - Extending sewer moratorium in East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING Billing adjustments for water leaks (1st reading 5/22/2006) RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting '4rr► May 22, 2006 Council Chambers Monday, 7:00 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kathy Keolker called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL OF RANDY CORMAN, Council President; TONI NELSON; DENIS LAW; COUNCILMEMBERS TERRI BRIERE; MARCIE PALMER; DON PERSSON. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMAN DAN CLAWSON. CARRIED. CITY STAFF IN KATHY KEOLKER,Mayor; ZANETTA FONTES, Assistant City Attorney; ATTENDANCE BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; LINDA HERZOG, Interim Assistant to the CAO; PETER RENNER, Facilities Director; MICHAEL BAILEY, Finance and Information Services Administrator; INTERIM CHIEF LARRY RUDE, DEPUTY CHIEF CHUCK DUFFY, and FIRE MARSHAL/BATTALION CHIEF STAN ENGLER,Fire Department; CHIEF KEVIN MILOSEVICH and COMMANDER CHARLES MARSALISI,Police Department. SPECIAL Interim Chief Larry Rude announced the Fire Department employee PRESENTATIONS promotions, as follows: err Fire: Employee Promotions • Firefighter Paul Harm,promoted to Lieutenant; • Lieutenant Karl Rufener,promoted to Captain; • Captain Mark Peterson, promoted to Battalion Chief; and • Battalion Chief Chuck Duffy, promoted to Deputy Chief. Added Mike O'Halloran, Municipal Arts Commission Chair, announced that Nancy Board/Commission: Municipal Hoben is the recipient of the BRAVO Award, which honors citizens who have Arts Commission 2006 made a significant contribution to the enjoyment of art, and an impact with BRAVO Award Renton art organizations. Mr. O'Halloran detailed Ms. Hoben's contributions to the Renton community, which include participating on the Allied Arts of Renton Board, Renton Civic Theatre Board, Municipal Arts Commission, and Renton Annual Art Show Committee; teaching art classes; producing the 2001 Renton Centennial production "Rentennial"; and assisting with the Renton Farmers Market and Cuautla Sister City program. Mayor Keolker presented Ms. Hoben with a framed certificate that was decorated with a drawing of her by artist Doug Kyes. Additionally, Mr.Kyes presented Ms. Hoben's husband with the original drawing. Ms. Hoben expressed her appreciation for the award, and her admiration for all those who volunteer and work for the Renton community. ADMINISTRATIVE Linda Herzog,Interim Assistant to the CAO,reviewed a written administrative REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work 'Now programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2006 and beyond. Items noted included: May 22,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 169 * The Renton Farmers Market begins Tuesday, June 6th, at the Piazza. The market takes place every Tuesday from 3:00 to 7:00 p.m. and runs through Is September 19th. * The Reuse It!Renton, Stop &Swap event will be held on June 3rd at the Renton Memorial Stadium south parking lot. AJLS: Community Leadership Mayor Keolker announced that the City was recently awarded the Community Award,WA Association of Leadership Award by the Washington Association of School Administrators in School Administrators recognition of Renton's support of education. AUDIENCE COMMENT Sandel DeMastus, 1137 Harrington Ave.NE, Renton, 98056, stated that the Citizen Comment: DeMastus- comment she made at the April 24th Council meeting regarding the 11th Highlands Community District legislators and the Highlands Community Association was taken out of Association, Senator Prentice context in the letter entered into the record at the May 8th Council meeting Letter from Senator Margarita Prentice. Citizen Comment: Petersen- Inez Petersen, 3306 Lake Washington Blvd. N., #3, Renton, 98056, objected to Various having to give her name and address prior to commenting at the Council meeting. She expressed her disappointment that her request for an individual Councilmember vote was not allowed on the matter of the Highlands Subarea Plan Study Area Moratorium extension at the May 8th Council meeting. Ms. Petersen also expressed her desire to know how Councilmembers vote on various matters, and her desire for an immediate way of communicating if she thinks any comments made at Council meetings are inaccurate. Citizen Comment: Colee- Jeff Colee, 330 Park Ave. N., Renton, 98055, asked for a waiver of the $100 fee Variance Fee Waiver Request, to apply for a variance for his eight-foot-high fence that separates his house Fence Height from his neighbor's house. Pointing out that his neighbor feeds feral cats, Mr. Colee explained that he erected the fence to prevent the feral cats from using his property as a litter box, as his wheelchair comes in direct contact with the waste. He indicated that other eight-foot-high fences exist in his neighborhood, and he has been working with animal control in regards to the cats. Mr. Colee reported that he has received an order to correct from the City, and requests a variance fee waiver as he is low-income and cannot afford the fee. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY LAW,COUNCIL REFER THIS MATTER TO THE ADMINISTRATION. CARRIED. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. AJLS: Renton River Days Fee Administrative, Judicial and Legal Services Department requested the Waivers&Banner Installation following: waiver of permit fees for 2006 Renton River Days activities endorsed by Renton River Days Board of Directors; waiver of City Center Parking garage fees from July 21 to July 23; and authorization to install River Days banners on City light poles from June 12 to July 24. Council concur. CAG: 05-114, Riverview Park Community Services Department submitted CAG-05-114, Riverview Park Bridge Renovation, Marine Bridge Renovation; and requested approval of the project, commencement of Vacuum Service 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of$9,535.85 to Marine Vacuum Service, Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. Human Services: 2007/2008 Community Services Department recommended approval of the 2007/2008 Funding Criteria for CDBG& Human Services funding criteria for allocation of Community Development General Fund Allocation Block Grants and General Funds. Refer to Community Services Committee. May 22,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 170 Annexation: Hudson, Benson Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Rd S& SE 168th St recommended a public hearing be set on 6/5/2006 to consider the 60% Petition to Annex and R-8 and R-10 zoning for the proposed Hudson Annexation; 13.69 acres located in the vicinity of Benson Rd. S. and SE 168th St. Council concur. Annexation: Perkins, SE 95th Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department P1 & 128th Ave SE recommended a public hearing be set on 6/5/2006 to consider the 60%Petition to Annex and R-4 zoning for the proposed Perkins Annexation; 15.47 acres located south of SE 95th P1. and east of 128th Ave. SE, if extended. Council concur. Utility: Sewer Moratorium in Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department East Renton Plateau PAA recommended a public hearing be set on 6/5/2006 to consider extending the moratorium on sewer availabilities for new subdivisions in the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area. Council concur. EDNSP: Multi-Family Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Housing Property Tax recommended approval of the multi-family housing property tax exemption Exemption, Chateau de Ville agreement for the Chateau de Ville project, 110 Williams Ave. S. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. CAG: 04-013,North Renton Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of Supplemental Infrastructure Improvements, Agreement#6 to CAG-04-013, agreement with W&H Pacific, Inc. for design W&H Pacific and construction engineering support in the amount of$468,873.95 for the South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements Project. Refer to Transportation(Aviation) Committee. Added Item 6.i. City Clerk reported bid opening on 5/3/2006 for CAG-06-066,Airport Entrance CAG: 06-066, Airport Rehabilitation; three bids; engineer's estimate$250,000 to $300,000; and Entrance Rehabilitation submitted staff recommendation to authorize the use of funds from existing Project, Construct Co capital projects and award the contract to low bidder, Construct Co., in the amount of$571,200. Council concur. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO INCLUDE ITEM 6.i. CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report Planning& Development regarding the issue of carports and garages in residential setback areas within Committee the North and South Renton neighborhoods. The Committee discussed City Development Services: Code setback requirements and acknowledged that many existing structures Garages and Carports within intrude into the setback area. The Committee recognized that new structures Setbacks are not allowed to intrude into the setback unless authorized through the granting of a variance. Existing legal non-conforming structures may remain, and no variance is necessary. The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to retain existing setbacks for residential zones in order to provide adequate separation between structures and properties. Furthermore, the Committee recommended that no code compliance action be initiated for existing legal non-conforming structures, in keeping with the provisions of City Code. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Utilities Committee Utilities Committee Vice Chair Briere presented a report regarding water and Utility: Billing Adjustments wastewater billing adjustments for water leaks. The Committee recommended for Water Leaks concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the proposed modifications May 22,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 171 to City Code Sections 8-4 and 8-5. The Committee further recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See later this page for ordinance.) Utility: Water Line Oversizing Utilities Committee Vice Chair Briere presented a report regarding the Reimbursement, Cottages at reimbursement request for oversizing the water line for the Cottages at Honey Honey Creek,NE Sunset Blvd Creek subdivision. The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the request for reimbursement in the total amount of$22,926.58 from Davis Real Estate Group for costs related to the oversizing of the water line within the subdivision as requested by the City's Utility Division. City Code allows developers and property owners to request that the City participate in the cost of the utility improvement when the City requires that the utility be oversized for the best interest of the City and the general locality. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval Finance: Vouchers of Claim Vouchers 248437 -24886 and two wire transfers totaling $3,278,559.21; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 63384 -63574, one wire transfer, and 622 direct deposits totaling $1,992,797.05. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance: Temporary Interfund Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report regarding temporary Loans interfund loans. The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the resolution granting authority for loans between 1000 City funds. The Committee further recommended that the resolution regarding this matter be presented for reading and adoption. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See below for resolution.) RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution#3811 A resolution was read granting authority for loans between City funds. Finance: Temporary Interfund MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADOPT Loans THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for first reading and referred to the Council meeting of 6/5/2006 for second and final reading: Utility: Billing Adjustments An ordinance was read adding Sections 8-4-46 to Chapter 4, Water,and 8-5-23 for Water Leaks to.Chapter 5, Sewers, of Title VIII(Health and Sanitation)of City Code allowing certain water and wastewater billing adjustments for water leaks. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 6/5/2006. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Inez Petersen, 3306 Lake Washington Blvd. N., #3, Renton, 98056, inquired as Citizen Comment: Petersen- to what law the Council President was accused of breaking during the public Highlands Subarea, Zoning hearing concerning the Highlands Subarea zoning proposal held at the April Text&Zoning Map 17th Council meeting. Mayor Keolker indicated that the answer was given by 41400 Amendments the City Attorney that evening. Council President Corman stated for the record that he does not believe he broke the law that night. May 22,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 172 ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 7:50 p.m. Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann May 22, 2006 'erre �rrr RENTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING CALENDAR Office of the City Clerk COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS SCHEDULED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING May 22, 2006 Ned COMMITTEE/CHAIRMAN DATE/TIME AGENDA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MON., 5/29 . NO MEETING (Memorial Day) (Corman) MON., 6/05 CANCELLED COMMUNITY SERVICES MON., 6/05 Human Services Funding Criteria (Nelson) 5:30 p.m. FINANCE MON., 6/05 2007 Budget Process; (Persson) 6:00 p.m. Investment Policy PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT THURS., 6/01 Highlands Subarea Zoning (Briere) 3:00 p.m. 4000 PUBLIC SAFETY MON., 6/05 CANCELLED (Law) TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION) THURS., 6/01 S. 3rd St. at Shattuck Ave. S. WSDOT (Palmer) 2:00 p.m. State Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety Program Grant; South Lake Washington Improvements Design Agreement Supplement with W&H Pacific; Airport Fixed Base of Operations Request for Qualification/Proposal (briefing only); Regional Transportation Issues Update UTILITIES THURS., 6/01 East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation (Clawson) 4:00 p.m. Area Sewer Moratorium NOTE: Committee of the Whole meetings are held in the Council Chambers unless otherwise noted. All other committee meetings are held in the Council Conference Room unless otherwise noted. ADMINISTRATIVE, JUDICIAL, AND • , LEGAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: May 22, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council FROM: Kathy Keolker, Mayor Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Administrative Report In addition to our day-to-day activities, the following items are worthy of note for this week: GENERAL INFORMATION • The City of Renton is honored to host the Exhibition of Sacred Art de la Basilica de la Virgin de Talpa de Allende, Jalisco, Mexico. On Saturday, May 20th, 200 guests attended the special inaugural reception and ribbon cutting. The exhibition is located at the Renton Community Center, 1715 Maple Valley Highway, and is open to the general public now through Sunday, May 28th, from 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. daily. Admission is free of charge but donations at the door are welcomed. The exhibition is sponsored by the Washington-Jalisco Sister State Organization,the Cuautla-Renton Sister City Committee, the mayors of the cities of Jalisco, Club Jalisco, and local restaurateurs from Jalisco. • Downtown Renton comes alive with the tastes of summer at the Renton Farmers Market! Tuesdays, June 6th through September 19th, from 3:00 to 7:00 p.m., will find the Piazza Park, located on South 3rd Street between Burnett Avenue South and Logan Avenue South, bursting with juicy berries, leafy lettuce, vine-ripened tomatoes, and a virtual cornucopia of other farm fresh produce. More than 50 vendors and farmers will sell locally grown farm products, including organic fruits and vegetables, cut flowers, baked goods, herbs, and more! For more information call Traci Bier at 425-679-1502 or visit www.GoRenton.com/farmersmarket.htm. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT • Summer day camps for youth are filling up fast with nearly half the camps already at capacity. Space is still available in select weeks of Kids Kaleidoscope and Sum-R-Craze for ages six to eleven; Itty Bitty Camp for ages three to five; and the Renton Teen Camp for ages eleven to fifteen. Call 425-430-6700 for more information. • The Renton Youth Track & Field program started last week with over 200 youth ages six to fourteen participating. The program is held Tuesdays and Thursdays at Renton Memorial Stadium and includes meets against several other city programs in the area. • USA Dance held a ballroom dance performance at Carco Theatre on May 20th and 21st. The performance was enjoyed and well attended with over 500 guests. • The Amateur Softball Association hosted an eight-team tournament on Saturday, May 20th. The tournament consisted of 16 different games played at Liberty and Ron Regis Parks, involving over 700 participants and spectators. Administrative Report May 22,2006 Page 2 PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT • Your trash may be someone's treasure! Before you take those usable, unwanted items to the dump, swing by Renton Memorial Stadium south parking lot at 405 Logan Avenue North and drop them off at the Reuse It!Renton, Stop& Swap on Saturday, June 3rd, from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. The City of Renton Solid Waste Utility brings back this popular one-day event to help you swap stuff with your neighbors for FREE. You're invited to stop and swap whether you have something to drop or not. This event was initiated to divert quality goods from our waste stream and make them available to neighbors and non-profits who can use them. Items are intended for free reuse and not for resale or personal profit. Contact the Renton Solid Waste Utility at 425-430-7397 or 425-430- 7396 for more information. The Last Word George F., Will int°z Peferserl -Aug l ll(c r„trajtt t _ 7. • 5/(9.0p0Oft; .- 10 ' "''- . Legal Theft . .,. . . ., , _,. .. . . . ,. .. ;,�, 1. ., .. . _, . . ..:f:::. .InNorwood . ,.;;,4,„,.,,,...., . 4 ..... ORWOOD,OHiO—IN THIS TOWN,WHICH iS N surrounded Ing Cincinnati,there is a field stir- ' rounded by a high chain-link fence.Across aE. street on one side of the field is a residential N..\.: ,,,. , neighborhood of modest homes. On another side is an up- . scale shopping center with a Starbucks,and Birkenstock and Smith&Hawken stores.The field used to he a neigh- ,,, =' fxirboud with 99 houses and small busi- interests,some of whose enhanced ri'hccs potential taxpayer.But ixcasionalh a nesses,but almost all the structures have can he siphoned away In taxes.Such le- Supreme Court decision disgusts and been destroyed.One of the homes that galized theft--theft In government-does alarms sii many people that there is a po- i remain- the developer of the shopping not use a gun,it just abuses the power of litical recoil and broad social stirnngs,. center csants to let el all so hr can expand eminent domain_And it was declared con- Dred Scott r.Sanford(15571 and Me r. his domain -was for 35 years the first stitutional by the U.S.Supreme Court in Wilde(1973)were such decisions.'fhc and only home owned by Carl and Jos- britt v.New London last year_ kclo decision is proving to he tlie list (iambic,who art-both in their mid-60s. The Fifth Amendment includes this thing that has happened sine( the New- NM‘ t bey live across the Ohio River in clause:"...nor shall private property be Ileal to energize the movement to Kentucky,in the basement of their(laugh- oaken for publictoe,without Inst comped- strengthen property rights. ter s house,as they wait firr the()hio sation"(emphasis added).The Framers mors of The Gambles'plight- a quiet,Hitt-- Supreme Court to decide their Burnes the Rill of Rights did not scatter adjectives collar eoupie's life in ruins lust as Chet arc late.\ors o od s government seized it to prof niscuoush:"I Taw said/in/fin-use in or- entering retirement--tividlt illustrates enrich itselfbt enriching a taxpaying de- der to restrict go%erntnent to"takings- what happens when property rights be- A teloper st ho has a$125 million project. come text attenuated to protect the inditid- `,► 'I'he(iambics say that when the city at teak zone uf's nvereignty against govern- ` Iilli'red them money finr their house,the} This muse Sht1WS �1F� m ent power.Because such abuses are 4 w crc not interested."We had evrrvthing happens when property proliferating nationwide.ixoiilc are pies- «e wanted,right there."says Ion,who suring state legislatures to tinbid the does not drive hut could walk to see her rights become too seizure of property simply to gis i local got- motber in a Norwood nursing home. ���'"` erns-writs-who//ever say they hateen(itigh "\i c hived that house-that lir[[[a." attenuated to protect revenues -the revenues they sin the[ need. �` least tense.\onsoxxfs goverment,in And CottgTcss may forbid the use of federal a relitarkably uierstatons deal.accepted the individual}s precious hinds fiat projects benefiting from such ' the developeroflir to pati-the cost of theseizures. 1111& ',the nation's ninth largest study that-surprise':--enabled the city to zone of sovereignty. hank,has said it will not lend to developers declare the neighborhood"blighted"and --- who Iknefit from the powerofernioerif dcr- ..detci-ior ating.-\t'.w tiw E,E K reader,stroll only for things directh owned by or pri- main wielded to enricli tlietit. mound your neighborhood.Do tear see madly used by the general public,such as Reeling trent the lite-shattering elfeets any broken sidewalk pavement?Any roads.bridges and public buildings. In of an uncireumseribeit potter of cunitlent standing;water in a road:,env weeds? 1954.the concept of-"public use"was et- domain,the Gambles are hoping lire res- Such litetors--never mind that sidewalks pandecf to include curing urban blight. cue It their stare Supreme Court.before and roads arc goscrntncnt'ti respo nsibill- The Ado case arose in Ne« London, which diet are represented In the Tnsti- tt --w ere cited by the desclolx'r's studs-to Conn.,where the city government em- tote for justice,a merry hand of libertari- just iti 'Sorts forcing the Gambles powered a private entity to condemn an Iiti attars,The(=ambles hate the digni- and their neighbors to sell to the developer property -a modest middle-class neigh- tied stoicism of uncomplicated people put j so he could build condominiums.shite horhoxxl-and give it to a private develop- upon In sophisticated()collie nimble with buildings and stores. Cr who it Mild pad moot taxes.The court complex sophistries.Carl sins."11 e're \orwood's behavior is part of a nation- ruled 5-4 in tat-or of\ew London. patting a lot each month for storage'of- al pattern: from 1995 through 2002,state Kilo demonstrated that anyone who their possessions that do not lit in his and local governments seized or threat- owns a modest home or small business daughter's basement near the town of In- cried to seize more than 10,000 homes, owns it unit at the sufferance ofa local dependence. Ky.Independence is what businesses,churches and pieces inland, government that might,on a whim offra- becomes tenuous when property rights not for"public use"hut to enrich private pacity,seize it to enrich a more attractive become attenuated. 94 NEWSWEEK APRIL 24. 2006 Rol o�r� ��� s. 1bth In f • �� Rezone from RESIDENTIAL-10 to 101111/ �� NT t ■iCENTER VILLAGE-RESIDENTIALr Rezone from 8l�e&30 dufac bonus ,� RESIDENTIAL-10 to Ld, U RESID ENTIAL MI .. �`# � � MULTI-FAMILY-URBAN liok`lik ,� hTSdu(acI j00� �. o \ S Leo � �j� ��;: �� ."� Z . NIMli I IS I I illitin 111111Allpill L_. 111111riPirl "'' Rezone fromoInALus g NE 1119111 �mi NOM = 4 Olin 1•904 - _ �� } tit4/14*-6VZ _ t` MULTI-FAMILY to CENTER VILLAGE Mil w , ii Elk, x :->;:',,,,.,-,,f,:f'-:.;::: - -- - /BIEN i.jo m.. _ __,,,„_,,,___ _,,,l,„.4.k„35y,, _ _, , _, ..„,,....„:„ .,,,,z1::,.„7._ ,, 7_, :7_ _- .._ , .. .,, _ ;,,,,7,,,k-,..x.---,,,-T- ..„:...F.ii,: . - __ ,-- Aill IN �3 '41 Ili = - no , - : .---,,:- - ,, - to I. thia _ _ 2,1 = _ _ - ,:„...,, ,-;=::„ ,,,,:-_„,_,„:. _ ._ 1.1 II ._ N - - % - - ---2-- --- ,d---,-,?:-:---=-=---- ' - - is. — Ems , , 0, it , E: _ a , ilikk\ :4_,,,mii Ilk dilicifirs Emma ilk _ - __- , Rezone from RESIDENTIAL =a Remains CENTER VILLAGE III80 dufac,bonus]' MULTI-FAMILY to CENTER VILLAGE-RESIDENTIAL ,c �� ■ �= �� I 1418 du/ac base& ili O( 111111111 lir. ,,-- . .wilmmil rolirmul.1 ir, iiI , , -,..„ _______ [!P!I! 1iIit#!f:iIa Illikl _ _ ,,__ ..„,r,,, Rezone from COMMERCIAL MIIII NEIGHBORHOOD to CENTER VILLAGE •- �� r' „�„� Inn �` �� �� 4:1 in %v. Nip. ria IIn milli Nil KIN �; J $PI ls Ns ■r:,nyll"�l II Lhg. Highlands Subarea Proposed Rezones Draft 2 c� Current20Proposalt: 20 • > t � �■�; G� � April , t}S �,, - 20 Apel 2006 /90-in fi le i-se to fc li t lt. - °6-7,)-?-A2-6' Page 1 of 2 HCA's vision for a "Modified Urban Village" in the Highlands • f �` lk Every duplex can look like the one above. And you've seen citizens at the podium during previous public hearings with similar pictures. Every rundown duplex has the potential to become Pike this. The HCA believes its"Modified Urban Village"Proposal is a wonderful and workable compromise which allows the neighborhood and the City to begin moving ahead with redevelopment of the Highlands,which is what we all urgently desire. We believe this plan is really the BEST option for all parties. With that being said, here are the fourteen(14)points of the HCA's "Modified Urban Village" Proposal: 1. First and foremost,there would be no need for a Declaration of Blight and the door to eminent domain which a Declaration of Blight opens. 2. Flexible zoning will allow private property owners to decide their own futures. 3. Single family dwellings and duplexes would be within code, zoning would not create any non confotming property. 4. Higher densities would be defined in a way to co-exist aesthetically with the single family dwellings and duplexes, probably not as high as Mayor Koelker wants. 5. Property owners would have the option to develop to higher densities, remodel their existing property, or voluntarily sell to a developer if that is their wish.And in some cases, property will remain "as is" because no improvement is needed. 6. Property owners would work with the City and others to remove identified blight. 7. From the money set aside for the City's "development partner, " the City would create low interest loans for the low-income elderly to upgrade their properties. Note: We assume there are more low income widows and widowers than slumlords, and these elderly citizens depend on rental income to live and do Page 2 of 2 not have anything left over for improvements. These are the same citizens who do not want to be removed from the homes where their roots and memories are. 8. The Non profit builders that Councilman Clawson has mentioned might be a good resource to help our honored and elderly low-income citizens. 9. Once the blight is identified and removed, both property owners and tenants would work to maintain the property. The HCA would be the glue to hold neighborhood together. 10. Ideally, property owners would enter into a Neighborhood Covenant, and many have already signed a petition to do so.This petition was presented at the May 8th city council meeting, but its importance was missed entirety. 11. The"Modified Urban Village" Proposal places responsibility on the City of Renton to initially bring the alleys and sidewalks up to code. 11111441K } Note: People have been paying taxes in that area for over 50 years. Certainly the City can now put some of that money back into the area by assuming the initial' cost of removing this blight. >.,• x Property owners would assume Y*s " maintenance after that. 12. This proposal would require the City of Renton to coordinate with the Section 8 housing authorities to ensure their tenant selection and location processes do not create problems in the Highlands. 13. It would require that the City of Renton to allocate police patrols in numbers commensurate with the population, something that has not been done in the past. 14. And lastly, if the Code Enforcement process is "too expensive"as city leaders have indicated, then the City of Renton should review and improve this needed service until process is cost efficient. All new programs need some initial tweaking to run efficiently; and to stay efficient, programs need an ongoing review to keep them cost efficient and value-added. April 15, 2006 , ,-1-Ile t I.c h', ?41. (,V11--7C-"7-\(1!.c II f f)pi i'e itm0-A± . , ! Thel..a.st ittfOr_d_Georger.IN111.: Newsweek artiCle Legal Theft an the Kelo declaion to correct impression In Norwood left by'ClawsonCouncilman 's comments a/the 5/15A36 (RWOOD,OHIO—IN THIS TOWN,WHICH 1.$ surrounded by Cincitutaii,there-is a field stir- council same subeetingecgt. ' rounded by a high chain-link fence.Across a NI. street on one side of the field is a reSiclential . .:! m on the j il . i le*Io A 1 I neighborhood of modest homes.On another side is an up- scale shopping center with a StarbilekS,,and Birkenstock and Smith&flawken stores.The-field used to he a neigh- ''',.,: -',-,.:,., - horhood with 99 houses arid mall tarsi, intermits,some of whose enhanced riche% potential taxpayer.But occasionally a acmes,but almost all the structures•have can be siphoned away bY taraus.Such lc- Suptethe Court decision disgteaii and been destroyed.One of the homes that galiZed theft—theft by government-does alarms so many people that there Ian po- remain—the developer oithe shopping not Use a gUll,it just abuses the pavier of fideal recoil and broad social stirring. center wants to level all so bazar'expand eminent&main_And it was-declared ron- Drrd Seen i t*Ord(16'7)and Roe A his domain—was for 35 years the fust istiturional by the LS Supreme Court in Wade 11973)wrze such decisitms.The and only home owned by Cart and Joy Mo r.Newlafirden lassyMr. Kota daisian is proving tube the best Gamble:whoare both in their mid-60s. The Mb Amendment includes Ibis thing that has happened since the New Now they live across the Ohio River in clause;" .not shall private property be Deal to'energiar the movement to Kensucky,in the haserstent of their daligh• takenforPstislie are..without,iti.4 cowmen- strengthen property rights. ter's house,as they wait for the Ohio sation"(emphasis added).Tlie Ratans-o( The Gambles"plight—a meet,hbr- Supreme Court to decide their home's the•Bal of Rights did not-ratter adjectii.es akar cotifike's,life in nuns just as they are fate.Norma:ars government seized it to proiniscuously;They said/nib&use in.or- enteritig retirement—Vividly illustrates enrich itself In enriching 3 taxpaying de- der to restrict government fa taiangS" What happcns*Iert PrOPEAF rieitt be- veloper who has a$125 million project_ _,, _____ •mono WO latetilatled tO prateet.the individ• ' The Gambles say that when the city via,.,,,‘„,.. ...ki,....1. ,i, oafs zone ofsoreteignty against govern. offered them money for their house,they I_"I'm 125M" rli WWII TWIN" meet power.Bomuse such abuses arc were not interested. We had everything happen whorl properly puilifenning nationwide,people are pms- we 3.sarital.right tbereir SaYslenrv-ilo guingstate kviskitunz to forbid the does not drive but could walk to sec her rights become too aebane Of peopertysimply to give kxrd gm- mother in a Norwood nursing him*. ernments—whoseser say they have enough We loved that house—that hone attenuated to protect revermes—the rek'CIUMS theysay they need. Past tense.Norwood's grivernment,,in And Congreasmay forbid the use offederal a mmarkably incestuous deal.aemthe individual's precious kinds for pipings benefiting flout such the developer's offer-to pay the cost of the seizunes..BB&T,the nation's ninth largess study that—suquise"--miabled the div to zone of sovereignty. bank,haasaid it will nut kmd to developers declare the neighborhood'blighted'antl — who benefit from the power ofmninent du- 'tleterimati ng."hit wswess reader,stroll only fir thins di rectlyrowned by or pri- main wiekled to=kik them. around your neighborhood.1)o you•sec manly used by thegenetal ptdslie.such as Reeling from the life-shattering effects any broken sidewalk pavement?Any roads,bridges and public buiWmgs.hi 4120 taleatartlKailled power(We-mine/it standing water in a road?Any weeds? 1954.die concept oepubbe use'Was er- deritain,the Garnblesare hoping ftsr res- Such factors—never mind that sidewalks purided to include curing urban blight etcby their awe Supreme Court before and roads are government's zesponsibili- The Me case.lux*in New London, which they are represtoted by the hub- iy—were ilted by the developer's study to Conn.,where the city government cm- turefor Justice;a merry hand of libertari- jtisti fy Norwood's forting the Gambles powered a-Oh:ate-entity m condemn an 1111 atues.The Gambles have the digni- and their neighbors to sell to the developer properrv—amodest middle-class neigh- fied slciicism rifuncomplirated people put so he could build condominiums.,office borhood—and give it to a private develop- uportery sophisticated petiole nimble with buiftlings an I stores. er who would pay more.taxes.The court oomph=sophistries.Carl silys,"WeYe Nonvood's behavior is part ofa nation- ruled 5-4 in&nor of New London. paying a lot each month for storage:of at pattern.,From t9,98 through 2002.state Ma demonstrated that anyWite who their possessions that do not fit in his and locidgevernments seized or linear- owns amodest house or small business daughter's basement near the town of!ti- med to seize more than 10.000 homes, owns it only-at the sufreranceof a local &viaticum-Ky.Independence is what tuisincsse ,churches and pieces of land, government that might on a whim of m- bedomc tenuous when PronertY rights not for"public.use"but to enrich private pacity,seize it to enrich a snore at/rat-rite become attenuated. 94 NEWSWEEK APRIL 24. 200$ irjaAdien(6 t,ord~J Page 1 of I ,JQ FFrad o/ec 13-?-12,006 Julia Medzegian - RE: Citizen requesting a fee waiver on a variance From: Julia Medzegian To: Randy Corman Date: 5/12/2006 3:57 PM Subject: RE: Citizen requesting a fee waiver on a variance CC: Don Persson FYI, I just spoke with Jennifer, who had a conversation with Neil. She said it's unlikely staff would support the waiver. Apparently the 97 year old on the other side of the fence has her story too... >>> "Corman, Randy" <randy.corman@boeing.com> 5/12/06 3:51:07 PM >>> Hey Don- Do you want to split this fee with me? We could probably save$2000 in staff time. Thanks, Randy From: Julia Medzegian [mailto:jmedzegian@ci.renton.wa.us] Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 3:45 PM To: Corman, Randy Cc: Don Persson Subject: Citizen requesting a fee waiver on a variance Randy, Mr. Jeffrey Colee stopped by my desk to find out the best way for him to speak with a councilmember regarding a request for a variance fee waiver. He is disabled (in a wheelchair)and he has a 10' fence around his house. He explained to me that he does this to prevent his neighbor's cats from coming into his yard and leaving their mess which then gets on his hands via him rolling his wheelchair around trying to do his yardwork. He would like to request a variance for his fence but is on a very limited income. He is proud of the way he keeps up his property, even though he is disabled. He said he saved for a number of months to be able to afford the fence and would like to not have to pay the fee for the variance request. I have a call into Jennifer Henning regarding this. Jennifer doesn't really believe this would be a good precedent to set, but had told Mr. Colee that the Council was the only way to get a fee waived. Could you give Mr. Colee a call? His phone number is 425-277- 9009. He said it is better to try to catch him in the mornings. Jennifer is supposed to get back to me on what, if any, option there might be for Human Services to help him out. FYI, the fee is $100. Don, I'm copying you because if there is a referral to committee, it would probably be to Finance Committee. Thanks, Julia file://C:\Documents and Settings\jmedzegian\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 5/23/2006 Page lof1 3ulia Medzegian - Citizen requesting a fee waiver on a variance From: Julia Medzegian To: Randy @ Boeing Date: 5/12/2006 3:45 PM Subject: Citizen requesting a fee waiver on a variance CC: Don Persson Randy, Mr. Jeffrey Colee stopped by my desk to find out the best way for him to speak with a councilmember regarding a request for a variance fee waiver. He is disabled (in a wheelchair) and he has a 10'fence around his house. He explained to me that he does this to prevent his neighbor's cats from coming into his yard and leaving their mess which then gets on his hands via him rolling his wheelchair around trying to do his yardwork. He would like to request a variance for his fence but is on a very limited income. He is proud of the way he keeps up his property, even though he is disabled. He said he saved for a number of months to be able to afford the fence and would like to not have to pay the fee for the variance request. I have a call into Jennifer Henning regarding this. Jennifer doesn't really believe this would be a good precedent to set, but had told Mr. Colee that the Council was the only way to get a fee waived. Could you give Mr. Colee a call? His phone number is 425-277- 9009. He said it is better to try to catch him in the mornings. Jennifer is supposed to get back to me on what, if any, option there might be for Human Services to help him out. FYI, the fee is $100. Don, I'm copying you because if there is a referral to committee, it would probably be to Finance Committee. Thanks, Julia file://C:\Documents and Settings\jmedzegian\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 5/23/2006 Si `sY o 0-15 CITY OF RENTON C- v + + / Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department tNrvo, Kathy Keolker,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator ORDER TO CORRECT Date: 05-02-2006 kt,, Service Request No.SR06-0470 4Z5--Z7?_8009 Violation Index No. C06-0165 Location of Violation: 330 PARK AVE N fy/,&YUe� Owner(tax-payer) : COLEE JEFFREY J Issued To: COLEE JEFFREY J Address: 330 PARK AVE N RENTON WA 98055 An inspection of the above premises revealed violation(s)of the City of Renton Municipal Code and Ordinances listed below. Compliance or corrective action must be completed by 06/02/2006. If voluntary compliance is not achieved,a Criminal Citation MAY be issued.The penalty for a Criminal Citation,upon a fording of guilt may be up to ninety(90)days in jail and up to a$1000.00 monetary fore. CODE SECTION CITED: Renton Municipal Code 4-4-040 D 2 c DATE OF INVESTIGATION: 04/28/2006 DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATION: FENCE HEIGHT CORRECTIVE ACTION: THE CITY OF RENTON HAS ADOPTED REGULATIONS GOVERNING FENCE HEIGHT FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF A FENCE LOCATED ON THE SIDE LOT LINE IS SEVENTY TWO(72)INCHES. IN THIS REGARD BY JUNE 2,2006 LOWER THE FENCE TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF SEVENTY TWO(72)INCHES ON THE SIDE LOT LINE. Issued By: Paul Baker Code Compliance Inspector Planning/Building/Public Works Department Development Services Division Phone No: 425-430-7386 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE `'� This paper contains 50%recycled material.30%post consumer 01°CP D-- -g Prn}4-- 13fl„ts -J go uo o 3 / I I\j5-;f;6,C.-c'&D okt ih1 z_I,Vi< i=1.,:_--A)cL i3 Tia.,is A) wlY T-ff- f4Ftic6„- iJ✓/°! i l o 2 V(7 To co L-v L rv/TN �?' Al e-/4,/418o,eP 1TH-c % c .1. 614)-P ' mac,fe- j-c=/`05 4- N �- 05 — 1) (r-c?-7 -4__) T j \ �� � TSL ! S%7'`/ I 5 Li TO r'rlt)v�11 ) g-fvD 00 (5A)- 0-‘)� PVAtNfy �,� � 7 yo (c-- -,,t)7 fir F-7-70 RD To �-D r1 � �J�L� r ��l�y�o x`Or(F f C�-nt DPia- /GAN��" eT4 Vv u 17 oT a-C- ° fig Pe) 5'`i T N_A(I To jJ "" t F C� ltie� /�C�l�c t-- G Le i '^ 77i, ' ' e 5/ wk p cG-� CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: 61 • Submitting Data: For Agenda of: May 22, 2006 Dept/Div/Board.. AJLS Staff Contact Sonja Mejlaender Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. 1. Waiver of permit fees during 2006 Renton River Correspondence.. Days Ordinance 2. Waiver of parking fees at City Centre Parking Resolution 3. Banner installation on street poles Old Business Exhibits: New Business Study Sessions Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Council Concur Legal Dept Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Renton River Days is celebrating its 21st year July 18—July 23, 2006. 1. In the past, it has been the policy of the City to waive all permit fees for activities endorsed by the Renton River Days Board of Directors. Each Renton River Days' event and activity will still be subject to review and approval by the appropriate City departments; such as inspection of food booths and tents (Fire), and street closures and routes for the Parade and River Days Fun Run& Walk(PBPW/Transportation). 2. In 2004 and 2005, the Council approved waiver of City Centre Parking fees during festival week. This is once again requested for 2006, for the weekend dates of July 21 —23, 2006. 3. The Council's permission is sought to hang 100 River Days banners on City light poles from June 12 through July 24. Note: Use of City parks and trails is scheduled for approval by Park Board at the May 16, 2006, meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Administration to waive all fees and charges associated with the 2006 Renton River Days Community Festival and to install festival street pole banners for the event. 1406111 Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: .'r ie Submitting Data: For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board.. Community Services Department May 22, 2006 Staff Contact Bill Rasmussen (6617) Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Accept completion of the Riverview Bridge Renovation Correspondence.. Project; Marine Vacuum Service, Inc., CAG- 05-114 Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Notice of Completion of Public Works Contract Study Sessions Copy of Final Pay Estimate Information Copy of Application and Certificate of Payment Recommended Action: Approvals: Council Concur Legal Dept Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... $ 9,535.85 Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted $251,800.00 Revenue Generated Total Project Cost $207,500.00 City Share Total Project.. $207,500.00 SUMMARY OF ACTION: The repair of the Riverview Bridge, located at 2901 Maple Valley Highway, has been completed by Marine Vacuum Service, Inc.,to the bid specification. No change orders were necessary. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept the Riverview Bridge Renovation project, and authorize the release of the retainage to Marine Vacuum Service, Inc. in the amount of$9,535.85, upon receipt of all required releases. Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh *sTArt State of Washington Reg.No.: Department of Revenue Audit Procedures&Administration Date: PO Box 47474 ',err Olympia,Washington 98504-7474 NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT From: City of Renton Assigned To Tracy Schuld 1055 South Grady Way Date Assigned Renton, WA 98055 Notice is hereby given relative to the completion of contract or project described below. Description of Contract Riverview Bridge Renovation CAG-05-114 Contractor's Name Marine Vacuum Service,Inc. Telephone No.206-762-0240 Contractor's Address P.O Box 24263, Seattle,WA 98124 Date Work Commenced Date Work Completed Date Work Accepted August 26,2005 December 20,2005 April 28,2006 love Surety or Bonding Co. First National Insurance Company of America,Bond#6327265 Agent's Address Contract Amount: $207,500.00 (Incl.tax) Amount Disbursed: Additions or Reductions: NA Amount Retained: $ 9,535.85 Sales Tax: $ 16,783.09 Total: $207,500.00 Total $207,500.00 By Tracy Schuld,Disbursing Officer Phone No: 425-430-6918 The Disbursing Officer must complete and mail THREE copies of this notice to the Department of Revenue,Olympia, Washington 98504- 7474,immediately after acceptance of the work done under this contract. NO PAYMENTS SHALL BE MADE FROM RETAINED FUND until receipt of Department's certificate,and then only in accordance with said certificate. " FORM REV 31 0020(12-92) I:\Bill\CIP\Riverview Bridge Renovation\Notice_of Completion.doc DATE: May 12, 2006 TO: Tracy Schuld FROM: Bill Rasmussen CONTRACTOR: Marine Vacuum Service, Inc. ' PROJECT NAME: Riverview Park Bridge Renovation CONTRACT NO.: CAG-05-114 (FINAL) ESTIMATE NO. 4 1. CONTRACTOR EARNINGS THIS ESTIMATE $0.00 2. SALES TAX @ 8.8% $ - 3. TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT THIS ESTIMATE $0.00 4. EARNINGS PREVIOUSLY PAID CONTRACTOR $ 197,964.15 5. * EARNINGS DUE CONTRACTOR THIS ESTIMATE $ 9,535.85 6. SUBTOTAL - CONTRACTOR PAYMENT $207,500.00 7. RETAINAGE ON PREVIOUS EARNINGS $ 9,535.85 8. ** RETAINAGE ON EARNINGS THIS ESTIMATE $ - 9. SUBTOTAL - RETAINAGE $9,535.85 10. SALES TAX PREVIOUSLY PAID $ 16,783.09 11. SALES TAX DUE THIS ESTIMATE $ - 12. SUBTOTAL $0.0r * (95% x Line 1) $ 9,535.85 ** (RETAINAGE @ 5%) $ 9,535.85 GRAND TOTAL $207,500.00 FINANCE DEPARTMENT ACTION PAYMENT TO CONTRACTOR (LINES 5 AND 11) No. 4 $0.00 Account 316.000000.020.5940.0076.63.000001 RETAINED AMOUNT (LINE 8) No. 4 $9,535.85 Account 316.000000.020.5940.0076.63.000001 TOTAL THIS ESTIMATE: $9,535.85 CHARTER 116, LAWS OF 1965 I,THE UNDERSIGNED DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY,THAT THE MATERIALS HAVE BEEN FURNISHED,THE SERVICES RENDERED OR THE LABOR PERFORMED AS DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND THAT THE CLAIM ISA JUST,DUE AND UNPAID OBLIGATION AGAINST THE CITY OF RENTON,AND THAT I AM AUTHORIZED TO AUTHENTICATE AND CERTIFY TO SAID CLAIM. SIGNED: 2005-016aa APPLI ATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR P �'MENT cit.( -Renton ~� - TO OWNER PROJECT: APPLICATION NO. : 3 Distribution to : City of Renton Riverview Park OWNER 1055 S.Grady Way Bridge Renovation PERIOD TO : 1/7/2006 `! ARCHITECT Renton, WA 98055 CONTRACTOR PROJECT NO. : CAG-05-114 FROM CONTRACTOR: VIA ARCHITECT : Marine Vacuum Service,Inc. 1516 South Graham St. Seattle,WA 98108 CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY ADDITIONS DEDUCTIONS Application is made for payment,as shown below,in connection with the Contract. Change Orders approved in Continuation Sheet is attached. previous months by owner $ - $ - 1. ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM(with tax) $ 207,500.00 C.O.'s approved this month Number Date Approved 2. Net change by Change Orders(with tax) 3. CONTRACT SUM TO DATE(with tax) $ 207,500.00 (Line 1 +or-Line 2) TOTALS $ - $ - 4. TOTAL COMPLETED&STORED TO DATE(with tax).. $ 207,500.00 * Net changes by Change Orders $ - 5. (Washington State Sales Tax at 8.8%) $ 16,783.09 The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the best of the Contractor's knowledge,infor- (Based on line 4) mation and belief the Work covered by this Application for Payment has been completed 6. Revised Total Completed&Stored to Date(w/o tax) $ 190,716.91 in accordance with the Contract Documents,that all amounts have been paid by the (Line 4 less Line 5) Contractor for Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payment 7. RETAINAGE AT 5% $ 9,535.85 received from the Owner,and that currenta p yment shown herein is now due. (Based on Line 6 Only) 8. TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE $ 197,964.15 CONT• • `O ,\ (Line 4 less Line 7) By: `i ;:`•:.. Date:.5.--k 0 — fl(P 9. LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT $ 197,964.15 (Line 8 from prior Certificate) State o' .1: hington, County of: King 10. CURRENT PAYMENT DUE $ 9,535.85 Subscrib d;Rd sworn to bef me this / day of 11. BALANCE TO FINISH,INCLUDING RETAINAGE $ - Notary Public : (Line 3 less Lines 9 and 10) My Commission expires : LT/ .740 ARCHITECT'S CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT AMOUNT CERTIFIED / , (Attach explanation if amount certified differs from amount applied for.) In accordance with the Contract Documents,based on on-site observations and the ARCHITECT : data comprising the above application,the Architect certifies to the Owner that to By: Date: the best of the Architect's knowledge, information and belief the Work has progressed as indicated,the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract This Certificate is not negotiable. The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only Documents,and the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. to the Contractor named herein. Issuance,payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Al#: (Pot Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 1/400, Dept/Div/Board.. Community Services/Human May 22, 2006 Services Staff Contact Karen Bergsvik,Ext. 6652 Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Human Services Funding Criteria Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Ad Hoc Committee Members Information Results and Strategies Rating Tool#1 Rating Tool#2 Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Community Services Committee Legal Dept Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: None Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project SUMMARY OF ACTION: In October 2005,an Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by the Mayor to develop funding criteria for Human Services funding which currently comes from the General Fund and Community Development Block Grants. The committee had representatives of the business community,non-profits,the Human Services Advisory Committee(HSAC), service groups and churches.The Committee began by asking, "What conditions of well being do we want for children,adults,and families in Renton?" The committee identified seven results. The#1 result is: All children and youth are ready for educational success,work and life. The funding criteria are: 1)What Renton result(s)does the program requesting funding address? 2)Does the identified criteria address the desired Renton results? 3)Do the identified activities address the identified strategies? 4)How well does the agency demonstrate that they have: a)organizational experience and structure to run the program? b)establish the program need and target population? c) define the program,goals,and staffing? d)articulate a long-range plan? e)show financial stability? Over 100 hours was spent on this process.Fifty-six applications for funding were received. The HSAC will be reviewing and rating the applications and forwarding their recommendations to the City Council in late June. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Review the funding criteria of the Ad Hoc Committee for the allocation of 2007/2008 Human Services funds. This funding cycle is a test of the process and will be reviewed and evaluated prior to the next funding cycle. During this test period,the forms that rank the criteria may change but the criteria will remain the same. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT �� MEMORANDUM DATE: May 16, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Renton City Councilmembers VIA: ,J> Kathy Keolker, Manr � FROM: �� Terry Higashiyama�Con munity Services Administrator Karen Bergsvik, Human Services Manager, x6652 SUBJECT: Funding Criteria for Human Services ISSUE: How should Human Services funds be allocated in Renton? BACKGROUND: • In 2004, the Human Services Advisory Committee forwarded their 2005/2006 funding recommendations for the General Fund and Community Development Block Grant allocations to the City Council. The funding recommendations were not adopted and agencies received the same amount of funding as in 2004. It was recommended for the 2007/2008 funding process that an Ad Hoc Committee develops funding guidelines sensitive to the needs of our diverse community. This was approved by the City Council on September 20,2004. • The Mayor appointed members to the Ad Hoc Committee in October 2005 (see Attachment#1). They were given the task of developing funding criteria. AREAS THAT WERE REVIEWED: • The Committee began by asking, "What conditions of well being do we want for children, adults, and families in Renton?" The Committee identified seven results. • The Committee then developed specific strategies and activities to accomplish the results. Many of the identified activities fall outside what is typically considered "human services"and either other departments within the City, or businesses, or non-profits will need to implement them. Attachment#2 outlines the results, strategies, and activities. The identified strategies and activities are suggestions. It was decided that applicants to the City for funding could identify their own strategies or use the strategies the Committee identified. • Committee members voted on the results and those that received the most votes have the most weight when funding applications are reviewed and rated. Strategies are also rated using agreed upon criteria. The rating of results and strategies is Attachment #3. Noy Randy Corman,Council President Page 2 of 3 May 15,2006 • Evaluating the quality of the agency/program, its fit for Renton, and the financial health of the agency are part of the second rating tool that the Human Services Advisory Committee will use to evaluate the applications. This tool is a draft because the Advisory Committee is using it in training and changes are being made as they use it. This is Attachment#4. • The agencies which participated in the Ad Hoc Committee agree that the focus should be on the results the agency accomplishes, rather than whether a specific agency should be funded or not. Whether or not an agency will be funded is based on the net score that the application receives. Results are weighted the heaviest (weight of ten), the score from Rating Tool#2 is given a weight of five, and the strategies are given a weight of two. 2006 RESPONSE: • The funding criteria are: 1) What Renton result(s) does the program requesting funding for address? 2) Do the identified strategies address the desired Renton results? 3) Do the identified activities address the identified strategies? 4) How well does the agency: a. Demonstrate they have organizational experience and structure? b. Establish the program need and identify the target population? c. Define the program, goals, and staffing? d. Articulate a long-range plan? e. Show financial stability by having diversified funding sources, a complete, accurate budget, no serious fiscal issues, and serve a reasonable number of people for the funding requested. • A Funding Application Workshop was held on March 15, 2006, at Carco Theatre for all participating South King County cities. Over two hundred people attended. Ten cities in South King County participated. A common application is used by these cities. This year a new common application was used. • The results, strategies, and activities were distributed at the funding workshop, with the draft rating tools. This information is also on the City's website. • The Human Services Advisory Committee and staff received extensive training on how to complete the two rating forms. • Agencies that applied to Renton for funds were asked to specify what results, strategies, and activities their program would be addressing. Agencies were told that incomplete applications would not be considered. Staff was available for technical assistance. The applications were due April 28, 2006. Fifty-six applications were submitted. Randy Corman,Council President Page 3 of 3 May 15,2006 •o,,,,' • The Human Services Advisory Committee will forward their funding recommendations to the City Council in late June. They will be recommending the funding of the applications that have the highest ratings. LONG-TERM RESPONSE: • There is a need to train the agencies that receive funding so that the performance reporting relates to the identified activities, strategies, and results. • Did this process help the City make progress towards the desired results? It is anticipated that a community report card will be completed in Spring 2007 to report on how well the results were accomplished. • Identifying what changes need to be made for the next funding cycle. CONCLUSION: We are updating Council to ensure that Human Services funds are allocated by clearly defined funding criteria and continue to best meet the needs of the community. Attachments cc: Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Noe Nib." amisimor Attachment#1 City of Renton Human Services Ad Hoc Committee Appointed by Kathy Keolker, Mayor • Rich Brooks,Executive Director, Renton Area Youth Services • Mary Ellen Stone, Executive Director,King County Sexual Assault Resource Center • Linda Rasmussen, South King County Regional Director, YWCA • Terri Kimball, Executive Director, Domestic Abuse Women's Network and President, South King Council of Human Services • Kirby Unti, Pastor, St. Matthews Lutheran Church • Ken Colman,Pastor,United Christian Church and Co-chair, Renton Domestic Violence Task Force • Toni Nelson, Community Services Chair, Renton City Council • Janet Bertagni, Chair,Renton Human Services Advisory Committee • Laura Brock, Member, Renton Human Services Advisory Committee • Casey Bui, Member, Renton Human Services Advisory Committee • Lori Guilfoyle, Community Affairs Manager, United Way, South King County • Al Talley, Member, Renton School Board • Mario Paredes, Executive Director, Consejo • Bob McBeth,Rotary and Rotacare • Bob Raphael, Owner, Service Laundry • Jon Pozega, Vice President Student Services, Renton Technical College and Kiwanis • Julie Brewer, Community Relations Manager, City of Renton • Garry Anderson, Chief, City of Renton Police Department • Neil Watts, Director, Development Services, City of Renton Public Works iton Human Services Funding Criteria Attachments 2 Results, Strategies, and Activities Background: In October, 2005, an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of a diverse group of Renton residents encompassing business owners, educators, non-profit service providers, Councilmembers, and members of the Human Services Advisory Committee was appointed to participate in a planning process to identify what conditions of well-being they wanted to see for the Renton community (results). They identified seven results. The Committee then identified 38 strategies and activities they knew would work to improve the results. They were asked to do this, in the context of the community —and not specifically those that fit under the definition of "human services" The non-human service strategies and activities are highlighted. The list of strategies and activities identified below are suggestions only. The Committee recognized that non-profit agencies providing services to the Renton community have expertise in their service areas and can develop other strategies and activities that will achieve the indicated result. DEFINITIONS: Shaded Paragraph=non-HS funded activity Child =less than 12 years old;Youth=12 to 18 years old Result: a condition of well-being for the residents of Renton Strategy: a broad, non-specific statement of an approach to improving a Result Activity: Page 1 of 2 a service or action that contributes to the implementation of a Page 1 Strategy Renton Human Services Funding Criteria Results, Strategies, and Activities Result All children and youth are ready for educational success, work, and life. Strategy Increase the number of Developmental Assets for youth. Activities > Increase youth opportunities to learn about community engagement through mentoring,job sharing, leadership training. • Support a variety of mentoring programs. O Increase youth employment opportunities through training/hiring. ►. Expand the pool of adults who will help teens/youths get involved. • Increase opportunities for business owners to contribute resources and time to schools. > Increase youth leadership. • Include youth on councils and commissions (low-cost). Strategy Families and children have services and programs that support their success in schools and access to them. Activities Increase access to Play and Learn Groups for parents and caregivers. • Increase access to resources and support in a user-appropriate, understandable manner. Support after-school programs and other programs that are easily accessible or provide transportation home after the program. Involve business owners in providing information to their employees (low-cost). Strategy Encourage parents to read to their children. ( e2 ,iton Human Services Funding Criteria Results, Strategies, and Activities Result Individuals have adequate clothing, food, housing, and healthcare. Strategy Increase and maintain affordable (adequate) housing. Activities p. Improve residents' ability to keep residences in good repair. • City employees have access to information that can help troubled homeowners/residents. Strategy Increase the capacity of programs that provide food, clothing, housing and healthcare, and residents' access to them. Strategy Improve our understanding of community needs. Result All individuals become as self-sufficient as possible . Strategy Provide residents with the skills to obtain living wage jobs (such as language and job training skills). Activities ► Expand availability of effective English-language learner(ELL) classes. ► Decentralize ELL classes (e.g., at businesses). Strategy Expand small business opportunities. Page 3 Renton Human Services Funding Criteria Results, Strategies, and Activities Strategy Improve financial literacy(for example,knowledge of household budgeting, use of checking and savings accounts, getting and maintaining credit). Activities 0. Promote financial education. 0- Increase the ability of people to reduce debt and improve their credit. Support Earned Income Tax Credit sites to help people maximize their incomes. Create an inventory of agencies and programs currently providing financial literacy, money management, and budget training and identifying strategies to increase capacity. Result Residents know about domestic violence and how to keep safe. Strategy Increase education about healthy relationships. Activities: 0- Prevention education • Programs for kids 0- Anti-bullying programs 10 Workplace domestic violence education 0, Improve in-school domestic violence curricula Strategy Increase access to information about domestic violence. Activities . Create and use educational materials in languages used by the residents of Renton. . Increase public service announcements. Strategy Increase the amount of domestic violence services and programs. ,. le 4 _,iton Human Services Funding Criteria Results, Strategies, and Activities Strategy Assure that domestic violence services are culturally competent (for example, agency is responsive to cultural norms, values and beliefs of the client, addresses needs in a culturally appropriate manner that encourages participation, reduces cultural barriers to service, and recognizes and respects cultural diversity). Result All residents are proactive to issues of sexual assault and sexual violence. Strategy Increase the ability of service providers to respond and act when sexual assault is suspected or confirmed. Strategy Increase the capacity to provide sexual assault services. Strategy Improve the ability of people to talk about sexual assault as a normal topic. Activity Help parents and adults find ways to talk with children about sexual assault. Strategy Improve access to sexual assault services. Result All residents are healthy and safe. Strategy Improve community fitness (physical activity/nutrition). Result All residents identify with and contribute to their community. Strategy Promote volunteerism. Activity Develop a centralized volunteer opportunity location. Promote volunteer solutions. Page 5 RATING TOOL #1 Attachment#3 Renton Human Services Evaluation of Results and Strategies Application Scoring based on Results Result Score Weight Net Score 1 All children and youth are ready for educational success, 10 work and life. 2 Individuals have adequate clothing, food, housing, and 8 healthcare. 3 All individuals become as self sufficient as possible. 6 4 Residents know about domestic violence and how to 4 keep safe. 5 All residents are proactive to issues of sexual assault 3 and sexual violence. 6 All residents are healthy and safe. 2 7 All individuals identify with and contribute to their 1 community. Total Result Score score multiplied by weight = net score Total Score Service has a direct affect: 5 points Service has some affect: 3 points Service has a minor affect 1 point Service has no affect: 0 points Ap•lication Scoring based on Strategies 1 The strategy addresses the desired result(s). If yes, proceed to Yes No question #2. If no, go no further and score a 0. 2 The activity addresses the identified strategy. If yes, proceed to Yes No question #3. If no, go no further and score a 0. Service has a direct affect: 5 points Maximum Total Service has some affect: 3 points Points Points Service has a minor affect 1 point Possible Earned Service has no affect: 0 points 3 The strategy is appropriate to meet the needs of the proposed 5 target population and will work in the Renton community. 4 Cultural relevancy and sensitivity is evidenced in the program 5 service delivery. 5 The strategy is identified as a Best, Promising, or Emerging 5 practice (with appropriate citations) or application presents data, research, evaluation or some other evidence that indicates the strategy has been tested or shown to be effective in addressing the results in Renton. 6 The strategy serves a reasonable number of people for the 5 cost. Total Strategy Score 20 (possible) Net Score: Results are given the greatest weight of 10. Strategies will be weighted by 2. Rating tool #2 that looks at the quality of the application and the financial health of the organization will be weighted by 5. Attachment#4 Rater: HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION RATING FORM I. ORGANIZATIONAL EXPERIENCE MAXIMUM OF 15 POINTS (up to 3 points each) Experience & Operational Structure Maximum Score • Agency has a track record of providing this service for a minimum Max (3) of at least two years that indicates it can deliver the services. • Staff has applicable/related experience in working with proposed Max (3) program. • If Board is described as a decision making board, its role includes Max (3) monitoring of budgets, approval of grants, and policy making. ■ The Board is diverse (e.g. age, gender, race/ethnicity, disability, Geographically) Max (3) • Board is connected/informed about the needs in Renton. Max (3) Total Points Organizational Experience (Maximum 15 points) II. NEED FOR PROGRAM MAXIMUM OF 24 POINTS (up to 12 points each) Problem Statement and Target Population (Score 0-3) weighted by a factor of 4 ■ Need for program in Renton is demonstrated via data Max (12) • Demographics and geography of clients described Max (12) Total Points Program Need (Maximum 24 points) III. PROPOSED PROGRAM / SERVICE MAXIMUM OF 28 POINTS (up to 2 points each) Program, Goals & Outcomes, Staffing, and Evaluation ■ Includes explanation of services to be provided. Max (2) ■ Services address the needs Max (2) ■ Outreach methods relevant to Renton Max (2) ■ Intake and selection process for clients is defined Max (2) • Program serves Renton residents. Max (2) +r.✓ ■ Cultural appropriateness/sensitivity addressed Max (2) Rating Tool #2 Page 1 of 2 Attachment #4 Rater: • Agency collaborates with other agencies, especially Renton Max (2) based Agencies (as appropriate). void • Key partners or stakeholders in place for services to be successful. Max (2) • Goals fit the desired results for Renton. Max (2) • Staffing levels are realistic Max (2) • Staff has experience in this area. Max (2) • Staff is culturally competent Max (2) • Outcome data is used to evaluate services Max (2) • Board and/or clients involved in evaluation Max (2) Total Points Program Proposal (Maximum 28 points) IV. LONG RANGE PLAN Maximum of 9 Points (up to 3 points each) • Future plans tied to strategic plan or mission Max (3) • Plans include multiple funding sources (example, public, private Max (3) foundation funding) .41104 • Plans include evaluation and improvement of services Max (3) Total Points Long Range Plan (Maximum 9 points) V. BUDGET Maximum of 24 Points (up to 4 points each) • Budget has at least two types of funding sources (e.g. any combination of public, private, foundation, fee for service) Max (4) • Total 2007 revenue equals expenses. Max (4) • Funding requested is reasonable given the projected number of Max (4) people served. Staff budget analysis • Budget is complete, accurate and consistent. Max (4) • Budget, audit, and financial statement identify no serious fiscal Max (4) Issues. • No red flags in the budget Max (4) Total Points Budget (Maximum 24 points) TOTAL SCORE Rating Tool #2 Page 2 of 2 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Al#: (7. do Submitting Data: For Agenda of: oimov• Dept/Div/Board.. EDNSP/Strategic Planning May 22, 2006 Staff Contact Don Erickson(x6581) Agenda Status X Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Hudson Annexation—60%Direct Petition to Annex Correspondence.. Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions 60%Direct Petition Information King County Certification Document Recommended Action: Approvals: • Council concur in setting the public hearing for June Legal Dept 5, 2006. Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment 1/41010, Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget N/A City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Council received a 60%Direct Petition on January 30, 2006, to annex approximately 13.69 acres of unincorporated King County located within Renton's Potential Annexation Area. The proponent's petition was certified on February 8, 2006, as having signatures representing at least 60% of the area's assessed value. Under state law, if the Council decides to accept the 60%Direct Petition, it is required to hold at least two public hearings on future zoning. The site is currently designated Residential Single Family(RS) and Residential Medium Density(RMD) as shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The RS portion would most likely be zoned R-8, eight units per net acre, and the RMD portion would most likely be zoned R-10, consistent with these two land use designations, if annexed into the City. The Administration is also seeking authorization to forward the Notice of Intent Package to the Boundary Review Board if Council decides to accept the 60% Direct Petition. The City, at that time, may decide whether to invoke the Board's jurisdiction and request expansion of the proposed annexation's boundary if it would make it more fiscally neutral. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set June 5, 2006, for a public hearing to decide whether to accept the 60% Direct Petition to annex as well as future zoning for the Hudson Annexation.. Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh �y ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ti 0� NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC + PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: May 8, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: i ji Kathy Keolker, Mayor FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator F-,/,./( STAFF CONTACT: Don Erickson(6581) SUBJECT: Hudson Annexation - Acceptance of 60% Direct Petition to Annex and Support for Future R-8 Zoning ISSUE: • Whether the City Council wants to accept the 60% Direct Petition to Annex for the Hudson Annexation now that the petition has been certified as sufficient by the King County Department of Assessments? • If Council decides to accept the 60% Direct Petition to Annex, whether future zoning should be R-8, consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan land use designation? • If Council decides to accept the 60% Direct Petition to Annex, whether it wishes to authorize the Administration to forward the Notice of Intent package to the Boundary Review Board? • Whether the City should invoke jurisdiction during the Boundary Review Board's 45-day review period, in order to expand the annexation's boundaries to include those properties with covenants to not oppose future annexation as well as other properties to the east to at least 148th Avenue SE, in order to create a more coherent interim city boundary? RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that Council: • Accept the 60% Direct Petition to Annex for the 13.69-acre Hudson Annexation site; h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\hudson\60%issue paper.doc Teri Briere,Council President Page 2 of 3 September 12,2005 • Adopt the recommendation of the Administration to support R-10 zoning on the south side of SE 108th Street consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Residential ,, id Medium Density (RMD) land use designation and R-8 zoning elsewhere, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Residential Single Family (RS) land use designation shown for those portions of the annexation site; and, • Authorize the Administration to forward the Notice of Intent package for the Hudson Annexation to the Boundary Review Board; BACKGROUND SUMMARY: At its November 14, 2005, public meeting, Council decided to accept the 10% Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation petition and authorized circulation of a 60% direct petition to annex. Council at that time specified that petitioners agree to support future zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation and assume their proportional share of the City's outstanding indebtedness upon possible future annexation to the City. Except for parks, reviewing staff identified no other issues. Because of potential downhill flooding, future development likely will be required to mitigate potential impacts to surface water. The City received the 60% Direct Petition to Annex for this revised annexation on January 30, 2006. The petition was certified by the King County Department of Assessments as having signatures representing at least 60% of the area's assessed valuation on February 8, 2006. Council is now being asked to decide whether it wishes to accept the 60% Direct Petition to Annex, and if it does, what the future zoning of the site should be if the Boundary Review Board approves it and it is subsequently annexed into the City. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation for the subject site is both RMD and RS. The RMD designation allows R-10 zoning, at ten units per net acre, and the RS designation allows R-8 zoning, at eight units per net acre. King County currently has both R12 and R18 zoning on the annexation site. The R12 zone allows 12 units per gross acre, and with bonuses, allows up to 18 units per gross acre. The R18 zone allows 18 units per gross acre, and with bonuses, allows up to 27 units per gross acre. A more detailed discussion of this proposed annexation and review comments was contained in the department's October 12, 2005 10% Notice of Intent issue paper. CONCLUSION: The proposed Hudson Annexation has been certified as having signatures representing at least 60% of the area's assessed value. It also has reasonable boundaries and appears to comply with most relevant Boundary Review Board objectives. Reviewing staff raised no significant objections to this annexation. There is a general deficiency in the area of parks and a one-time estimated parks acquisition and improvement cost of $136,836 to bring the annexation area up to City standards. This is based upon an h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\hudson\60%issue paper.doc Teri Briere,Council President Page 3 of 3 September 12,2005 estimated future population of 364 residents, living in 200 dwelling units, at build out. *4110, Staff estimates a fiscal cost to the City of approximately $41,565 per year at build out in today's dollars. This is because the area is already basically built out so that assessed values are not anticipated to increase as much as would be normal in a less built out area. Based upon the above and the previously submitted analysis in the 10% Notice of Intent issue paper, staff concludes that the proposed Hudson Annexation would be consistent with its Comprehensive Plan, and be in the general welfare and interest of the City. However, if this annexation area were included in a possible larger annexation of that portion of the Benson Hill area not incorporated, say, within a year or two, and with an estimated population of +16,000 or more residents, much, if not all of the deficit from this annexation would be absorbed through the state's new state tax program for annexations.' Because this annexation will not affect the number of residents needed to qualify for the 0.1 percent tax credit, and because annexation of the larger area is at least 18 to 24 months away, staff believe it would be wrong to defer this annexation for that long of a period. 'o✓ SSB 6686,recently enacted by the Governor,provides,beginning in July 1,2007,a state tax credit of between 0.1 percent and 0.2 percent to cities where the projected cost to provide municipal services to an annexation area exceeds the projected general revenue that the city would otherwise receive from the annexation area on an annual basis. The rate of tax that any city may impose under this section shall be 0.2 percent for the total number of annexed areas the city may annex between July 1,2007 and January 1, Nur, 2010. h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\hudson\60%issue paper.doc 1 j t,_1 i' j CT U u . L I.... I db❑ F 1Q0CDE I 1 ill o �1' 8a Q o o O /j a I .+EJgr-,�� Q ❑ O Q 0 .4110, 0 4) E 1 q I [LI 17 i m D ° 0 a . _ ,I, a ,,.., .D, cy .,\D 0 G Eri 'Ill a 0 '124, �W� r,Q 1111\ I la `E]❑ f E3 ail 0 0 0 -- , 1 -`' , ti------rir:D— c=a u.Difi in cu Eui,,,,,...L,Ip ir . ' A., iii, oC2, —4.---, c=i ❑ Elo o ❑ , f ❑ i 0 �❑ oQ° i SMI 0 ❑ 1 7 El ❑ ° EllI 711 111111 1 CI 0 a '- ❑ ❑ Ri I" l , .'L 0 � 61 I cu w n i anCT iii al d ii.) 0 a , .11 iii fili > EDiii fir.. �► rir �tny-t ._a. ■ p ❑❑ 0 Q c)-(> . ,- oQD � -) 8 °la . ' oc3m :❑ : ❑ :o 0 80 u_ 1- ❑a ❑ 0 0 CD Di 1 1 L 0 0 0 n o ED 4 �ooQ g 0 a 0 0f_ J ' mai F bfLI 172nc St 5r- , 1 - \ a ❑ Proposed Hudson Annexation 0 300 600 Figure 3: ExistingStructures Map 9 Structure .(797% (797p AEoPmicch,DAdltrmeo ,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning — -- — City Limits 1 : 3600 \U`/ G.Del Rosano I I Proposed Annex.Area �'NTO 3 October 2005 /1-05-00S i" " 4 i /p' •�� , - tor , PETITION TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF RENTON UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 Applican • ,,E , s ,� (60% Petition—HCdso Anon n) Address: NTON TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON 4735 Ne - s" 0-8 / 1055 South Grady Way JAN 3 0 2006 Renton, WA 98055 /:ms`s' Telephone Noc=•20(p- -061 I RECEIVED Deg— The undersigned are owners of not less than siifneftgnigiffigkalue according to the assessed valuation for general taxation,of real property located contiguous to the City of Renton. We hereby petition that such property be annexed to the City of Renton under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 et seq. The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City of Renton. A map (Exhibit 1)and legal description(Exhibit 2)are included as part of this petition. In response to a duly filed and considered"Notice of Intention" to commence annexation proceedings, the City Council of the City of Renton met with the initiating parties under RCW 35A.14.120 on November 14, 2005. The City Council then determined that the City would accept the 10%Notice of Intention petition and authorize circulation of this petition. Further, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120, the undersigned petitioners agree to: (1) Accept the City's simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's land use designations for Norge the subject property; and, (2) Assume their proportional share of the City's pre-existing bonded indebtedness (approximately 8 cents per each$1,000 of assessed value). all as noted in the minutes of the Council meeting and contained in the electronic recording of such meeting. WHEREFORE,the undersigned property owners petition the City Council and ask: (a) That the City Council fix a date for a public hearing about such proposed annexation,cause a notice to be published and posted, specifying the time and place of such hearing, and inviting all persons who are interested to appear at the hearing and state their approval or disapproval of such annexation or to ask questions; and (b) That following such hearing, and consistent with any approval by the Boundary Review Board, the City Council by ordinance annex the above described territory to become part of the City of Renton, Washington, subject to its laws and ordinances then and thereafter in force, and to receive City public services. This two page form is one of a number of identical forms which comprise one petition seeking the annexation of the described territory to the City of Renton, Washington as above stated, and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures. Page 1 of 2 PETITION TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF RENTON UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 o Applicant. (60/o Petition—Hudson Annexation) Address: g� , TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON - 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, WA 98055 Telephone No,' 14-054 The undersigned are owners of not less than sixty percent(60%) in value according to the assessed valuation for general taxation,of real property located contiguous to the City of Renton. We hereby petition that such property be annexed to the City of Renton under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 et seq. The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City of Renton. A map (Exhibit 1) and legal description(Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. In response to a duly filed and considered "Notice of Intention" to commence annexation proceedings, the City Council of the City of Renton met with the initiating parties under RCW 35A.14.120 on November 14, 2005. The City Council then determined that the City would accept the 10%Notice of Intention petition and authorize circulation of this petition. Further, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120, the undersigned petitioners agree to: (1) Accept the City's simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations Curt,OF RENTON consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's land use designations for the subject property; and, JAN 2 3 20 (2) Assume their proportional share of the City's pre-existing bonded RECEIVED indebtedness (approximately 8 cents per each$1,000 of assessed CITY CLERK'S OFFICE value). all as noted in the minutes of the Council meeting and contained in the electronic recording of such meeting. WHEREFORE,the undersigned property owners petition the City Council and ask: (a) That the City Council fix a date for a public hearing about such proposed annexation, cause a notice to be published and posted, specifying the time and place of such hearing, and inviting all persons who are interested to appear at the hearing and state their approval or disapproval of such annexation or to ask questions; and (b) That following such hearing, and consistent with any approval by the Boundary Review Board, the City Council by ordinance-annex the above described territory to become part of the City of Renton, Washington, subject to its laws and ordinances then and thereafter in force, and to receive City public services. This two page form is one of a number of identical forms which comprise one petition seeking .4010, the annexation of the described territory to the City of Renton, Washington as above stated, and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures. Page 1 of 2 Hudson Annexation 60%Direct Petition to Annex WARMNG: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement,shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names ofpetitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) ,74.7. it 21i4;7.71 k ; yit thaw,sc. n'aCEi6 ' � -. } �'F', ° t `` ter_ �+-•F� �9a .� •. -,c �+ '���y.'- yea -y_ $':- 1 / f S6'' /er 2 2 30S 984 1 Q6)?z v � val ►�f nP . r 2. AS- 4 a '�:► 2 /0445- 2!/23 D5'1O " i fer- 4-44-v i.o 3. 09SJc t A/i24,0,,,`"2 / X274 6:) 4. /6/-33 sE sit S-( 4 '4),4,-'3 New Lki 5. /of s& r�, �.�{. 292 30C9e)5 7 Me-Lt ", h 000 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 2 of 2 Hudson Annexation 60%Direct Petition to Annex WARATNG: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name,or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement,shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names ofpetitioners should be in identicalform as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) 'o. ` L4rn _ 'y - r= . - :.- _; ti • 47'4,-'4-4,'-----A ,:-_, tui ==s"`;r,r - .;a.__ `` - ,> :s . = ,.7 .-�' ' ',- " '` ; .4,74.'1 rk,,,, ";..__.' . ."''-'4'..4'- , , 1. ��� �j t CSC-�i�s1, ki to \\ ats-.- 10Ye2f. e 10 9f( 5 . -i685 2. �" o25 t(. G2 f2-I I! fvfrei 014 9,4, /09// 5 itor4 Sy- 2.923oS1,37 3. l'/Gly 13 ke w wi 4. • 7b PIO 1 6.E - 1 on-4117T- 2- 30 9vbc i mat pt. )10/1 4 5. yl O4t L( Ji" /" ' 1 °co 1 S a. 9?-41 J 30 - £92590 /C/07 :E /I &-F 2923. .�go7/ 6. -Ttct. ; f 7. /O.+�3i se/1- . . 2.92:30S 1070 Sa(w14.-1 0 4 , Io8t5 SE /bags-(. 22, 3as"ytkbil 8. ilii-th". 2.. , -- 9. 10. Page 2 of 2 Hudson Annexation 60%Direct Petition to Annex WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions,or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement,shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Nome The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) 1.0441 • q R 3 1 `' ,y € d`9 i i r . . 5�,, ' �' _ .li{`i �t4 s—^ 1'—`„s s ✓"�, 't +�, .,7t,%� d � ,.. t a -t r d .lY� ��" `�xQ ._.� -� r-r)pr ** n �-rte'44-:� I�; 1, 1. �� 4AT S '-7 4036aim ids l / ', v41, I J {��,; �, -� �� 1 GC4.. g o✓,5,0 eps 2. /��� ��.1 w A ' 3 g'70OO33 — 11/11414- 3. 4. Now 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Noe Page 2 of 2 Hudson Annexation 60%Direct Petition to Annex . WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter,or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement,shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of petitioners should be in identical fornt as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) .1, -,,-2 E), ' ' s£ NF m 9i t 4 4 I ffirr4W/10 f Qui0A,-omoeewavo 1.-:_c_ 1. y I 0 6 P Nr-.e � '�'lots Aue S� Fl Cy,7zO S v 1,..i,.J fZCdu tvvnl w Q&'SSS 2. I q ` s q 000 335 �,etx �.ose,,� fit, 4.h. t�I eos-s- 3. V9, /e,--,� *..� -- u-docs JZ,e�rt 33 1680 o ( /00/it 4. 14/ ��y & ICW- 00 3g I gryteu .4,000 i , e 5. ee.r\ITN., olgiar 'I I b(c - i , '8f700 03.26 1 I # - ( 6. Vr f1 t3t700037 5-ra/v/ IP IW 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 2 of 2 Hudson Annexation 60%Direct Petition to Annex WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name,or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement,shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names ofpetitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real tstate.) 6 7 Fr F 1 $ `e f,M s- .. � � e�€B1CLL Ep�`j 7 ! � s i ,u�" , } r -i- LT'E s je"_ e t l r �r s.3�,� 1 .� ' s.�... .._ �'i � � ti"'Y"♦ �rrr"i .:.�.i /- 9-0(0, Miliy,fiy 1 C: 2J 011 1. - tip/ V41/1-474 2 (- - ))! Hudson Annexation 60%Direct Petition to Annex WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name,or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement,shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Nuoil The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names ofpetitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) .- a .i. 1. /////6,,� % /if g63P tion l Thew,, & t G.67e6re TheiMisifiadeft4 / 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 2 of 2 Hudson Annexation 60%Direct Petition to Annex WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement,shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names of.etitioners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of title to the real estate.) S- s v= x A'5 i &'ma k x .s /" .t - �..x.t.- r 't .t"�tt. c ,,j�. as'i re s. - - r :.:Ii i '^- � ���'m n:, z.2' 'twee � �.o € i , J 1. ¢ its , N ��a)t� �° r, 7„.--.4,-, s- - ...,. ..✓vs ''-' ..• :' x a ¢s�_r_.C81'a� �.e.�-�z ���✓ �az.F 4£00 .ra.ss 1. /�-1 —rte as wits tit tc � tate A� �-t-t— (��8'i Q�0�0 VZ'LitA /A ( ._ Cl a i.J� ‘4,(A- , �t S t�c3 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 2 of 2 • VI ira \ -P-',C-g- ■k Mt EXHIBIT 1 •� 1MitlVIII 11 11 ( 111 16stSt If . m N ■■R %IP i #0 44. , All II No ,--. im ie ! INS -midi fAS it l I Pi I 1 I Y well t •N $IOiiiii IWIIIIEIE At 0 t * t^al ma S 27th StnowminEllin II i $21, Elkvimmossi1111n mal � �� i. NINE �� ; ■ mmisup ____ ��1111"MINI NM MI o ori IIA ; •II) oolk �. �rWCAlrialliti _.� UMW Nin MI ■ Ci r IICIE:4111111 It MI5 ii• $ �;i ill IIII Ii: \Vi IV 1111 � 4111116 10 111 t� '1111± iJ ■ ftIPII:M t ur, ill Itia in- -- - - - . -- ii MEN E mo 1111 Ilk :mi.....iiEn !- - - --- A . n_ . .�.. , . : � g nimi �::ii1„i � �il�iluriiiiiiim iii ` i e ....._� _�_ ,� I1 ■11::: i NE �"'s �111111,11,� , • ;� ii. .ii 1i, .. _t _ . ■■ i X11_ fe- __ !distills,' ����11I ' IZbE172t II 1 ■ ■ ims NI MI MP Emil =KM 11 1 ,-.8 III!RA - Drd-r1;4-n1,.. n..l c'r I i i t I, Proposed Hudson Annexation o 600 1200 Figure 1: Vicinity Mapimis /�.::.:;.;>::;>;;:.;::..; r Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning —. — — city Limits 1 : !200 3 Del Rosa Administrator _ Proposed Annex.Area .Lkl Rosario ally- 3 Ocmbv 2005 ---_ EXHIBIT 2 HUDSON ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 20 through 25,inclusive,Aker's Farms No. 5, as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, Records of King County, Washington, as platted; TOGETHER WITH that portion of Benson Road S. (State Route 515, Secondary State Highway No. 5C)in the southwest quarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, being the easterly 30 or 42 feet in width, lying northerly of a line beginning at the southeast corner of said Lot 20, crossing said Benson Road S, to the southeast corner of the west 30 feet of the north 82 feet of the south half (1/2) of the north half(1/2)of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of said Section 29, said southeast corner being the termination of said line; and TOGETHER WITH the north quarter(1/4) of said northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 29,EXCEPT the east 264 feet thereof; and TOGETHER WITH the west 30 feet of said northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 29,lying southerly of the south line of the north quarter(1/4) thereof, and lying northerly of said line beginning at the southeast corner of said Lot 20 of said Aker's Farms No. 5, crossing said Benson Road S, to the southeast corner of the west 30 feet of the north 82 feet of the south half(1/2) of the north half(1/2) of said subdivision, said southeast corner being the termination of said line; and TOGETHER WITH that portion of the south 30 feet(SE 168th Street) of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 29, lying easterly of that portion of said street included in the existing City Limits of Renton, as annexed by Ordinance No. 1971, and lying westerly of the west line of the east 264 feet of said northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of said Section 29 extended northerly, to the northerly right-of-way margin of said SE 168th Street, as it crosses 111th Ave SE. "ter 0 King County Department of Assessments Scott Noble ,4400 King County Administration Bldg. 500 Fourth Avenue,Room 708 Assessor Seattle,WA 98104-2384 (206)296-5195 FAX(206)296-0595 Email:accccsor.lnfo@metrokc.gov www.metrokc.gov/assessor/ ANNEXATION PETITION CERTIFICATION THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the petition submitted February 2, 2006 to the King County Department of Assessments by Don Erickson, Senior Planner for the City of Renton, supporting the annexation to Renton of the properties described as the Hudson Annexation, has been examined, the property taxpayers, tax parcel numbers, and assessed value of properties listed thereon carefully compared with the King County tax roll records, and as a result of such examination, found to be sufficient under the provisions of the New Section of Revised Code of Washington, Section 35.13.002. ,ore The Department of Assessments has not verified that the signature on the petition is valid through comparison with any record of actual signatures, nor that the signature was obtained or submitted in an appropriate time frame, and this document does not certify such to be the case. Dated this 8th day of February, 2006 , S7e6r14----/dr" Scott Noble, King County Assessor :#..01202M ( , city of Renton / ,...1 Merritt5211.7(Pachase II) Current Annexations Perkins __ URBAN(iROWTII BOUNDARY ....A.eee- CITY LIMITS A(TIVF ANNFXATION Aster Park 0 E:nornle Dey,alopzie Neighborhoods 8 Strategic Planning 0 Oei Roseno \ — — 18.5 ac. Querin 1 , 240 SEATTLE , ik . C31 1 - Inl , '''' .5.1 . • Hoquiam u .1. ,... r------\ 20.4 ac. 1 -1 i Preserve 1 Our Plateau 1474.5 ac. ,,,, % L, Ci-IN r-,--- 1„,,, • • lAki RADII TEA Leitch — i 16.2 ac. Maplewood ., Addition TUKWILA i 60.5 ac. , Akers Farms - . - - - ---- - -- ) I"- ' / Hudson 13.9 ac. ,Irsixr ) 14.6 ac. Falk II , \ :1 ,fg 6.8 ac. \ , APR KENT ! 1 i I.1 siilaili m,r , LI' Ae t' A Anthone' '' ,,, 25.7 ac. \s„,,,, ,-/\, ,, I -,„-, ,, I AY I Not Nos 1 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: ew Submitting Data: For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board.. Economic Development, May 22, 2005 Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Staff Contact Don Erickson, x-6581 Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. PROPOSED ANNEXATION Correspondence.. Perkins —60%Direct Petition to Annex and Ordinance consideration of Future Zoning Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Petition Certification Information 60%Petition Recommended Action: Approvals: Council concur to set a Public Hearing date for June 5, Legal Dept X 2006 Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: kw? Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget N/A City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The petitioners submitted a 60%Direct Petition to Annex to the City Clerk on December 13, 2006, and the signatures on it were certified by the King County Department of Assessments on December 22, 2006. The proposed 15.47-acre Perkins Annexation site is located in Renton's Potential Annexation Area along the west and east sides of Union Avenue NE (132nd Avenue SE) between NE 27th Street(SE 95th Way), if extended, on the north and NE 26th Street(SE 98th Street) if extended, on the south. If extended, its western boundary would be Queen Avenue NE (128th Avenue SE), and its eastern boundary would be approximately Vashion Place NE, if extended. State law requires the Council to hold at least two public hearings to consider future zoning for the subject site if it decides to accept the 60%Direct Petition. If Council accepts the 60% Direct Petition to Annex, the Administration is recommending that it support future R-4 zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation of RLD. The Council is also being asked to authorize sending the Notice of Intent package to the Boundary Review Board, and possibly invoking the Board's jurisdiction to ask that the annexation site be expanded to include the Sierra Heights Elementary School site to its immediate south. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set June 5, 2006, for a public hearing to consider the 60% Direct Petition to Annex petition and 11600 possible future zoning for the proposed Perkins Annexation. EDNSP/PAAIAnnexations/Perkins Annexation/agnbill/de ( Y O ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, C.) NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC ' ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: May 15, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: -` Kathy Keolker, Mayor FROM: 54 Alex Pietsch, Administrator 2c-/ ' STAFF CONTACT: Don Erickson(6581) SUBJECT: Perkins Annexation -Acceptance of 60% Direct Petition to Annex and Support for Future R-8 Zoning ISSUE: Whether the City Council wants to accept the 60% Direct Petition to Annex for the Perkins Annexation now that the petition has been certified as sufficient by the King lorrie County Department of Assessments? If Council decides to accept the 60% Direct Petition to Annex, whether future zoning should be R-4, consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan land use designation? If Council decides to accept the 60% Direct Petition to Annex, whether it wishes to authorize the Administration to forward the Notice of Intent package to the Boundary Review Board for their mandatory 45-day review? Whether the City should invoke jurisdiction during the Boundary Review Board's 45- day review period, in order to expand the annexation's boundaries to include those properties with covenants to not oppose future annexation as well as other properties to the east to at least 148th Avenue SE, in order to create a more coherent interim city boundary? RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that Council: • Accept the 60% Direct Petition to Annex for the 15.47-acre Perkins Annexation site; r✓ h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\perkins\60%issue paper.doc Randy Corman,Council President Page 2 of 3 May 15,2006 • Authorize the Administration to forward the Notice of Intent package for the Perkins Annexation to the Boundary Review Board; and, • Support the administration invoking jurisdiction and expanding the boundaries of this annexation to the south to include the Sierra Heights Elementary School site. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: At its November 21, 2005 public meeting, Council decided to accept the 10% Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation petition and authorized circulation of a 60% direct petition to annex. Council at that time specified that petitioners agree to support future zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation and assume their proportional share of the City's outstanding indebtedness upon possible future annexation to the City. Except for parks, reviewing staff identified no other issues. Because of nearby wetlands and the potential for flooding, however, future development likely will be required to mitigate potential impacts to surface water. The City received the 60% Direct Petition to Annex for this revised annexation on December 13, 2005. The petition was certified by the King County Department of Assessments as having signatures representing at least 60% of the area's assessed valuation on December 22, 2005. Council is now being asked to decide whether it wishes to accept the 60% Direct Petition to Annex, and if it does, what the future zoning of the site should be if the Boundary Review Board approves it and it is subsequently annexed into the City. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation for the subject site is Residential Low Density. This designation allows R-4 zoning at a maximum of four units per net acre. King County currently has R-4 zoning on the site, which allows four units per gross acre, and with bonuses, allows up to six units per net acre. Pursuant to GMA and the Countywide Planning Policies regarding the creation of more efficient service areas and the reduction of duplication of services, both the City and County have the authority, under state law, to invoke Boundary Review Board's jurisdiction and request that it modify the annexation's proposed boundaries. The Administration believes that the City should invoke the Board's jurisdiction in order to request that they expand the boundaries to the south to include Sierra Heights Elementary School and its associated properties. Although schools cannot be included in an annexation for the purposes of calculating the assessed value of those in favor of annexation, the Boundary Review Board apparently has the authority to include schools when it is expanding the boundaries of an annexation to create more logical municipal boundaries. As a minimum, staff is recommending that the boundaries be expanded to the south to include the Sierra Heights Elementary School, which lies between the proposed annexation and the City of Renton municipal boundary to the south. This would reduce h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\perkins\60%direct petition agenda bill.doc Randy Corman,Council President Page 3 of 3 May 15,2006 As a minimum, staff is recommending that the boundaries be expanded to the south to err include the Sierra Heights Elementary School, which lies between the proposed annexation and the City of Renton municipal boundary to the south. This would reduce the creation of a potential peninsula of unincorporated King County, surrounded by the City on more than 75% of its perimeter. It would also result in a more logical service area. The Renton School District has voiced no opposition to annexation to the City of Renton and, in fact, supported a previous attempt at annexation. The latter was withdrawn when the Washington State Supreme Court ruled that the old petition method that relied on obtaining signatures representing 60% of an area's assessed value was illegal. A more detailed discussion of this proposed annexation and review comments was contained in the department's November 21, 2005, 10% Notice of Intent issue paper. CONCLUSION: The proposed Perkins Annexation has been certified as having signatures has reasonable boundaries and appears to comply with many relevant Boundary Review Board objectives. However, its boundaries would be improved by including the Sierra Heights Elementary School to the south. As a result, the Administration is recommending that the Board's jurisdiction be invoked so that it can consider incorporating the Sierra Heights Elementary School properties into this annexation. Reviewing staff raised no significant objections to this annexation. Community Services, however, indicated a general deficiency in the area of parks and estimate a one-time parks acquisition and improvement cost of$22,706 for this annexation area. This is based upon an estimated future population of 107 people, living in 46 dwelling units, at build out. Staff estimates revenues to the City of approximately $11,403 per year at build out in today's dollars. The inclusion of the school properties is not estimated to substantially change these figures. Based upon the above and the previously submitted analysis in the 10% Notice of Intent issue paper, staff concludes that the proposed Perkins Annexation would further the City's business goals, be consistent with its Comprehensive Plan, and be in the general welfare and interest of the City. h:\ednsp\paa\annexations\perkins\60%issue paper.doc PERKINS ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALYSIS SHEET Units Population AV Existing dev. 3 7 $828.000 Full dev. 46 107 $20.178.000 Assumptions: 2.2 persons I household ~4810 $255,450 AV/existing unit $35O.OUO/YV/new unit Roo-600i Total revenues Existing Full Rate Existing � Regular|mvy ��.00O �O3.358 3.14 Full '...``'`,,.,,�`r,�� Excess levy $65 $1.586 0.07861 State shared revenues Rate(per cap) Existing Full Liquor tax $3.52 $24.64 $376.04 Liquor Board profits $5.04 $35.28 $539.28 Fue|tox-noadm $14.46 $101.22 $1,547.22 Fuel tax-arterials $6.47 $45.29 $692.29 MVET $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Camper excise $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Criminal justice $0.36 $2.52 $38.52 Total $208.95 $3.183.95 Miscellaneous revenues Rate Existing Full Real estate excise* $48.57 $339.89 $5.196.99 Utility tax** $133.20 $399.00 $6.127.20 Fines &forfeits* $17.53 $122.71 $1,875.71 Total $862.30 $13,199.90 * .�~ Per capita ** Per housing unit-based on $2,220 annual utility billing @ 6% tax rate Total ongoing costs Per capita Existing Full Existing � Contracted Services FuU 'iiiii!iii!i Alcohol $0.19 $1.33 $20.33 Public Defender $4.68 $32.76 $500.76 Jail $8.56 $59.92 $915.92 Subtotal $94.01 $1.437.01 Court/legal/admin. $66.92 $468.44 $7,160.44 Parks maintenance* $14.90 $104.30 $1.594.30 Police $278.89 $1.938.23 $29,627.23 Road maintenance** N/A $0.00 $4.894 Fire*** $1.25 $1.035.00 $25.232.50 Total $3.639.98 $68.935.48 *See Sheet Parks FIA **See Sheet Roads FIA °°° Rate per$1.00Uofassessed valuation (FO#25contract) Net fiscal imst Exist|mg � Full iii��������-~^ ��0--~^^ /����!�Parks aoquiuUUon@deve|opnment(� n� oGhaetParkaF�): $22,705'82 ~-`~``-''`- Other one-time costs: $425.00 Total one-time costs: * ' ���� Revised 8-29 per Finance Memo —mow Amaiommwsiousi IMIIIMIMIIIIII or la 1111 WA Earla'W��,wOft mills=, ■ /SE Ai 4ellit 1 00 TO 1 lai LW Wal IFi NO * 1 IIII itilailied 111 NI 111611111%itilludr...11 7. -A� „ PiLIII • � � w• • ,/--- w„,,,- 1101.1 r�� SE 95t Iv' y milli Q `e kr c �E� o Pi s.95th Wa I1iLIUf Da r` ///,'' z 1111 i PM Mr" diti .,,fri; il 4,414, IIII a memembp, . v.., a1in .—wig -I= k • *. ratargt NA* al■ii WIN . In U1111111011�i11111L Il11611311I1.2 OR" 1%1 we iit, mop DAMN toe na ■■j It%Ut4kIb ' �Wi i!1111p41:eJuII: gwNE4dd err rr %Aso, mo � LI:i!PMir.v �iniso .n 11111111st St � y. .r ���h a1 111 ift111witive op.� � ,�. tt4ç1iiti 'MOW#14j:: =ni il1::: ' i_ I.' atiffa1[IEYi111 MI6 4" II gill G,� n11� TIMM mow ��!!I ii `A ' s�,': : �� �1i�� W�■91' as �. Y1■YJ�1t 111111;L��� li �y S Cl � Wok/t�;■nan�■nia fp ■111/■ • po �m F al Mori., mo gP1fl; =�� 1/I 1 '��. clic• z � � cp . =mo1 & e`d! ErI' I 11.lII . •• • r W, p �` ia&ntim, cu 111162 uta& . * BRIM' Amp ar'' mei /P III INSIElt. �111i■t simummilhomme 'mom III I P lad 111. mo I mg I !a ■ 1.t gra nt, a 3 NZ im Co if i ibm.,,, Fre, vin imm.d — ppr Ait§ sm � .! ■■I MN in G' AN 141 ft fir: � "1914=-V1111% i11�illasem v) mft ii111 =Lim PA i III � �� Q . 1.11 fp ■ J� � d � :Ilii 1\ � I� ,-Proposed Perkins Annexation 0 800 1600 Figure 1:Vicinity Map ,t, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning i 1 Annexation Area 1 : 9600 � � lexDel Rosario Piet cs, Administrato ——r G. — City Limits eato 21)September 2005 IIS Cj pi 1 • T't i itirk �„�• SE 9SE ',t � 5 t 'v"v'a y, cr) Agof w :1, 0 45, is . hewijLt h PI o°N •1 0 `9L5� 1 S ii cw � o FL_A ._e_ ./ II _ 0 imminimal111111111. Ail T 14! 11 st p 7 d o > iliiii PI aC3 IMI PD InaSierra Heights 4160 MIN �' p ��6 1'11 Elementary School • a rani routs tri 1 t ❑ ❑ 0 % T tE �0 i gm o W leii• r IF [F (61 1111MINNI o il3irti 'NW wries46 FM Art ril a ;.-- It 11614 1 ta railaion EMI 11,/ a.` Im un Emu • Dm/ A ta- lilt MEI glitniile,s1ANS41 ,� u�� Ai VIM6. It1laNaLill WM 141,1 ''" Ilte. WIWI' I Raffdi ci;VCIDE PIERPreOft° cliw 1 10. 101 ito r--.1.c Ell Frimmal'ami - i . N. id...: 0) er..,cv A *An as i-rn mirtitemarliffur, illim___Mr4 44> * p'• *6 wi 1C 13 4 r,i _ 4 „tea -� � a � , ,� � �*WO Li kvi coo v z mi �. tl .S,. "IL ""al D ril &,._ , t 2lioIki EAR Ki ,111 I r. Imo. T o n 11111 00 a q f:� , 611 1� �� `•� It,-_1 . • ���■�00 allre,l.1_14 , NtaProposed Perkins Annexation 0 400 800 ci, o-,,,r, Figure 4: Structure Map 1. c T ♦,t, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning 1 : 4800 ♦ ♦ Alex Pietsch,Administrator L—_.— City Li Annexation Area G.Del Rosario --_—-- City Limits .tR`NTO 20 September 2005 C Structure //.... ' -Y Rte,• Ya _PI ' ti _ yy I` ---,,--L rL r-RI ' Li � th t/ t1 1 m � t ; Q I t `� s _ I � \-/ n I____T___Hi — I ____ 1_477 . _Nr) it ! I t I � �1 _ I. ,i 4 \ may,_•- ._� '_� - _ _I_ 11---V-`1 -; j ,� - - fes= \ -_;: ' 1. Y- \ I �,. ___ , , _ .,. • ;–= o) '. 7, . 1LF--rI _ INE& 12• ' .- IMF .' ' I — (---7 1 • Yom- • — llif _ 4,U-i r . 1, , ,-.\\‘,,:. / . ._. / cNi,,,,,,„, � :. = �� wry. ... . _, .. 1 J ' I .,A___„ • Ifr •L,� 1c� fir: 1 l ' I ri —: . - % -' . 4 ' 7\_ ,i- ..,,, ,1 J-Itsli d , -_____' . 1 t I-St, LI I, .1____±_i, ' ''' - f L------\ \ - - ' I, , . , . , . • •••_:, 1• ,-.A ' i--- ------ - 'CD III c— 1 .1"."---**". '1 11 • ' __''' r !el r momum. 0 _ -- .._A, "1.1 -, . - pi ,-2, ' ....--- ___..7/ i ." 1 ___ -,8 .4., ..., ..---,.... Eg. I ''roposed Perkins Annexation 0 400 800 'S'' Figure 3:Topography Map t Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning [ Annexation Area 1 : 4800 •�1. Alex Pietsch,Administrator G.Del Rosario -� City LimitsN 20 September 2005 1 m Contour King County Department of Assessments Scott Noble King County Administration Bldg. 500 Fourth Avenue,Room 708 Assessor Seattle,WA 98104-2384 (206)296-5195 FAX(206)296-0595 Email:assessor.info@metrokc.gov www.metrokc.gov/assessor/ ANNEXATION PETITION CERTIFICATION THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the petition submitted December 20, 2005 to the King County Department of Assessments by Don Erickson, Senior Planner for the City of Renton, supporting the annexation to Renton of the properties described as the Perkins Annexation, has been examined, the property taxpayers, tax parcel numbers, and assessed value of properties listed thereon carefully compared with the King County tax roll records, and as a result of such examination, found to be sufficient under the provisions of the New Section of Revised Code of Washington, Section 35.13.002. The Department of Assessments has not verified that the signature on the petition is valid through comparison with any record of actual signatures, nor that the signature was obtained or submitted in an appropriate time frame, and this document does not certify such to be the case. Dated this 22nd day of December, 2005 Scott Noble, King C ty Assessor CITY OF RENTOR -- 006 PETITION TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF RENTON DEC 1 2 2005 UNDER RCW 35A.14.120 o Applicant:,S014‘.1 M.l.on�q CCT CLERKRECEIVED S OFFICE (60% Petition—Perkins Annexation) Address: 1- .144 1JE '1-1 t4i (VM TO: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON 93059 EMS P 1055 South Grady Way Telephone No.'�3 60(,c16a�i 1`�ef Renton, WA 98055 The undersigned are owners of not less than sixty percent(60%)in value according to the assessed valuation for general taxation, of real property located contiguous to the City of Renton. We hereby petition that such property be annexed to the City of Renton under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 et seq. The territory proposed to be annexed is within King County, Washington, and is contiguous to the City of Renton. A map (Exhibit 1)and legal description(Exhibit 2) are included as part of this petition. In response to a duly filed and considered "Notice of Intention"to commence annexation proceedings, the City Council of the City of Renton met with the initiating parties under RCW 35A.14.120 on November 21, 2005. The City Council then determined that the City would accept the 10%Notice of Intention petition and authorize circulation of this petition. Further, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120,the undersigned petitioners agree to: (1) Accept the City's simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's land use designations for the subject property; and, (2) Assume their proportional share of the City's pre-existing bonded indebtedness(approximately 8 cents per each$1,000 of assessed value). all as noted in the minutes of the Council meeting and contained in the electronic recording of such meeting. WHEREFORE, the undersigned property owners petition the City Council and ask: (a) That the City Council fix a date for a public hearing about such proposed annexation,cause a notice to be published and posted, specifying the time and place of such hearing, and inviting all persons who are interested to appear at the hearing and state their approval or disapproval of such annexation or to ask questions; and (b) That following such hearing, and consistent with any approval by the Boundary Review Board, the City Council by ordinance annex the above described territory to become part of the City of Renton, Washington, subject to its laws and ordinances then and thereafter in force, and to receive City public services. This two page form is one of a number of identical forms which comprise one petition seeking *ow the annexation of the described territory to the City of Renton, Washington as above stated, and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures. Page 1 of 2 Perkins Annexation 60%Direct Petition to Annex WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions,or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter,or signs a petition when he or she is otherwise not qualified to sign, or who makes herein any false statement,shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Neof The undersigned have read the above petition and consent to the filing of this petition. (Names ofpetoners should be in identical form as the same that appear on record in the chain of tide to the real estate.) L`7' : C :,=k;�3"_1-^'+2`c "-r-�-r$z-+ °-t 1, ++s'�C p c F Li FE It FBF ! QEF ,: �Ettl Fmk L � a €tFPC 1 r WCIC G4r/VC PER 0(1 t° 13a R c5iiy 2. Scwe_A 4✓/rills 16�3 13a e.S£. ff'1305-11 14> r 3. /9/,/615 arron V,,,,dermalt t 1-3 .14.1.56. 4. 4111 ,44,01 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Page 2 of 2 2 1111151101111MMI ., "011471" :,S) b- III° sEggo �- EXHIBIT 1 0 ft 1111 I I I A 4 I I I I I Ijill I!tit et PAI I I Val" • - tballill# •i . ■ ergs �„�/ rj%//r0 �ANimird mid mi.® Will= lw Allr 0 laku.,„, " SE 95t � � I V� x ff c ` ; - "11 95th Wa00 /��1- ii groh th pi in IN ' 49,5, 95 pi lIl t .1011 s Alb% 11 irem%Aug a'.' ! :77:torilikig� ,IIS• .411 w� ■� o iru�„! �t,i���i�iY 119;111 WE A N Ii41 tic igil auras mug EWAmou um i fin owe min Roo r'���� li111i11iiil�i. 1112111 111111/11111!111. •� E riiszkr as 1111! !1!!1111! UZIIR!I' no 0 --N stswilwojivrat 1111614 11; :op rellimal a Immissilfrowril 11111"1110":11 ifirA st st 4,,,.. f tali rail, .. i.ICIaE��i�1�.111iC %•� /, giii vu �� �I Ib. � �/ !RIi1!V :::: �i11 !,! >. . ,�• 4 ■�. 1, 1 'i•� ► °� iii C ii An AI��[� . =dna i �= "I ' loon,o : :1 ii' I!J W��l mi 111liUJy� unman moi► .../4 11 is 46isit'iddizsairsis ♦ �c• VO" �. iriNgyrrifil rim *'"4- L 111111 gliqr ■ P' a ri 1 ma mi co il ■4 lit i )-Z1111ii.7 "Ploirmil mi. up if! I, IN iks ''11,. i r. il Uu hib ill .� /e§ w IE. is 4z, Aft is Ogaste FM Iiiii "II 4 me "VANN 'ai r4 IR 111.6"; Mipprk 4 a 11E1.111 mi /111111= NI 11.._ LS Itilatill phs MIELIIIIIMI IMP 1111L-LAile Loposed Perkins Annexation 0 800 1600 Figure 1:Vicinity Map :::>::��.::::::::>:.;::::<:::•:••::;::::>:;:: • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Alex per,,Administrator Annexation Area 1 : 9600 G.De!Rosario """" City Limits „Le' 20 September 2005 EXHIBIT 2 PERKINS ANNEXATION_ LEGAL DESCRIPTION The north 491.24 feet of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 4, Township 23 North,Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; EXCEPT that portion of the east 30 feet thereof lying southerly of the existing City Limits of Renton, as annexed by Ordinance No. 4195; TOGETHER WITH that portion of the west 30 feet (132nd Ave SE)of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 3, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington lying northerly of the existing City Limits of Renton, as annexed by Ordinance No. 4195; and TOGETHER WITH the south 120 feet of the north 384 feet of the east 181.5 feet of the west 211.5 feet of said northwest quarter of the northwest quarter. CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: tf7 tr Submitting Data: For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board.. EDNSP May 22, 2006 Staff Contact Rebecca Lind (x6588) Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. East Renton Sewer Moratorium Correspondence.. Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Study Sessions Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Council concur. Legal Dept Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The current moratorium on out-of-city- sewer certificates in the East Renton Plateau annexation area(aka, Preserve Our Plateau Annexation) is set to expire June 5, 2006. The Council has referred the question of a possible extension to the Utilities Committee, scheduled for discussion June 1, 2006. A public hearing is required to extend the moratorium. Due to the timing of the referral and the Committee's schedule,the public hearing must be announced prior to the Committee's opportunity to discuss the matter. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set a public hearing to discuss to potential extension of the out-of-city sewer moratorium in the East Renton Plateau potential annexation area for June 5, 2006. Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 5/22/2006 %kw, Dept/Div/Board.. EDNSP Staff Contact Mark Santos-Johnson Agenda Status Ext. 6584 Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Correspondence.. Agreement—Chateau de Ville Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Planning and Development Committee Legal Dept Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... N/A Transfer/Amendment N/A Amount Budgeted N/A Revenue Generated N/A Total Pro'ect Bud:et N/A Cit Share Total Pro'ectN/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: In December 2003, the Council established a property tax exemption incentive to encourage multi-family housing development in designated residential targeted areas. In March 2006, the City received a Multi- Family Housing Property Tax Exemption application for the Chateau de Ville in the Downtown designated residential targeted area. As provided for in RMC 4-1-220,the EDNSP Administrator needs to approve or deny the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption application within 90 days of receipt of the application and, if approved,the applicant must enter into an agreement approved by the Council that addresses the terms and conditions for the Chateau de Ville project to receive a partial property tax exemption upon completion. Subject to the Council's approval of the agreement,the EDNSP Administrator intends to approve the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption application for the Chateau de Ville project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve a Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement that addresses the terms and conditions for a partial property tax exemption upon completion of the Chateau de Ville project and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement in substantially the same form. �( y 0� ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, G aNEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: May 12, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: 1/0.Mayor Kathy Keolker FROM: Alex Pietsch,Administrator Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: Mark Santos-Johnson, Economic Development Specialist ext. 6584 SUBJECT: Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement —Chateau de Ville Now ISSUE: In March 2006, the City received a Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption application for the Chateau de Ville in the Downtown designated residential targeted area. As provided for in RMC 4-1-220, the EDNSP Administrator needs to approve or deny the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption application within 90 days of receipt of the application and, if approved, the applicant must enter into an agreement approved by the Council that addresses the terms and conditions for the Chateau de Ville project to receive a partial property tax exemption upon completion. Subject to the Council's approval of the agreement, the EDNSP Administrator intends to approve the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption application for the Chateau de Ville project. RECOMMENDATION: EDNSP recommends that the Council: (1) approve the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement that addresses the terms and conditions for the Chateau de Ville to receive a partial property tax exemption upon completion; and(2) authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement in substantially the same form. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: As authorized by Chapter 84.14 RCW,the Council adopted Ordinance 5061 on December 22, 2003, Ordinance 5151 on August 1, 2005, and Ordinance 5192 on January 23, 2006,to establish c:\docume-1\msanto—1\locals-1\temp\gwviewer\issuepaper-mfhpte agreement-chateau de ville draft 5-12-06.doc Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Page 2 of 4 Agreement—Chateau de Ville May 12,2006 and subsequently amend a property tax exemption incentive(codified in RMC 4-1-220)to encourage multi-family housing development in the following designated residential targeted areas: Highlands: Within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation: Center Village(CV) zone, Residential Multi-Family(RM-F) zone,or Residential 10 du/ac (R-10) zone Downtown: Center Downtown(CD) zone, Residential Multi-Family Urban Center(RM-U) zone, or Residential Multi-Family Traditional(RM-T)zone South Lake Washington: Urban Center North District 1 (UC-N1) zone, or properties within the Urban Center North District 2 (UC-N2)zone that were designated as eligible for exemption by Ordinance 5151 and developed with a residential multi-family project vested to the requirements of the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone. As outlined in Chapter 84.14 RCW and RMC 4-1-220, the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption(MFHPTE)provision allows the value of qualified new housing construction to be exempt from ad valorem property taxation for ten successive years after completion of the project. However, the exemption does not include the value of the land, existing improvements or non- housing-related improvements (e.g., commercial space). The multi-family housing property tax exemption applies to all levels of the ad valorem property tax, including the local jurisdiction, county, state, and all local taxing districts. The multi-family housing property tax exemption is in addition to any other tax credits, grants, or incentives provided by law for the multi-family housing. The City received a MFHPTE application for the Chateau de Ville on March 16, 2006. The project is a four story, 50-unit condominium building with 53,702 sf of residential space and 21,939 sf of below-grade parking with 75 parking spaces. Chateau de Ville is a for-sale residential project. Please see Attachment 1 for additional project information and the potential projected multi-family housing property tax exemption for the project and Attachment 2 for a related map. The estimated potential property tax savings related to the MFHPTE are approximately$64,673 per year($646,732 for the ten-year period) for the Chateau de Ville project. This equates to a potential property tax savings of approximately$1,293 per year per housing unit($12,935 per housing unit for the ten-year period). The City of Renton's portion of the above estimated potential property tax savings related to the MFHPTE is approximately$16,869 per year($168,691 for the ten-year period) for the Chateau de Ville project. Although the City will receive additional property tax revenue from any increased assessed value for the land as a result of the new construction on site, the City will not receive property tax revenue from the residential improvements until after the ten-year property tax exemption period. c:\docume—l\msanto--1\locals-1\temp\gwviewer\issuepaper-mfhpte agreement-chateau de vine draft 5-12-06.doc Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Page 3 of 4 Agreement—Chateau de Ville May 12,2006 As part of the City's MFHPTE application, applicants are invited to comment on whether the ability to obtain a property tax exemption for their project made a difference in their decision to develop the project. For the Chateau de Ville project, the applicant noted: "When we first looked at the Renton market in 2002 the incentives the City was offering made economic sense. In 2002 our liability insurance was $54,000 per year and by August of 2003 that had increased to $120,000. The quote that we have now to insure us for the Chateau de Ville project is $486,000. Waiving the building permit fees will offset some of this increased cost, and the real estate exemption is equally important since it will allow us to offer housing at a very competitive price. The tax exemption program will make the units affordable to a larger group of buyers." The project paid a$500 initial application fee and satisfies the City's MFHPTE eligibility requirements as outlined in RMC 4-1-220D: • The multi-family housing units are located in one or more new buildings designed for permanent residential occupancy, each with four or more dwelling units; • The project is located in the Residential Multi-Family Urban Center(RM-U) zone as part of the Downtown designated residential targeted area; and • The project consists of a minimum of 10 dwelling units. As provided for in RMC 4-1-220F, the EDNSP Administrator needs to approve or deny the Now, MFHPTE application within 90 days of receipt and, if approved, the applicant must enter into an agreement approved by the Council that addresses the terms and conditions for the Chateau de Ville project to receive a partial property tax exemption upon completion. Subject to the Council's approval of the agreement, the EDNSP Administrator intends to approve the MFHPTE application for the Chateau de Ville project. Please see Attachment 3 for the proposed MFHPTE Agreement for the Chateau de Ville. The Chateau de Ville project will expand the housing opportunities in downtown Renton, increase the population in the Urban Center Downtown designated area to help support existing and future businesses in the area, and thereby, assist the City's efforts to further revitalize downtown Renton. CONCLUSION: Renton's Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption program was established to help increase housing opportunities in designated residential targeted areas, including Downtown. The Chateau de Ville project will provide an additional 50 condominium units to complement the City's downtown revitalizations efforts and further the City's 2006-2011 Business Plan Goals. Enc: Attachment 1-Chateau de Ville Project Information and Potential Projected Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Attachment 2-Proposed Project for Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption map Attachment 3 -Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement for the Chateau de Ville c:\docume-1\msanto-1\locals—l\temp\gwviewer\issuepaper-mfhpte agreement-chateau de ville draft 5-12-06.doc Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Page 4 of 4 Agreement—Chateau de Ville May 12,2006 cc: Jay Covington,CAO Bonnie Walton,City Clerk *4100 Michael Bailey,Finance&IS Administrator Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator Neil Watts,Development Services Director Nomil c:\docume-1\msanto--l\locals--1\temp\gwviewer\issuepaper-mfhpte agreement-chateau de ville draft 5-12-06.doc Attachment 1 Chateau de Ville Project Information and Potential Projected Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Based on City's Projected Assessed Values for Project May 12,2006 Project Information(Based on Information Provided by Applicant) Project Name Chateau de Ville Street Address 110 Williams Avenue S Owner Chateau de Ville,LLC Residential Targeted Area Center Downtown Zoning Residential Multi-Family Urban Center(RM-U) Four-story,50-unit condominium building with 53,702 sf of residential and 21,939 sf of below-grade parking. The building will provide 28 one-bedroom units and 22 two- Brief Project Description bedroom units with 75 parking spaces. Estimated Construction Start Date March 2006 Estimated Completion Date April 2007 Type of Project Residential For-Sale Residential Unit Breakdown Area(Range in SF) Studio Apartments 0 One-Bedroom Apartments 28 628 to 822 Two-Bedroom Apartments 22 968 to 1046 Three-Bedroom Apartments 0 Studio Town House 0 One-Bedroom Town House 0 Two-Bedroom Town House 0 Three-Bedroom Town House 0 Total Residential Units 50 Planned Building Improvements Residential Units SF 43,446 Residential Common Areas SF 10,256 Residential Structured Parking SF 21,939 Sub-Total Residential SF 75,641 Non-Residential SF 0 Retail Non-Residential Common Area SF 0 Non-Residential Structured Parking SF 0 Retail Sub-Total Non-Residential SF 0 Total Residential&Non-Residential SF 75,641 Residential Percentage of Project 100.00% Retail/Commercial Percentage of Project 0.00% Parking Stalls Residential Non-Residential Total Structured Parking 75 0 75 Surface Parking 0 0 0 Totals 75 0 75 Projected Total Cost of All Improvements(New Construction/Rehabilitation) $7,218,955 Projected Cost of Residential Improvements $7,218,955 Projected Cost of Residential Improvements per Housing Unit $144,379 Projected Cost of Residential Improvements per SF $95.44 Projected Cost of Non-Residential Improvements $0 Current Assessed Value(from King County Assessor's Office online records) NOle Land SF 24,206 Current Assessed Value for Land(2006) $203,000 Current Assessed Value for Land per SF $8.39 Fortner single-family residential structure demolished in October 2005 Current Assessed Value for Improvements $156,000 for project Chateau de Ville Projected Property Tax Calculation Estimated Assessed Value for Land after (Reflects current land value but subject to increase based on increased Construction/Rehabilitaton $203,000 improvements to site) Estimated Assessed Value for All Improvements after Construction/Rehabilitation $5,414,216 (Estimated by Cityat 75%of projected construction costs) Total Estimated Assessed Value for Land&All Improvements after Construction/Rehabilitation $5,617,216(Estimated by City at 75%of projected construction costs) Estimated Assessed Value for Residential Improvements after Construction $5,414,216(Estimated by City at 75%of projected construction costs) Estimated Assessed Value for Improvements per Housing Unit $108,284 Estimated Assessed Value for Non-Residential Improvements after Construction $0(Estimated by City at 75%of projected construction costs) Projected 20r061 Rate Estimated Estimated Property Total Estimated per$1,000 of Estimated Property Tax for Tax for Non- Property Tax Breakdown of Projected Property Tax Assessed Property Tex for Residential Residential (Land& (Based on Projected 2006 Property Tax Rates) Value Land Improvements Improvements Improvements) City of Renton—General Levy 3.04482 $618 $16,485 $0 $17,103 City of Renton—Special Levy 0.07088 $14 $384 $0 $398 Total City of Renton property tax 3.11570 $632 $16,869 $0 $17,502 King County 1.32869 $270 $7,194 $0 $7,464 Port of Seattle 0.23330 $47 $1,263 $0 $1,310 Hospital District#1 0.59000 $120 $3,194 $0 $3,314 Renton School District#403 3.95970 $804 $21,439 $0 $22,242 State of Washington School Fund 2.49787 $507 $13,524 $0 $14,031 Emergency Medical Service 0.21982 $45 $1,190 $0 $1,235 Sub-total other property tax 8.82938 $1,792 $47,804 $$$$0000 0 $49,597 Total Property Tax 11.94508 $2,425 $84,673 $0 $67,098 Estimated Annual Property Tax per Housing Unit $48 $1,293 $0 $1,342 44141,, � ' i.14 si.• a ' v, " , " 'te ., r „ he ' .. x'��'"i'""'' tom tY 5 � Wi ' �` . ` � ; t rt r d �, ��4�' *kms � � 1' „` - € � Chateau de Ville Potential Projected Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Based on Applicant's Projected Assessed Values for Project May 12, 2006 Project Information (Based on Information Provided by Applicant) Project Name Chateau de Ville Street Address 110 Williams Avenue S Owner Chateau de Ville,LLC Number of Housing Units 50 Current Assessed Value(from King County Assessor's Office online records) Land SF 24,206 Current Assessed Value for Land(2006) $203,000 Current Assessed Value for Land per SF $8.39 Former single-family residential structure demolished in October Current Assessed Value for Improvements $156,000 2005 for project Chateau de Ville Projected Property Tax Calculation(Based on Applicant's Projected Assessed Values) Applicant's Estimated Assessed Value for Land after Construction/Rehabilitation $1,350,000 Applicant's Estimated Assessed Value for All Improvements after Construction/Rehabilitation $8,375,000 Applicant's Estimated Assessed Value for Land&All Improvements after Construction/Rehabilitation $9,725,000 Applicant's Estimated Assessed Value for Residential Improvements after Construction/Rehabilitation $8,375,000 Applicant's Estimated Assessed Value for Non-Residential Improvements after Construction/Rehabilitation $0 Applicant's Estimated Assessed Value for Improvements per Housing Unit $167,500 Projected 2006 Rate Estimated Estimated Total Estimated per$1,000 of Estimated Property Tax Property Tax for Property Tax Breakdown of Projected Property Tax Assessed Property Tax for Residential Non-Residential (Land& (Based on Projected 2006 Property Tax Rates) Value for Land Improvements Improvements Improvements) City of Renton-General Levy 3.14843 $4,250 $26,368 $0.00 $30,618 City of Renton-Special Levy 0.07861 $106 $658 $0.00 $764 Total City of Renton property tax 3.22704 $4,357 $27,026 $0.00 $31,383 King County 1.38229 $1,866 $11,577 $0.00 $13,443 Port of Seattle 0.25321 $342 $2,121 $0.00 $2,462 Hospital District#1 0.09039 $122 $757 $0.00 $879 Renton School District#403 3.99250 $5,390 $33,437 $0.00 $38,827 State of Washington School Fund 2.68951 $3,631 $22,525 $0.00 $26,155 Emergency Medical Service 0.23182 $313 $1,941 $0.00 $2,254 m✓ Sub-total other property tax 8.63972 $11,664 $72,358 $0 $84,021 Total Property Tax 11.86676 $16,020 $99,384 $0 $115,404 Estimated Annual Property Tax per Housing Unit $320 $1,988 $0 $2,308 l'P " ,� `'� -,t-' - 3 ' '� �' -ril , ) c �. :x, .epi „ r 4 4•,s,V. z5 Fay t . -.z. - ° ' .2-' ` k�,� • $ ���� ��,..+ t'''`°' eI� icy• x ��Ft�§- �,�33e �� s II'. �y c �" '�"' t `��,���� � � ," �i +z.\*--' " t v y� Eif,;i, 6'i 3 € ✓ .,E ''' ss'•- ,,,:,.4.; `z. �.....,. s,. � ,,,.a.'', w. y - 3s. - t s r-•s � ¢ a�" "r sa" ,,i ,.":.. tt.�-=-: ', :et - tr,,,;-. sg.{ s}}V �, ' i * y, ," � ,-.4,.. ' sy F y� fsys xp �l��i�, �§'4 f �,• r .� � � �. T €�w A� - x .2 i, t` * ' } R y ��� �P�y t�7.. `tel?�s t}s� Sp��i' 'i`3`�t`Y- ' �� ����� r� '. i -.;�+�� � y�E-�3 q�,P - '; '3:'-. ". ,§ µ' T :�x sr s �. n �°!x"11` r� ':-, . N5 Cf`% E '`i (j e F � - .--: ':.. � s : { E . %i: ,. 3` 'i ,,s i i. d� s Tad t � 't�. '•a - . + x 4{ t x tx 0 mow s .:',.:.'t-"*`'''''' .s tVt`'`' ' 'l� � q c F x- t • i i - E�!x Y x lta r;T "° e-s• .. ir aka t li�'C .,a "�,' `t`��. '„=' -•z..; v"m:,,. r� yt£ -. •�?' Attachment 2 wow1wii ■YY■iii'.ci171i:IG Ili::....-..0.11:ae, u unem.-��forowi11_. � 1►j'4 lidliel\ 1i!:! r-It7 4 ■:a i.■trfiitll�.`�,. ■Iio AW/■aa‘aart•� • ■MI aI . ��ai1:■_ralip II 110■I 1 �I ra_.a• ■�QIf ils■ ■ r �4 A �� �� '-'71':'' ■ i � G=fin;.....■■■.�'■:ins= , , �;I I t 1�'' 1�`i€�1�'i11 it ■FL..a�-■ta a bi4I b■ . 111V I ■■ra■a0.--i!.e■EM■1 --� iit eai �� 1 IU■ r1iItgt'! ', ) i ���. t��i >>73V. '��{YitYl /- �� ���'. r y a■.. M_. Fa �+ipii i > i, ,,° � ' '4 E :a S ,�i ■aYlrnl■ ■ 900 cied � \ :',11.:',;7, '. 7eir� :+�:•„ 1J o 1 l I;t .,1 a� la■■lN 7 d 111141114111111111141 ' � '< , a 111111111 Mg u■ ;f2 IS agtellaNIUM=I a ' -a■�I\�I QT Y \lit it III z ai ��� ttr+ �:al.Cullllll C-i��ircumancial � �:��nncroj ego. eun 111111111111 s illill _v.U!!lSII: of in i�. a i 1 ■■r�,p�■O�Oln u■I 11 r A W. .'isrlia rl �I IIIINgII {:..j I�i ri_1 4 r-Ei,, > IJ(' N1 WE'aigill.-2 °' :��'��1 4ii� LtP �, r Nath St. urs ■., <' ......i tr s:■■■��1■■■:iii. ]i 111 IIar1 ii ri j r 111.I411j'IYIj�1� �{ -%OF%OM���=C7��M1T71'It11G11111 Y 'ttr qIH rAIIP • Y1 , _ ��'�~I-\111 IYLYIjI II •IqI ` {11 1111 �� I/IMg I� 1 Ili • IIIA 1R!!!11p11� ul�■■,""� iti 1 © 11i1m im Bk. , A qct 40—wiiIsll. II!Irl in%'A 1 �i r i:1r �off"p i,1�I �1��13 1. ui YJ:unsii\d04, N stn SL N 6t -■ ■� j ,\♦ill44 4;;N*•.O —,---- ■ w/ HIEMIA II■NIII j ,X 711`■ ate-- '2V411$1* � 411$1,. 1•' Fil ■ IIIIYLiIi:l 111117LYI \� �5!g. • unre�llvo7•Iokira t•� s ■I■ a Bo Flom i mnl IMP cal■ u OO _Er.77. iiii J i�r �i,.� I"t F►` mop lima I pi �/■�Wal111E if =EL'-O .6u J�,�./►"Sis ,;�a' p41;SI�zu 4211■0,or 111 so Ora h liner ���i NE El E■ ► Ti rrtle� `/.9at[�la-a 111 Comm Q iid CIE i, N 4th St ,• Vfr�, ■�- NE 4th St iimi 111111111 t al El II LI ill liFinfirill i a 11- 4 OW Duni! ..� ■=1 i3 deN61, 4 eaa c o �, I1� - - Ville frkit NE _E-_" Arport Way 0 4, `J: V ille 12w _ NE 2nd St ■ m■1ME �� �,. 122 El Ili-1:����[[- 4:411:,!:T'Ijitill'1:lrri'"litllic: /4411 muums '✓ . ma_is■.■ IY4 .Llak +•g. • '��I ' mini- 11 5 1' t.I, C 41 rilr =. iia_ ` IIIIIIIIgq�illYlY1 , lir, . C �■ • AM , \,,•yIi.ra—_ , = `,mo•ifvI p.r - Ili ■■ ' :1 1,c>� 4,�I 1lux Mir II i��.'G�'r".i�i�!yirt ®♦®e ii� 1 • on '�a1� `• `. ti4 % cf��ttltlli�'� pm- <.I A 1� .-N�\: 1 Nt+' ------ 447414:34 � 7���j 1111�ii����i��i `f► IA♦If. ITIMIR :43 .�c SIC az_I �■1 11111111ML, I�•♦ .Ci wiivá cill.0 CSI �:� a .Alin 31ta Proposed Project for Multi-Family Housing S. roperty Tax Exemption Residential Targeted Areas: me Downtown • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Iris Highlands •(af t♦ Alex Netsch,Administrator �_� • tel cos ° - South Lake Washington N.�O 9 May 2006 Attachment 3 MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT FOR CHATEAU DE VILLE THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of , 200 by and between CHATEAU DE VILLE, LLC (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Applicant"), and the CITY OF RENTON, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City"). Recitals. 1. Applicant has applied to the City for a limited property tax exemption as provided for in Chapter 84.14 RCW and RMC 4-1-220 for multi-family housing residential for-sale housing located in the Residential Multi-Family Urban Center (RM-U) zone as part of the Downtown residential targeted area and the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator has approved the application; and 2. Applicant has submitted to the City preliminary site plans, floor plans and elevations for Chateau de Ville with fifty (50) new multi-family housing condominium units (hereinafter referred to as the "Project") on property situated at 110 Williams Avenue South, Renton, Washington, and more fully described in Exhibit A attached hereto, (hereinafter referred to as the "Property"); and 3. Applicant is the owner of the Property; and 4. The City has determined that the Project will, if developed as proposed, satisfy the requirements for a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and Applicant do mutually agree as follows: 1. Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption City agrees, upon execution of this Agreement following approval by the City Council, to issue a Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption, which conditional certificate shall expire three (3) years from the date of approval of this Agreement by the City Council, unless extended by the Administrator of the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department (or any other City Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Chateau de Ville, p. 1 �' Name office, department or agency that shall succeed to its functions), or his or her designee, (hereafter referred to as "Administrator") as provided in RMC 4-1-2201. 2. Agreement to Construct Multi-Family Housing. a. Applicant agrees to construct the Project on the Property substantially as described in the site plans, floor plans, and elevations on file with the City's Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department or its functional successor(hereafter referred to as "Department") as of the date of the City Council's approval of this Agreement, subject to such modifications thereto as may be required to comply with applicable codes and ordinances; provided, that in no event shall such construction provide fewer than thirty (30) new multi-family housing dwelling units designed for permanent residential occupancy. b. Applicant agrees to construct the Project on the Property to comply with all applicable zoning requirements, land use regulations, and building and housing code requirements, including but not limited to the City's development regulations in Title IV of the RMC and the City's applicable design standards and guidelines. The Applicant further agrees that approval of this Agreement by the City Council, its execution by the Mayor, or issuance of a Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption by the City pursuant to RMC 4-1-220F3 in no way constitutes approval of proposed improvements on the Property with respect to applicable provisions of the City's lotow development regulations included in Title IV of the RMC or any other applicable regulation or obligates the City to approve proposed improvements to the Property. c. Applicant agrees that the Project will be completed within three years from the date of approval of this Agreement by the Council, unless extended by the Administrator for cause as provided in RMC 4-1-2201. 3. Requirements for Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. Applicant may, upon completion of the Project and upon issuance by the City of a temporary certificate of occupancy, or a permanent certificate of occupancy if no temporary certificate is issued, request a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. The request shall be in writing directed to the Administrator and be accompanied by the following: a. A statement of expenditures made with respect to each multi-family housing unit and the total expenditures made with respect to the entire Project and Property; Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Chateau de Ville, p. 2 svird b. A description of the completed work and a statement of qualification for the multi-family housing property tax exemption; c. A statement that the Project was completed within the required three-year period or any authorized extension and documentation that the Project was completed in compliance with the terms of this Agreement; and d. Any such further information that the Administrator deems necessary or useful to evaluate the Project's eligibility for the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. 4. Agreement to Issue Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. The City agrees to file a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption with the King County Assessor within forty (40) days of submission by the Applicant of all materials required by paragraph 3 above, if Applicant has: a. Successfully completed the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and RMC 4-1-220; b. Filed a request with the City for a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption with the Administrator and submitted the materials described in Paragraph 3 above ; c. Paid the City a fee in the amount of two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00); and d. Met all other requirements provided in RMC 4-1-220 for issuance of the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. 5. Annual Certification. Within thirty (30) days after the first anniversary of the date the City filed the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption and each year thereafter for a period of ten (10) years, Applicant agrees to file a certification or declaration with the Administrator, verified upon oath or affirmation, with respect to the accuracy of the information provided therein, containing the following: a. A statement of the occupancy and vacancy of the multi-family housing units during the previous year; b. A certification that the multi-family housing units, Project and Property have not changed use since the date of filing of the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption, Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Chateau de Ville, p. 3 —w c. A statement that the multi-family housing units, Project and Property continue to be in compliance with this Agreement and the requirements of RMC 4-1- 220; d. A description of any improvements or changes to the Project made after the filing of the Final Certificate or the most recent certification; and e. Any such further information that the Administrator deems necessary or useful to evaluate eligibility for the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. 6. No Violations for Duration of Exemption. For the duration of the property tax exemption granted under RMC 4-1-220, Applicant agrees that the Project and the Property will have no violations of applicable zoning requirements, land use regulations, and building and housing code requirements, including but not limited to the development regulations in Title IV of the RMC, for which the Planning, Building and Public Works Department or its functional successor shall have issued a notice of violation, citation or other notification that is not resolved by a certificate of compliance, certificate of release, withdrawal or otherwise, within the time period for compliance, if any, provided in such notice of violation, citation or other notification or any extension of the time period for compliance granted by the Planning, Building and Public Works Department. 7. Notification of Transfer of Interest or Change in Use. Applicant agrees to notify the Administrator within thirty (30) days of any transfer of Applicant's ownership interest in the Project, the Property or any improvements made to the Property. Applicant further agrees to notify the Administrator and the King County Assessor within sixty (60) days of any change of use of any or all of the multi- family housing units on the Property to another use. Applicant acknowledges that such a change in use may result in cancellation of the property tax exemption and imposition of additional taxes, interest and penalty pursuant to State law. 8. Cancellation of Exemption - Appeal. a. The City reserves the right to cancel the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption if at any time the multi-family housing units, the Project or the Property no longer complies with the terms of this Agreement or with the requirements of RMC 4-1- 220, or for any other reason no longer qualifies for a property tax exemption. b. If the property tax exemption is canceled for non-compliance, Applicant acknowledges that state law requires that an additional real property tax is to be Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Chateau de Ville, p. 4 .00 imposed in the amount of: [a}the difference between the property tax paid and the `" property tax that would have been paid if it had included the value of the nonqualifying improvements, dated back to the date that the improvements became nonqualifying; [b] a penalty of 20% of the difference calculated under paragraph (a) of this paragraph 8; [c] interest at the statutory rate on delinquent property taxes and penalties, calculated from the date the tax would have been due without penalty if the improvements had been assessed without regard to the exemptions provided by Chapter 84.14 RCW and RMC 4-1-220. Applicant acknowledges that, pursuant to RCW 84.14.110, any additional tax owed, together with interest and penalty, become a lien on the Property and attach at the time the Property or portion of the Property is removed from multi- family housing use, and that the lien has priority to and must be fully paid and satisfied before a recognizance, mortgage, judgment, debt, obligation, or responsibility to or with which the Property may become charged or liable. Applicant further acknowledges that RCW 84.14.110 provides that any such lien may be foreclosed in the manner provided by law for foreclosure of liens for delinquent real property taxes. c. Upon determining that a tax exemption is to be canceled, the Administrator shall notify the property owner by certified mail, return receipt requested. The property owner may appeal the determination in accordance with RMC 4-1-220L2. 9. Amendments. No modification of this Agreement shall be made unless mutually agreed upon by the parties in writing and unless in compliance with the provisions of RMC 4-1-220H, including but not limited to the Applicant's payment of a two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) contract amendment fee. 10. Binding Effect. The provisions, covenants, and conditions contained in this Agreement are binding upon the parties hereto and their legal heirs, representatives, successors, assigns, and subsidiaries. 11. Recording of Agreement. The Administrator shall cause to be recorded at the Applicant's expense, or require Applicant to record, in the real property records of the King County Department of Records and Elections, this Agreement and any other documents as will identify such terms and conditions of eligibility for exemption as the Administrator deems appropriate for recording. 12. Audits and Inspection of Records. Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Chateau de Ville, p. 5 " Applicant understands and agrees that the City has the right to audit or review appropriate records to assure compliance with this Agreement and RMC 4-1-220 and to perform evaluations of the effectiveness of the multi-family housing property tax exemption program. Applicant agrees to make appropriate records available for review or audit upon seven days' written notice by the City. 13. Notices. All notices to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed given when hand-delivered within normal business hours, when actually received by facsimile transmission, or two business days after having been mailed, postage prepaid, to the parties hereto at the addresses set forth below, or to such other place as a party may from time to time designate in writing. APPLICANT: Chateau de Ville, LLC 801 S Third Street Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-235-7540 Fax: 425-235-7804 Attention: Melissa J. Lu Member CITY: City of Renton Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Phone: (425)430-6592 Fax: (425)430-7300 Attention: Administrator 14. Severability. In the event that any term or clause of this Agreement conflicts with applicable law, such conflict shall not affect other terms of this Agreement which can be given effect without the conflicting terms or clause, and to this end, the terms of the Agreement are declared to be severable. Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Chateau de Ville, p. 6 NINO IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year written above. CITY OF RENTON Kathy Keolker, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Attorney Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk CHATEAU DE VILLE, LLC A Washington Limited Liability Company By: John R. Sugden, Manager CHATEAU DE VILLE, LLC A Washington Limited Liability Company By: Melissa J. Lu, Member Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Chateau de Ville, p. 7 softie STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day of , 200 , before the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the state of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared before me Kathy Keolker, to me known to be the Mayor of the City of Renton, the municipal corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said municipal corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned and on oath stated that she was authorized to execute said instrument. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC Printed Name: Residing at My commission expires [notary seal] Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Chateau de Ville, p. 8 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day of , 200 , before the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the state of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared before me: John R. Sugden, to me known to be the Manager of CHATEAU DE VILLE, L.L.C., that executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said party, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC Printed Name: Residing at My commission expires [notary seal] Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Chateau de Ville, p. 9 %low STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) -On this day of , 200 , before the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the state of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared before me: Melissa J. Lu, to me known to be a Member of CHATEAU DE VILLE, L.L.C., that executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said party, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC Printed Name: Residing at My commission expires [notary seal] Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement vomme Chateau de Ville, p. 10 MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY NiatiO TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A LOT 1 IN BLOCK 23 OF TOWN OF RENTON, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 1 OF PLATS, PAGE 135, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY AND THAT PORTION OF THE TOBIN DONATION CLAIM LYING SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1 AND NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1 PRODUCED EASTERLY AND LYING EAST OF SAID LOT 1, AND WEST OF THE CENTERLINE OF SAID BLOCK 23 PRODUCED NORTHERLY; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL B LOTS 2 AND 3 IN BLOCK 23 OF TOWN OF RENTON, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 1 OF PLATS, PAGE 135, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, AND THAT PORTION OF THE TOBIN DONATION CLAIM LYING SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 2 PRODUCED EASTERLY AND NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF ' SAID LOT 3 AND LYING EAST OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOTS 2 & 3 AND WEST OF THE CENTERLINE OF SAID BLOCK 23 PRODUCED NORTHERLY; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Exhibit A–Legal Description Chateau de Ville-p. i - CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL 1 AI#: � a, Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of Dept/Div/Board.. Transportation Systems Division May 22, 2006 Staff Contact Robert Lochmiller(x7303) Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements Correspondence.. Project Construction Management Service Ordinance W&H Pacific, Inc. Resolution Supplemental Agreement#6 (CAG 04-013) Old Business Exhibits: New Business X Issue Paper Study Sessions Supplemental Agreement #6 Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept Refer to Transportation Committee Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: 317.012306 Expenditure Required... $407,692 PE Transfer/Amendment $ 61,182 CE $468,874 Total ,, Amount Budgeted $ 2,875,000 PE Revenue Generated $650,000 PE $ 1,781,000 CE Total Project Budget $23,291,000 City Share Total Project... SUMMARY OF ACTION: As the preliminary design has progressed, conditions have changed necessitating additional work outside the initial scope of the project. Additional design work includes additional stormwater analysis, revisions to accommodate Harvest Partners' revised site plans, dewatering plan, adding special features to roadways, revised Logan Avenue to lower construction costs, modeling and preparing plans for the detour route, adding utilities for the City of Renton Information Services(IS) Division, and support during bidding(addendums and pre-bid meetings). The contract also includes on-call services during construction for design questions and support, if needed. The City is currently in the process of bonding to refund the design expenses already incurred and to fund the construction and construction management of the South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements Project. The City has spent under$2,374,000 for design to date. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the supplemental agreement with W&H Pacific, Inc. in the amount of$468,873.95 for design and construction engineering support for the South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements. C'\Documents and Settings\mpetersen\Local Settings\Temp\W&H Pacific Supp-6 060504.DOC ti` Y O� PLANNING/BUILDING/¢% PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT /� MEMORANDUM DATE: May 22, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: . / Kathy Keolker, Mayor FROM: Ski Gregg Zimmermati,'ministrator STAFF CONTACT: Rob Lochmiller, Project Manager (x7303) SUBJECT: South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements Construction Management Service W&H Pacific, Inc. Supplemental Agreement to CAG 04-013 ISSUE: Should Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the supplemental agreement with W&H Pacific, Inc. in the amount of$468,873.95 for the South Lake Washington Roadway Norsp' Improvements? RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the supplemental agreement with W&H Pacific, Inc. in the amount of$468,873.95 for design and construction engineering support for the South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements. BACKGROUND: As the preliminary design has progressed, conditions have changed necessitating additional work outside the initial scope of the project. Additional design work includes additional stormwater analysis, revisions to accommodate Harvest Partners' revised site plans, dewatering plan, adding special features to roadways, revised Logan Avenue alignment at North 6th Street to lower construction costs, modeling and preparing plans for the detour route, adding utilities for the City of Renton Information Services (IS) Division, and support during bidding (addendums and pre- bid meetings). The contract also includes on-call services during construction for design questions and support, if needed. Randy Corman,Council President Members of the Renton City Council Page 2 of 2 May 22,2006 The City is currently in the process of bonding to refund the design expenses already incurred and to fund the construction and construction management of the South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements. The City is bonding $2,875,000 for design expenses and $1,781,000 for construction management for the project. The City has spent under $2,374,000 for design to date. cc: Peter Hahn,Deputy P/B/PW Administrator—Transportation Rich Perteet,Interim Transportation Design,Planning&Programming Supervisor Rob Lochmiller,Transportation Design Project Manager Connie Brundage,Transportation Administrative Secretary H\Division.s\TRANSPOR TAT\DESIGN ENG\RoHBoeing Redevelopment\Contract\Supplemeni 46\Issue Paper-W&H Supp 6 060512.doc 41111111. "-' Washington State Department of Transportation Now Organization and Address Supplemental Agreement No. 6 W&H Pacific 3350 Monte Villa Parkway Bothell, WA 98021 Agreement Number CAG 04-013 Project Number Phone 425-951-4860 Project Title New Maximum Amount Payable South Lake Washington Roadway Improvement $ 2,805,768.83 Description of Work Additional design services and on-call services during construction. The Local Agency of City of Renton desires to supplement the agreement entered into with W&H Pacific and executed on 1/29/2004 and identified as Agreement No. CAG 04-013 All provisions in the basic agreement remain in effect except as expressly modified by this supplement. The changes to the agreement are described as follows: Section 1,SCOPE OF WORK,is hereby changed to read: The original scope of services is amended to include additional services as described in detail in the attached Exhibit"B." II Section IV,TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION,is amended to change the number of calendar days for completion of the work to read: Completion by December 31,2007 Ill Section V, PAYMENT,shall be amended as follows: Additional services described in Exhibit"B"will cause in increase to the contract of$468,873.95 as shown in Exhibit"E"for a new maximum amount patable of$2,805,768.83 If you concur with this supplement and agree to the changes as stated above,please sign in the appropriate spaces below and return to this office for final action. Dated this day of ,2005. By: By: W&H Pacific, INC. Consultant Signature Approving Authority Signature DOT Form 140-063 EF Revised 10/97 EXHIBIT B SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 6 CITY OF RENTON SOUTH LAKE WASHINGTON ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK MAY 2006 Additional services as listed below: 1. Additional Stormwater System Analysis of Outfall#21 and the use of John's Creek in lieu of Outfall #21. (Verbal per Leslie on 9/1/05)work consisted of: — coordination with City staff and others to evaluate and justify conveyance system design conclusions and recommendations(a.k.a. —the Boeing Outfall 21 issue), including: additional analyses performed, data and other information furnished, meetings(6/29/05, 8/9/05, 8/29/05, 10/6/05 and 10/31/05), related communication and correspondence with City, — answer City questions — additional analyses and/or supplemental clarification/documentation re: stormwater conveyance system design, including the following: o draft memo(dated 7/11/05)clarifying understanding, background, and basis for design utilizing Boeing's OF-21 o drainage basin &subbasins evaluation including revised modeling and flow analysis, etc. (7/05—8/05) o preparation for and meeting with City on 8/29/05 including background review and understanding presentation NIS o responding to Greg Z.'s questions re: Boeing OF-21 (memo dated 8/31/05)and identifying additional alternatives, etc. o conveyance system alternatives analysis and cost estimating (Altematives Matrix, dated 9/14/05) o John's Creek Alternative development(as an alternative to utilizing Boeing's OF-21)— analysis, layout, modeling, preliminary design and documentation of conveyance system improvements including model results in revised tables and figures,transmitted 9/21/05 o evaluation &sensitivity analysis of alternative hydrologic methodologies—SBUH vs. KCRTS(documented in 10/18/05 e-mail/memo) o additional modeling associated with revised Cedar River tailwater conditions(10/05) o evaluation and comparison of John's Creek vs. Boeing's OF-21 alternatives, including 10/02/05 meeting with City and W&H, and documentation in memo dated 10/21/05 including modeling results in revised tables and figures o sensitivity analysis(including revised modeling)of John's Creek channel, upstream culverts, and Lake Washington and related tailwater conditions (10/31/05) o Stormwater Conveyance System Analysis& Design —Summary Memo, Q&A information, and John's Creek alternative improvements description including revised model results—figures(dated 11/9/05) o area East of 1-405 land use/development condition—sensitivity analysis, including model results—figures(dated 11/9/05) o assist City Staff with letter Boeing (12/05) Page 2 of 4 Nir.n 2. Roadway Plan Revisions needed to accommodate a new revised Harvest Partner's site plan. Revisions included relocated entrances and added on street parking back to Park Ave N (verbal Leslie 9/23/05). The following plan sheets were revised: 1. Channelization plans to include new curb radius 2. Water, Sewer, Storm 3. Signal 4. Illumination 5. Signing 6. Plan and Profile 7. Roadway Sections 8. Landscaping Quantities and engineer estimates were updated. QA/QC was performed. 3. Ongoing time for Boeing, Developer and Franchise utilizes coordination due to design changes required by Harvest and Boeing. - Confirmation of requirements associated with various individual franchise utilities' existing and planned new utilities, including meetings, correspondence, etc. - update of Preliminary Utility Layout Drawings(50-scale)for coordination and use by various franchise utilities - preparation for and meeting with PSE on 8/30/05, and other related coordination and correspondence. - joint trench design assistance, facilitation, and coordination including preparation of plan and detail drawings, and coordination with various individual franchise utilities - misc. project design and related information share with various individual franchise utilities - coordination with Boeing re: utilities to remain(multiple revisions) &related, including multiple Nirr meetings and/or site visits(5/18, 6/21, 7/6, 7/28/05, 10/20/05), correspondence, etc. - assistance and coordination with potholing of Boeing utilities - table prepared documenting Boeing utility crossings(8/18/05) - review&characterization of Boeing's existing utility tunnels, including 7/6/05 site visit, 10/26/05 memo. - coordination with Boeing re: crossing &/or conflicts with various existing Boeing facilities(utility tunnels, sewer metering vault, electrical duct bank and power vault in Logan, etc.) - misc. project design and related information share and general coordination with engineers for Boeing and Developer - updated Preliminary Utility Layout Drawings(50-scale)to reflect Boeing's revised utilities to remain, etc. - Meeting (12/1/05)w/Developer. 4. Preparation of a dewatering plan (verbal Rob 11/2/05) The following tasks are nearly complete: EVALUATION OF DEWATERING PARAMETERS - Estimate the range of hydraulic conductivities along the utility alignments - Develop conceptual dewatering models for 300 foot+/-long excavation reaches - Estimate range of dewatering flows for each excavation reach - Approximate range and extent of drawdown for dewatering each excavation reach DEVELOPING DEWATERING APPROACH - Evaluate potential settlement of soils due to ground water drawndown in the vicinity of existing structures - Determine most efficient/appropriate dewater technologies for each excavation reach - Estimate cost of dewatering Nose - Meet with Project Team to discuss impacts, alternatives and approach to developing specifications for the bid documents EVALUATING DISCHARGE PERMIT NEEDS Page 3 of 4 - Contact regulatory and permitting agencies to confirm permitting, sampling and testing requirements for dewatering discharge disposal - Develop costs for sampling and testing necessary to meet permit requirements PREPARE DEWATERING MEMO - Prepare draft and final memorandum documenting evaluations and analyses - Provide recommendations for dewatering approaches and specification process - Outline major dewatering issues, considerations and costs 5. Prepared an estimate of costs for incorporating Special features(i.e. colored concrete intersections)!Landscaping prepared by Harvest Partners into our plans. (verbal Leslie 1219/05) We obtained a set of plans from Harvest Partners. Calculated quantities Prepared excel spreadsheet Sent memo to Rob 6. Bi-weekly meetings with City,Developers& Boeing. Preparation for, attending and facilitating Bi- Weekly meetings that started on 1/19/06 and will continue for 10 weeks minimum(5 meetings). Prepare& distributed meeting notes. 7. Prepared Plan revisions for added SB lane on Logan Ave N from N 4th Street to N 8th Street; right turn only lane on N 6th EB to SB Logan Ave N and a driveway access to parking lot#18 for Boeing (Rob-12/8/05). We revised the following plans: 1. Channelization plan to include new curb radius 2. Water, Sewer, Storm 3. Signal 4. Illumination 5. Signing 6. Plan and profile 7. Roadway sections 8. Landscaping Quantities and Engineer's costs were updated. 8. Prepared Plan revision for making N 8th Street 5 lanes from Park Ave N to Garden Ave. N,as requested by the City(Rob-1/3/06). The following plan sheets were revised: 1. Channelization plan to include new curb radius 2. Water, Sewer, Storm 3. Signal 4. Illumination 5. Signing 6. Plan and profile 7. Roadway sections 8. Landscaping Quantities and Engineer's costs were updated. Page 4 of 4 9. Prepared Plan revisions for Park Ave N revision for deletion of left turn from movements at Harvest Partners intersection and aligning up left turn pockets at N 8th Street(Rob- 1/11/06). The following plan sheets were revised: 1. Channelization plan to include new curb radius 2. Water, Sewer, Storm 3. Signal 4. Illumination 5. Signing 6. Plan and profile 7. Roadway sections 8. Landscaping 10. Prepared Plan Revision for Logan Ave N(between 6th and 8th)for matching the existing N 6th Street intersection. (Rich Perteet verbal 2/14/06). 1. Curb return elevations will be revised 2. Channelization plans will be revised 3. Signal plans will be revised 4. Demolition plans will be revised 5. Storm water plans and details will be revised including resizing vaults and pipes. New utility crossings will be reviewed for proper clearance 6. Roadway typical sections will be revised 7. Plan and profile plan sheets will be revised 8. Revisions will be coordinated with the City, Boeing and HP 11. Engineering Support during Bidding.(Not in our current scope and budget) 1. Prepare for and attend two(2) Pre-Bid meetings 2. Prepare for and attend four(4)weekly coordination meetings with the City Nome 3. Prepare three addendums. This work will include preparing design revisions as requested by the City - Design revisions will include revising plans, design calculations, specifications, quantities and cost estimate. 4. Assist the City in responding to contractor design questions 5. Prepare a thorough review of the contractor's bids following bid opening. This review will evaluate and summarize bids received and provide a recommendation to the City. 12. Model Detour Route and Prepared Detour Plan.(Rich 3/8/06) 1. Prepared Traffic Modeling for detour route. Identified intersections exceeding capacity and provided alternative signal and channelization options. A detailed detour plan was prepared that includes all the intersection modifications needed. Wrote contract special provisions for the detour route and plan. Attended three meetings with City on review and acceptance of final plan. 13. City Fiber Interconnect for IS.(Rich 3/10/06) 1. Coordinated with City and their Consultant on adding a fiber interconnect line to the project to serve the City's IS department. We upsized our signal interconnect line from a 2"to a 4"and added a 4"spare line. Additional 24 strand filter is being included with our signal interconnect. Prepared plan and provisions revisions needed to include this work. 14. Engineering Support during Construction. W&H Pacific Project Manager(Sam Richard)will be available to the City for responding to contract questions, project understanding and background with Noire design issues. Sam will attend weekly and bi-weekly meetings as directed by the City. Estimate for the work is based on 8 hours a week for 60 weeks. So Lake Washington Roadway Improvements Supplement#6 Date:May 9,2006 Additional project work Exhibt E Labor Hour Estimate Schedule Project Project Senior Surveyor Project Project Principal Manager Engineer Designer Technician Surveyor Crew Clerical Hours Cost Hrs@ Hrs@ Hrs@ Hrs@ Hrs@ Hs@ Hs@ Hrs@ Project Tasks $ 60.00 $ 48.00 $ 42.00 $ 32.00 $ 25.00 $ 44.00 $ 53.00 $ 22.00 1.Stone outfall#21 17 12 1 30 $1,342.00 2.Harvest Partners plan revisions 6 52 155 355 2 570 $16,351.00 3.Boeing/developerlutilites coordination 20 20 1 41 $1,822.00 4.Dewatering plan 2 1 3 $118.00 5.Cost estimate special Harvest features 7 11 7 1 26 $885.00 6.Biweekly meetings 20 4 24 $1,048.00 7.Plan revisions for Boeing 4 9 60 40 1 114 $3,512.00 8.Nath street revisions(5 Lane) 4 4 24 20 1 53 $1,650.00 9.Park Ave N revisions(Left turns) 4 4 24 20 1 53 $1,650.00 10.Redesign Logan at 6th Street 4 8 40 40 92 $2,808.00 11.Engineering Support During Bidding 80 40 24 24 16 184 $7,240.00 12.Detour Plan and Modeling 2 4 8 40 54 $1,520.00 13.Added Fiber Line 2 4 32 38 $1,064.00 14. Services During Construction 300 300 $14,400.00 Labor Subtotal 0 472 157 346 578 0 0 29 1582 $55,410.00 Overhead (Labor*169.306%) $93,812.45 Fee labor'30% $16,623.00 Total Labor $165,845.45 EXPENSES Cost Expenses Item Quantity Unit per Unit Cost Mileage 500 Miles $0.405 $202.50 Outside redproduction(Digital) 1 1 $8,100.00 Total Expenses $8,302.50 Subconsuttant Contract Subcontractor Amount Cost Berryman&Henegar (Task 1,Task 2,Task 3,Task 7,Task 8,Task 9,Task 10,Task 11, Task 12,Task 14) $246,887.00 $246,887.00 Kleinfelder (Task 4.Dewatering Plan) $16,888.00 $16,888.00 Kdd (Task 11,Task 12,Task 13,Task 14)(Perm.Signal at Fry's) $30,951.00 $30,951.00 Total Subconsultants $294,726.00 Subtotal $468,873.95 Contingency $0.00 TOTAL $468,873.95 H:\Division.s\TRANSPOR.TATIDESIGN.ENG\Rob\Boeing RedeveiopmentContract\Supplement#6\supp#6 3-10-06.xis W& H Pacific, Inc. A wholly-owned subsidiary of ASCG Incorporated Schedule of Indirect Costs For Year Ended December 31, 2003 DCAA Audit Report No. 04261-2004L23000001 Dated March 24, 2004 Amount per Unallowable 2003 Description G/L Costs Total Direct labor $ 19,461,066 $ - $ 19,461,066 a Payroll Burden: Fringe benefits $ 6,651,877 $ - $ 6,651,877 b Other payroll related costs $ 763,695 $ (186,703) $ 576,992 c Total payroll burden $ 7,415,572 $ (186,703) $ 7,228,869 Other Indirect Costs: Indirect Labor $ 14,516,708 $ (610,182) $ 13,906,525 d Travel $ 706,223 $ (10,427) $ 695,797 e Freight $ 86,025 $ - $ 86,025 f Legal $ 259,554 $ - $ 259,554 g Consulting $ 1,578,670 $ - $ 1,578,670 h Occupancy $ 3,664,169 $ (102,206) $ 3,561,963 i Communications $ 624,207 $ - $ 624,207 k Insurance $ 566,812 $ - $ 566,812 I Niirie Depreciation $ 1,306,337 $ - $ 1,306,337 m Property maintenance and taxes $ 252,971 $ - $ 252,971 0 Equipment rent and operations $ 1,171,064 $ (71,890) $ 1,099,174 p Office operations $ 1,394,092 $ - $ 1,394,092 q Business development $ 81,305 $ (45,961) $ 35,344 r Advertising $ 171,499 $ (94,910) $ 76,589 s Entertainment $ 23,966 $ (23,966) $ - t Contributions $ 30,653 $ (30,653) $ - u Bad debts $ 254,073 $ (254,073) $ - v Other $ 688,854 $ - $ 688,854 w Gain on sale of assets $ 44,923 $ (53,581) $ (8,658) x Interest $ 343,553 $ (343,553) $ - y Taxes, other than property $ 745,581 $ (740,981) $ 4,600 aa Allocated administrative costs $ (408,897) $ - $ (408,897) z Total other indirect costs: $ 28,102,343 $ (2,382,383) $ 25,719,960 Total indirect costs $ 35,517,915 $ (2,569,086) $ 32,948,829 Overhead Rate: 1.69306 Cost of Money Rate 0.00733 South Lake Washington Road Improvements (Construction) Exhibit G.1 South Lake Washington Road Improvements Principal Project Mgr Sr.Traf Eng Traffic Eng CAD Eng Admin Direct Overhead Total $49.51 $49.51 $34.79 $29.48 $25.27 $18.00 Salary Cost Cost 1 Construction 1.1 Detour Plans 1.1.1 Traffic Modelling for Detour Development 15 10 25 $1,827.63 $2,627.77 $4,455.40 1.1.2 Detour Plan Coordination 10 5 5 $816.46 $1,173.91 $1,990.37 1.1.3 Design signal modifications for detours(3 signals) 20 8 24 $1,976.12 $2,841.27 $4,817.39 1.1.4 Signal modifications for 8th&Garden(contract) 4 4 8 4 $674.14 $969.28 $1,643.43 1.1.5 Termporary traffic signal for Fry's(contract) 12 16 30 12 $2,338.49 $3,362.28 $5,700.77 SUBTOTAL DETOUR PLANS • • 0.; 45 ., 43. • ...92 0 . : . .: 0 ' $7,632.84 $10,974.50 $18,607.34 1.2 Construction Assistance 1.2.1 Response to RFI's 10 10 $789.94 $1,135.78 $1,925.72 1.2.2 Contractor Submittal Review 10 5 $642.52 $923.82 $1,566.34 • SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANC 0 . . 20 : 0 '15 0 0' $1,432.46 $2,059.59 $3,492.05 1.3 Permanent Signal Design at Garden and N 10th St. 1.3.1 Contract change order design 16 40 20 $2,476.92 $3,561.32 $6,038.24 I TOTAL PROJECT CHANGES 0 65 43 107 0 0 $11,542.22 $16,595.41 $28,137.63 Direct Labor Cost $11,542.22 Overhead at 143.78 $16,595.41 Subtotal $28,137.63 Fixed Fee at 10.0 $2,813.76 Sub total $30,951.39 Reimbursables $0.00 Grand Total $30,951.39 Scope 1 Perform Traffic Modelling of AM and PM peak hour,simulating rerouted detour traffic. 2 Identify intersections exceeding capacity and provide alternative signal and channelization options to improve operations. 3 Coordinate recommendations of signing and striping with W&H Pacific staff. 4 Design wiring,dsplay and control changes to existing signals for City of Renton maintenance crews 5 Prepare contract documents for signal modifications at 8th&Garden for road widening. 6 Perpare contract documents and plans for temporary traffic signal at Fry's northern driveway. 7 Provide construction assistance and material submittal review. 8 Develop detour alternatives as needed during construction to improve traffic flow. 9 Design permanent traffic signal for Garden Aveneu N&N 10th Street. Assumptions 1 AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts are available via Renton staff 2 W&H Pacific will prepare plans for detour routes and traffic control signing and striping 3 Not more than three unique models to be analyzed for each peak hour Detour signal modifications will be required on Garden Ave N at 6th&8th and a new temporary signal will be designed at Fry's entrance. 5/12/2006 440011, KED 2006 Overhead Calculation for KD_D&Associates, LLC Amount 1 %of Direct Salaries Direct Salaries $159,691.39 [Expenses Vac/Sic/Hid $21,154.53 ' 13.25% Payroll Taxes $21,482.62 i 13.45%_ Group Medical $10,522.86 . 6.59% ;Office Rent $56,995.18 35.69% `Office Maintenance $200.73 0.13% Office Security $1,299.70 0.81% Telephone Expense $5,996.53 3.76% Administrative Expenses ( $46,344.44 29.02% Accounting Fees $975.00 0.61% `Business Tax ! $7,494.41 4.69% :Professional Liability $12,851.50 8.05% General Liability $2,806.00 1.76% • ':Panting/Reproductions $824.51 0.52% : Computer Equip&Supplies $3,690.36 2.31% if., to Expense $350.71 0.22% "err✓ ,Fees, Dues,Meetings $538.00 0.34% 'Professional Services $1,732.90 1.09% -_ Business Meals $0.00 0.00% :Depreciation $11,283.75 7.07% {Equipment Lease/Rentals $20,234.15 12.67% Mileage Reimbursement $320.00 0.20% Bonuses $2,500.00 1.57% !TOTAL $229,597.88 143.78% 46rr► aY 68846 Seattle, taia.:l,,,.11 `.•8168 Telethcne 266.829 ('. . ;,:. 11111t 206 374.24322 '': 4-ZZO TPIO x II/14111 i Ea 91 I 1� a 1 111.1 flu &a :VI ku 1 ti <p � ; . P 35 $ � q a a 4 m A• 3 g S s s it . Yr 8 ' o 3 I a -, a i 1S O S ' 00000 irc a• 42xi or ga o 0 00000 0 . liih 0-2 oao = S� 0: 1 13 II 8So8""'" 3x m � 'l 2P 15 !=e:8:::18N .41 vm 8'BSw .00 S N, •g 0 uy �" p • � ' gig N , w';.e 00 2ti-, r s 3 " g21 of 8eS000 F31 @8 o co Z ' Al 1 3 0+ 000040„. ° n. g i ....::.::304 ~I WI. 4' ffi S _ <80$0 tiio g . -8 ,g t_ - e-- - nail ovewge e , g N 2 F " @ D 0 o -— 2 S �S d G j . u-4 u e u D O C P • 3 :N.o----o oN v ig 3 _ = o e 48000000 a gs 003 # 2 ,,k!,- 4 S 0e00 1 Og i c x a: -00000 04 '4 •D- r 8S. r- elk ; :: S ° $ S; ; _ !; :;:;;!:: E 88 a t EXHIBIT G-2 BHC CONSULTANTS, LLC BREAKDOWN OF OVERHEAD COSTS (Provisional Rate FY Ending March 31,2007) Direct Labor(Billable Base) A 1,270,195 General&Administrative Expenses Indirect Salaries B 659,369 Payroll Burden Payroll Taxes 204,104 Health & Life Insurance Program 156,000 Worker's Compensation - Performance Bonus 111,478 Profit Sharing - Retirement& Pension 72,359 Vacation, Holiday, Sick 92,767 Other Employee Benefits 3,120 Total Payroll Burden C 639,828 31.5% Other General&Administrative Expenses Temporary Personnel 2,000 Legal&Accounting 32,000 Facilities(Occupancy) 234,840 Communications 49,500 Professional Development 35,600 Personnel 15,500 Business Development 44,000 Travel&Subsistence 12,300 Printing & Reproduction 3,500 Vehicle Expense 14,700 Office Supplies 25,400 Library 3,000 Computer&Software Expense 46,525 Business Licenses 2,500 Taxes Other Than Income 69,491 Insurance Expense 95,872 Contributions - Depreciation 124,919 General&Administrative Other 85,400 Total General&Administrative Expenses D 897,047 Unallowable Costs Trade Shows &Advertising (3,000) Travel- Unallowable (1,000) Bank Charges (5,000) Key Man Life Insurance (13,372) Contributions - Fines& Penalties - Total Unallowable Costs E (22,372) Total Allowable Costs(B+C+D-E) F 2,173,872 Facility Capital Cost of Money @ 1.44% G 18,291 (Direct Labor) Overhead Rate(F+G+H/A) 173% Exhibit G.3 SOUTH LAKE WASHINGTON STREET IMPROVEMENTS Date: 02 09 06 Project#31636, Contract No.CAG 04-013 By: MB&LW For Sam Richard, W&H Pacific Revised LW 05 05 06 KA Job#43221, Task 4,Refer to Kleinfelder Scope of Work dated 02 09 06 TASK 4, GEOTECHNICAL&DEWATERING SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES LABOR COSTS Activity Description Staff Title&Base Salary Rate Total Hours Total$ Robert Marcus Katie Middour Larry West Byers Brown CADD Admin $33 $58 $41 $20 $21 $16 Geotechnical Support 6 2 1 9 $304 Dewatering Specifications 12 12 6 1 31 $1,354 Revise Dewatering Letter 8 2 2 1 13 $438 NPDES Permitting 8 1 9 $176 Meet with City Staff 3 3 3 1 10 $412 Base Labor Costs 23 17 15 8 4 5 72 $2,684 Overhead Costs @ 1.98 Base Labor Costs $5,314 Fee©0.30 Base Labor Costs TASK 4 TOTAL LABOR COSTS $8,804 DIRECT COSTS Task# Activity Description Mileage Subsistance Repro Misc. Subtotal$ 4 Supplemental Services 50 50 $100 TASK 4 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 50 0 0 50 $100 PROJECT TOTAL TASK 4 TOTAL LABOR COSTS $8,804 TASK 4 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $100 rake TASK 4 TOTAL COST $8,904 43221/SEA6P034.xis Copyright 2006 Kleinfelder,Inc Page 1 of 1 February 9,2006 • Exhibit G.4 SOUTH LAKE WASHINGTON STREET IMPROVEMENTS Date: 11 18 05 Project#31636, Contract No. CAG 04-013 By: RM&LW For Sam Richard, W&H Pacific Revised: LW 11 30 05 KA Job#43221, Task 3,Refer to Kleinfelder Scope of Work dated 1130 05 Revised: LW 05 05 06 LABOR COSTS Task# Activity Description Staff Title&Base Salary Rate Total Hours Total$ Robert Marcus Katie Middour Larry West Byers Brown CADD Admin $33 $58 $41 $20 $21 $16 3.1 Eval. Dewatering Parameters 12 2 1 15 $528 3.2 Develop Dewatering Approach( 8 4 6 1 19 $758 3.3 Evaluate Discharge Permit NeE 2 2 16 2 22 $534 3.4 Prepare Dewatering Memo 8 2 6 2 18 $538 Base Labor Costs 30 10 6 16 6 6 74 $2,358 Overhead Costs @ 1.98 Base Labor Costs $4,669 Fee @ 0.30 Base Labor Costs TASK 3 TOTAL LABOR COSTS $7,734 DIRECT COSTS Task# Activity Description Mileage Subsistance Repro Misc. Subtotal$ 3.1 Eval. Dewatering Parameters 50 $50 3.2 Develop Dewatering Approach(s) 25 $25 3.3 Prepare Dewatering Memo 100 25 $125 3.4 Prepare Dewatering Memo 50 $50 TASK 3 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 150 0 0 100 $250 14,410e PROJECT TOTAL TASK 3 TOTAL LABOR COSTS $7,734 TASK 3 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $250 TASK 3 TOTAL COST $7,984 Nirrr 43221/SEA5P246.doc Copyright 2005 Kleinfelder.Inc Page 1 of 1 November 30,2005 ADJUSTMENTS TO STATEMENT OF DIRECT LABOR, FRINGE BENEFITS and GENERAL OVERHEAD DIRECT and INDIRECT LABOR Included in the Company's direct labor base is the premium portion of overtime. This report does not include any reclassification of premium overtime to other direct costs. (FAR31.201-4). OTHER ADJUSTMENTS Audit adjustments represent various costs unallowable by specific FAR Sections: Profit Sharing &ESOP Plan $ (1,419,370) Passed from Corporate Legal Litigation Settlement Costs 810,856 31.205-47(b)(e) Benefits adjustments 250,991 Adjustments to actual Advertising and Contributions 434,839 31.205-1;8; 14 Bad Debts 772,337 31.205-3 Goodwill 717 31.205-49 Interest Expense 1,385,932 31.205-20 Allocation of Corporate expenses 2,290,257 Various Meals& Entertainment 240,545 31.205-46; 51 Other 35,918 31.205-15; 16; 19;28;43 Bonuses (1,033,421) Passed from Corporate $ 3,769,601 SUMMARY OF FRINGE BENEFIT AND OVERHEAD RATES The following represents the allowable rates incurred by the Company for the year ended March 31,2004: ` Off-Site Locations Home Office Fringe Benefit Rate 53.0133% 53.0133% Overhead Rate 126.7131% 145.3171% Total Combined Rate 179.7264% 198.3304% i i . ............. r •• VI ... .v.... ._. . ./ • II µ• mo ` .~.. v i /Wed - PApopp ' CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: 6 • I .� Submitting Data: For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board.. AJLS/City Clerk May 22, 2006 Staff Contact Bonnie Walton Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Bid opening on 5/3/2006 for CAG-06-066, Correspondence.. Airport Entrance Rehabilitation Project Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Staff Recommendation Study Sessions Bid Tabulation Sheet (three bids) Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept Council concur Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... $571,200 Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget $675,000 City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Engineers Estimate: $250,000 - $300,000 In accordance with Council procedure,bids submitted at the subject bid opening met the following criteria: There was more than one bid, and there were no irregularities. Because the low bid was not within the project budget, Council approval is sought to transfer funds in the amount of$475,000 from existing capital projects to this project, such that the total Capital Improvement Program budget is not exceeded. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the use of funds from existing capital projects, and accept the low bid submitted by Construct Co. in the amount of$571,200. Uti(VY 0sf PLANNING/BUILDING/ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT . Nry0 MEMORANDUM DATE: May 22, 2006 TO: Bonnie Walton, City Clerk FROM: Ryan Zulauf, Airport Manager(x7471) SUBJECT: Airport Entrance Rehabilitation Project—Bid Award ISSUE: Should Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to accept the bid from Construct Co. of Sumner in the amount of$571,200.00 to complete the Airport Entrance Rehabilitation Project for the main entrance onto the Airport? RECOMMENDATION: Refer this issue to the City Council for Concurrence. BACKGROUND: On May 3, 2006,three (3)bid proposals were received and reviewed for the rehabilitation of the front entrance at the Renton Municipal Airport. This project is being carried out for the purpose of providing a much needed facelift to one of the City's vital transportation gateways and showcasing the City's newest piece of public art, a bronze statue of the Airport's namesake, Mr. Clayton Scott. Construct Co. of Sumner submitted the lowest bid in the amount of$571,200. The other two bids were slightly higher at $590,238 and $592,960. The initial project budget was $200,000 with$40,773 currently encumbered. It is recommended that $475,000 be transferred from existing capital projects to the Airport Entrance Rehabilitation Project such that the total Capital Improvement Program budget of$1,721,800(which includes carryforwards not listed in the 2006 Budget Detail book) is not exceeded. The following project budgets will be reduced by the amount listed. Bonnie Walton Page 2 of 2 May 22,2006 Project Original 2006 Revised 2006 Transfer Budget Budget Amount Apron C Utility Project $106,000 $20,000 $86,000 Secondary Blast Fence $25,000 $10,000 $15,000 Reconstruction Fire Training Area Remediation $95,000 $0 $95,000 Airport Office Rehabilitation $50,000 $0 $50,000 Airside/Landside Separation $655,000 $406,580* $130,000 608 Hangar Expansion $50,000 $0 $50,000 622 Hangar Rehabilitation $63,000 $14,000 $49,000 Total Transfer to Airport $475,000 Entrance Rehab. Project *Note: -Balance after transfer of$118,420 to the Quonset Hut Secondary Fire Escape Project. It is also recommended that the contract be awarded to the low bidder, Construct Co. of Sumner Washington. This project is scheduled for early summer of 2006. cc: Peter Hahn,Deputy P/B/PW Administrator-Transportation Nenita Ching,Finance Analyst Connie Brundage,Transportation Administrative Secretary Susan Campbell/Carolyn Currie,Airport Secretary h:\file sys\air-airport,transportation services division\03 projects\02capital improvement projects\2006 airport entrance rehab project\corresp\airport front entrance construction bid award.doc ' CITY OF RENTON BID TABULATION SHEET PROJECT: Airport Entrance Rehabilitation; CAG-06-066 DATE: May 3, 2006 FORMS Non- Mini- Bidder's BID BIDDER Bid Collo- Anti- mum Qualifications Addenda Bond sion Trust Wage Statement 2 C.A. Carey Corporation X X X X X X $592,960.00 PO Box 1006 Issaquah,WA 98027 Steve Murdoch Construct Co. 1621 Pease Ave. X X X X X X $571,200.00 Sumner,WA 98390 Cy Morse United Pacific Structures,Inc. X X X X X X $590,238.00 PO Box 1640 Gig Harbor,WA 98335 Jim Bozich ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE TOTAL: $250,000-$300,000 172171 1 DBY 1 C COUNCIL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT Date 5=a a-a ooh May 22,2006 Garages and Carports in Residential Setbacks in North and South Renton Neighborhoods (Referred March 20, 2006) The Planning and Development Committee met to review the issue of carports and garages in residential setback areas within the North and South Renton neighborhoods. The Committee discussed Renton Municipal Code setback requirements and acknowledged that many existing structures intrude into the setback area. The Committee recognizes that new structures are not allowed to intrude into the setback unless authorized through the granting of a variance. Existing legal non-conforming structures may remain, and no variance is necessary. The Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to retain existing setbacks for residential zones in order to provide adequate separation between structures and properties. Furthermore, the Committee recommends that no code compliance action be initiated for existing legal non-conforming structures, in keeping with the provisions of the Renton Municipal Code. Terri Briere, hair f �7 Dan Clawson, Vice Chair Ica Marcie Palmer,Member cc: Gregg Zimmerman,P/13/PW Administrator Neil Watts,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner Ar" trrArrD BY 1 UTILITIES COMMITTEE C:71 e' liNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT Date S' a- ab06 May 22,2006 Water and Wastewater Billing Adjustment for Water Leaks (Referred May 15, 2006) The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the proposed modifications to Renton Municipal Code Sections 8-4 and 8-5, and present the ordinance regarding this matter for first reading. 1 1 � an Clawson, air Tern Briere, Vice-Chair .(cl/a/t; ed, .- Denis W. Law, Member cc: Lys Hornsby,Utility Systems Director Michael -Batleyi Finance. 44rnintsfrahor UTILITIES COMMITTEE APPROVED BY COMMITTEE REPORT CITY COUNCIL Date 6-40?-a°°6 ' May 22, 2006 The Cottages at Honeycreek Subdivision Request for Reimbursement for Oversizing of Water Line (May 8, 2006) The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the request for reimbursement in the total amount of$22,926.58 from Davis Real Estate Group, for costs related to the oversizing of the water line within the subdivision as requested by the City's Water Utility section. City Code allows developers and property owners to request the City to participate in the cost of the utility improvement when the City requires that the utility be oversized for the best interest of the City and the general locality. Dan Clawson, Chair Terri Briere, ice Chair /(...yzi,t4;7 142 4c„. Denis W. Law, Member cc: Lys Hornsby,Utility Systems Director Abdoul Gafour,Water Utility Supervisor APPROVED BY ' FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT CITY COUNCIL May 22,2006 Date S-aa-ao06 APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND PAYROLL VOUCHERS The Finance Committee approves for payment on May 22, 2006, claim vouchers 248437-24886 and 2 wire transfers, totaling $3,278,559.21 , and 622 direct deposits, payroll vouchers 63384-63574, and 1 wire transfer, totaling $1,992,797.05 . - r .„ 1�on Persson, Chair Denis Law, Vice-Chair Toni Nelson, Mem.er APPROVED BY I FINANCE COMMITTEE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT } ®ate .5"--aa-- °°6 May 22, 2006 TEMPORARY INTERFUND LOANS May 15, 2006 The Finance Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the Resolution granting authority for loans between city funds. The Committee further recommends that the Resolution regarding this matter be presented for reading and adoption. Don Person, Chair 49itiA; lnJlatit_ Denis W. Law, Vice Chair Toni Nelson, Member cc: Mike Bailey,Finance&IS Administrator Linda Parks,Fiscal Services Director Temporary Interfund Loans.doc\ Rev 01/06 bh Nc/op/ed: s aa- a006 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. .3g7/ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON GRANTING AUTHORITY FOR LOANS BETWEEN CITY FUNDS. WHEREAS, RCW 43.09.200 provides that the State Auditor shall formulate, prescribe, and install a system of accounting and reporting for all local governments; and WHEREAS, such a system has been created and is known as the Budgeting, Accounting and Reporting System(BARS); and WHEREAS, the BARS manual at Part 3, Chapter 4, Section A, provides guidelines for loans between city funds; and WHEREAS, it becomes necessary, from time to time, to resolve temporary cash flow problems with a temporary loan between funds; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. Except as provided for in Section IlI of this resolution, and with respect to"Temporary Loans" only, the City Council shall approve loans between funds by separate resolution. SECTION III. The temporary loans between funds of the City of Renton are hereby authorized by the Renton City Council under the following conditions and circumstances: 1 RESOLUTION NO. a. Temporary Loans are not to exceed ninety(90)days in duration. If it appears that a loan between funds may extend beyond ninety(90)days, a resolution seeking approval of such loan shall be drafted and presented to the City Council. b. Temporary Loans shall generally be at interest. The borrowing fund shall reimburse the lending fund with interest equivalent to the Local Government Investment Pool rate as of the date the loan was initiated. However, when the borrowing fund is an"internal fund" and the lending fund is an"external fund" associated with the borrowing fund as described in the adopted City of Renton financial policies, or when the funds share a source of revenue(such as property tax), no interest shall be assessed for the loan. c. The City Council shall be notified of Temporary Loans. The City of Renton's monthly financial reports shall provide the cash status of all City funds and the existence of loans between funds. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2006. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2006. Kathy Keolker, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RES.1171:4/10/06:ma 2