Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil 11/20/2006 AGENDA RENTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING November 20, 2006 Monday, 7 p.m. • 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. Increasing the impact fee collected for the Issaquah School District and implementing an impact fee to be collected for the Kent School District b. Aster Park Annexation- 60%Petition to Annex and future zoning for 19.85 acres located along the south side of NE Sunset Blvd.,west of 148th Ave. SE c. Annexation and future zoning of 13.69 acres located in the vicinity of Benson Rd. S. and SE 168th St. (Hudson) 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. City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance(V-06-108); appeal filed by Alden Linn,2907 Park Ave. N., Renton, 98056, accompanied by required fee. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Consideration of the appeal by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record,the Hearing Examiner's report,the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties (RMC 4-8- 110F.6.). b. Community Services Department recommends approval to transfer the lease and concession agreement with All My Restaurants, Inc. for the restaurant and banquet facilities at Maplewood Golf Course to Newcastle Restaurants,Inc. for the remaining three years of the existing lease. Council concur. c. Finance and Information Services Department recommends approval of an interlocal agreement regarding the sharing of fiber optic installation projects with the Eastside Fiber Consortium (various eastside agencies)to add Bellevue Community College as a participating agency. Council concur. (See 9.a. for resolution.) d. Finance and Information Services Department recommends approval of the 2006 year-end budget amendment ordinance. Refer to Finance Committee. e. Hearing Examiner recommends approval, with conditions,of the Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat; two single-family lots on a 0.26-acre site located at 2008 NE 16th St. (PP-06-104). Council concur. f. Utility System Division submitted proposed changes to the water, wastewater, and surface water utility rates. Refer to Committee of the Whole. 7. CORRESPONDENCE (CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE) • 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 Loi the Chair if further review is necessary. a. Finance Committee: Vouchers;Parks& Recreation Staffing Budget Amendment* b. Planning&Development Committee: Comprehensive Plan Amendments; 2007 Comprehensive Plan Pre-Applications; Wireless Communication Facilities in Residential Zones*; Private Stormwater Utilities in Geologically Hazardous Areas c. Utilities Committee: WRIA 8 &9 Salmon Habitat Plan Interlocal Agreements*; Public Works Construction Permit Fees* 9. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Resolutions: a. Eastside Fiber Consortium interlocal agreement addendum(see 6.c.) b. WRIA 8 & WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan interlocal agreements(see 8. c.) Ordinances for first reading: a. Approving the Hudson Annexation(see 3.c.) b. Establishing R-8 zoning for 5.83 acres of the Hudson Annexation(see 3.c.) c. Establishing R-10 zoning for 6.60 acres of the Hudson Annexation(see 3.c.) d. 2006 Budget amendment to offset increased Community Services Department overtime&labor costs (see 8.a.) e. Public works construction permit fees increase(see 8.c.) f. Wireless communication facilities in residential zones City Code amendment(see 8.b.) 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 4:30 p.m. 2007 Budget Presentations&Deliberations; King County Agreement re: East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area; King County Agreement re: Potential Future Annexation of Four Potential Annexation Areas 41110 • Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk • CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21 AND ARE RE-CABLECAST TUES.&THURS.AT 11 AM&9 PM,WED.&FRI.AT 9 AM&7 PM AND SAT.&SUN.AT 1 PM&9 PM RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting November 20, 2006 Council Chambers Monday, 7 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; DAN CLAWSON; COUNCILMEMBERS DENIS LAW; TERRI BRIERE; MARCIE PALMER; DON PERSSON. CITY STAFF IN KATHY KEOLKER, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative ATTENDANCE Officer; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; ALEX PIETSCH, Economic Development Administrator; DON ERICKSON, Senior Planner; REBECCA LIND, Planning Manager; MARTY WINE, Assistant CAO; TERRY HIGASHIYAMA, Community Services Administrator; LESLIE BETLACH, Parks Director; GERALD RERECICH, Recreation Director; PREETI SHRIDHAR, Communications Director; CHIEF I. DAVID DANIELS, Fire DepaiInient; CHIEF KEVIN MILOSEVICH, DEPUTY CHIEF TIM TROXEL and COMMANDER KATIE MCCLINCY, Police Department. PUBLIC HEARINGS This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Finance: Impact Fees, Issaquah accordance with local and State laws,Mayor Keolker opened the public hearing &Kent School Districts to consider the following: 1. Increasing the impact fee from $5,115 to $6,136 collected for all new single-family homes built within the boundaries of the Issaquah School District in the Renton City limits. 2. Collecting a new impact fee in the amount of$4,928 for all new single- family homes built within the boundaries of the Kent School District in the Renton City limits. Planning Manager Rebecca Lind stated that consideration of the impact fees is a result of requests from the school districts, and she pointed out that the matter has been referred to the Finance Committee. Ms. Lind explained that the adoption of impact fees requires consideration of three factors: the cost of housing in Renton, the capacity in the schools serving Renton residents, and the amount of funds that are expended locally. Ms. Lind indicated that in both districts, additional capacity is needed for schools serving Renton residents. The Issaquah School District has scheduled improvements to Briarwood Elementary, Maywood Middle, and Liberty High schools. The Kent School District has scheduled improvements that build additional high school classrooms. She noted that it is anticipated that Renton will annex territory within the Kent School District in 2007 (Anthone' Annexation). Ms. Lind stated that both school districts are responding to growth by proposing capital improvements to schools serving Renton residents. The assessment of the full impact fee ensures that those who contribute to the growth pay a share of the growth related costs. She concluded that staff recommends adoption of the requested impact fees for both school districts. Public comment was invited. a November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 399 Craig Christensen, 565 NW Holly St., Issaquah, 98027, representing the Issaquah School District, stated that impact fees are an integral part of the district's facilities funding. He explained that the district is experiencing growth from all geographical sectors and these fees provide funding to accommodate the growth in housing. Mr. Christensen indicated that$46.9 million of the district's bond is going directly to schools that will service Renton students, and he described the proposed improvements to Liberty High, Maywood Middle,and Briarwood Elementary schools. He also noted that funds were used for acquiring land for future growth if needed. In conclusion, Mr. Christensen stated that the proposed improvements are a priority for the district's upcoming Capital Facilities Plan,and he urged approval of the impact fee increase. Gwenn Derdowski, 12033 SE 256th St., Kent, 98030,representing the Kent School District,reported that the district is the fourth largest in the State and the second largest in King County. She stated that impact fees are already collected on behalf of the district by King County, and the cities of Kent, Covington, and Auburn. Ms. Derdowski noted that the district serves eight permitting jurisdictions, including a small portion of Renton(City-owned land of the Springbrook Watershed). Ms. Derdowski stated that the Renton portion of the district will likely increase with new annexations. She explained that impact fees present a savings to existing taxpayers in that future bonds would require less funding from existing taxpayers since the developers are paying a share of the new growth. Ms. Derdowski reviewed the proposed improvements and enrollment projections listed in the district's Capital Facilities Plan. Discussion ensued regarding the reasons for adopting the Kent School District's impact fee prior to annexation of property within the district. Ms. Derdowski pointed out that the impact fee collected by Renton will replace the fee already collected by King County on behalf of the district. There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. Annexation: Aster Park, This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Sunset Blvd NE accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Keolker opened the public hearing to consider the 60% Direct Petition to Annex and future zoning for the proposed Aster Park Annexation; 18.48 acres, including the SR-900 right-of-way, located along the south side of Sunset Blvd. NE (SR-900), west of 148th Ave. SE, north of SE 112th St., if extended, and east of 144th Ave. SE, if extended. Senior Planner Don Erickson explained that the site contains a new 37-lot single-family subdivision, two homes, and a mobile home park. The topography is relatively flat, with a 2 percent slope along the eastern 80 percent of the site, and a 20 percent slope along the western 20 percent of the site. He noted that public services are provided by Fire District#10, Water District#90, Renton sewer, and the Issaquah School District. Mr. Erickson indicated that current King County zoning is R-4 (four dwelling units per gross acre) and R-48. The Renton Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Residential Low Density, for which proposed zoning is R-4 (four dwelling units per net acre). He pointed out that the proposal is generally consistent with Boundary Review Board objectives. Mr. Erickson reviewed the November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 400 fiscal impact analysis, which assumes a new home value of$500,000 and a potential of 61 single-family homes at full development. The City is estimated to realize a deficit of$8,707 at current development, and a surplus of$23,892 at full development. He noted the estimated one-time parks development cost of $27,724. Mr. Erickson concluded that the proposed annexation furthers City business goals by ensuring higher quality development and efficient urban services, and is generally consistent with annexation policies. Councilwoman Briere noted that an unincorporated island is created north of the subject site if the site is annexed. In response to Councilman Clawson's inquiries, Mr. Erickson confirmed that the mobile home park is on septic system,and the park will come into the City as legal non-conforming. Councilwoman Briere commented that the mobile home park's drain field was rebuilt approximately five years ago. Public comment was invited. There being none, it was MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL: ACCEPT THE 60% DIRECT PETITION FOR THE 18.48-ACRE ASTER PARK ANNEXATION; SUPPORT FUTURE R-4 ZONING CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY DESIGNATION;AND AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATION TO SUBMIT THE NOTICE OF INTENT PACKAGE TO THE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD AND PREPARE THE RELEVANT ORDINANCES. CARRIED. Annexation: Hudson, Benson This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Rd S & S 168th St accordance with local and State laws,Mayor Keolker opened the public hearing to consider the proposed annexation and zoning of 14.63 acres (including streets) located in the vicinity of SE 168th St. and Benson Rd. S. (Hudson). Senior Planner Don Erickson reviewed the history of the annexation, noting that the Boundary Review Board approved the annexation in September 2006. He pointed out that funding for the signalization project at SE 168th St. and 108th Ave. SE could be jeopardized if the City annexes the site prior to King County awarding the contract. He explained that King County anticipates awarding the contract in April 2007; therefore staff recommends adopting the relevant annexation ordinances but setting the effectuation date for May 2007. Continuing, Mr. Erickson reported that the western portion of the annexation site is relatively flat, and the eastern portion slopes towards Soos Creek to the east. The site contains 19 single-family homes, 152 multi-family units, at least one vacant parcel, and some commercial properties. Regarding the public services, he noted that the site is within Fire District#40, Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, and Renton School District. Mr. Erickson stated that the site is zoned R-8 (eight dwelling units per gross acre), R-12, R-18, and Community Business in King County. The City's Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Residential Single Family and Residential Medium Density, for which R-8 (eight dwelling units per net acre) and R-10 zoning is proposed. He reported that the fiscal impact analysis indicates a deficit of$53,545 at current development and a deficit of$52,349 at full development, as the site is already built-out. The estimated one-time parks acquisition and development cost is $138,108. November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 401 In conclusion, Mr. Erickson stated that the annexation proposal is consistent with Boundary Review Board objectives and City annexation policies. He pointed out that the surface water costs are estimated at$3,258 annually, and unless the City delays the effectuation date, it will be responsible for the signalization project costs estimated at$789,000. Mr. Erickson indicated that the annexation furthers City business goals by encouraging responsible growth, and possibly serving as a catalyst for expanding its boundaries to the north or west to result in a more regular City boundary. Councilman Law expressed concern that King County will not award the contract prior to the proposed effectuation date of the annexation and the City will then be liable for the project costs. Councilman Clawson noted that it is possible to extend the effectuation date if necessary. Public comment was invited. Stephanie Lorenz,4725 NE 4th St., Suite B, Renton, 98059, representing Mr. Hudson, suggested that the City contact King County to verify that the annexation has to be delayed in order to secure the project funds. She referred to a project where King County funds were used for a passover in Magnolia, the area of which was already annexed. Ms. Lorenz noted that the proponents are frustrated with the annexation timeline and they want to move forward with their projects. Mayor Keolker indicated that the Administration will investigate the matter. There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL: APPROVE AN ORDINANCE EFFECTUATING THE 14.63-ACRE HUDSON ANNEXATION ON 5/1/2007; APPROVE AN ORDINANCE REZONING 6.6 ACRES TO R-10 CONSISTENT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY LAND USE DESIGNATION; AND APPROVE AN ORDINANCE REZONING 5.83 ACRES TO R-8 CONSISTENT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE DESIGNATION. CARRIED. (See page 406 for ordinances.) ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2006 and beyond. Items noted included: * The 13th Annual Clam Lights display at Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park begins on December 1 and runs nightly through January 1. * The official tree lighting event at Piazza Park occurs on December 2. * A project to improve Rainier Ave. between S. 2nd St. and S. 4th Pl. has been awarded$1,906,200 in funding for 2008 by the Transportation Improvement Board. The project is part of the overall improvements to the Hardie/Rainier corridor, and includes replacing the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad bridges, and pedestrian and transit improvements. AUDIENCE COMMENT Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, stated that although eliminating Citizen Comment: Petersen- the use of eminent domain and non-conforming properties in the Highlands area 2006 Comprehensive Plan came about prior to the formation of the Highlands Zoning Task Force,the task Amendments, Highlands Area force succeeded in the ability to remodel existing duplexes and to have mother- in-law apartments. Ms. Petersen displayed a map of the Highlands area,and November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 402 compared the zoning from the original subarea plan to the recommended zoning of the task force,noting the density similarities between the two plans. Ms. Petersen expressed concern regarding the high densities proposed for the area, including the allowance of three- to five-story buildings, saying that high densities should not be supported without a proper EIS (Environmental Impact Statement). She urged Council to consider requiring an EIS. Citizen Comment: O'Halloran- Mike O'Halloran, Airport Advisory Committee Chair, 4420 SE 4th St., Renton, Airport Open House, Master 98059, issued an invitation to the Renton Airport Open House on November 21, Plan Update at which citizens can ask questions and discuss future options for the airport. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. At Councilman Persson's request, item 6.b. was removed for separate consideration. Appeal: Linn Office City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the Linn Conversion Landscape Office Conversion Landscape Variance; appeal filed by Alden Linn, 2907 Park Variance, V-06-108 Ave. N. Renton, 98056, accompanied by required fee. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Finance: Fiber Optic Finance and Information Services Department recommended approval of an Installation Projects Interlocal interlocal agreement regarding the sharing of fiber optic installation projects Agreement, Eastside Fiber with the Eastside Fiber Consortium(various eastside agencies)to add Bellevue Consortium Community College as a participating agency. Council concur. (See page 405 for resolution.) Budget: 2006 Year-End Finance and Information Services Department recommended approval of the Amendments 2006 year-end budget amendment ordinance. Refer to Finance Committee. Plat: Monterey Place II, NE Hearing Examiner recommended approval,with conditions, of the Monterey 16th St, PP-06-104 Place II Preliminary Plat; two single-family lots on a 0.26-acre site located at 2008 NE 16th St. Council concur. Utility: 2007 Rates Utility Systems Division submitted proposed changes to the water, wastewater, and surface water utility rates. Refer to Committee of the Whole. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO REMOVE ITEM 6.b. FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION. CARRIED. Separate Consideration Community Services Department recommended approval to transfer the lease Item 6.b. and concession agreement with All My Restaurants, Inc. for the restaurant and Community Services: banquet facilities at Maplewood Golf Course to Newcastle Restaurants, Inc. Maplewood Golf Course (Arias-Barajas, Inc.) for the remaining three years of the existing lease. Restaurant Facilities Lease, MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL APPROVE Transfer to Newcastle THE AGREEMENT ADDENDUM WITH A CORRECTION TO PAGE 1, Restaurants, LAG-03-003 ITEM 2., LINE 3 AS FOLLOWS: REPLACE THE WORD "shall" WITH THE WORD "may." CARRIED. Mayor Keolker noted that the agreement will be returned to the concerned parties to determine if they accept the change. Added Correspondence was read from James A. Fenner and Carolyn R. Fenner,402 CORRESPONDENCE Seneca Ct. NW, Renton, 98057, concerning stormwater runoff through their Citizen Comment: Fenner- yard and into their basement as a result of the development on an adjacent Stormwater Drainage property located at 84th Ave. S. and S. 128th St. MOVED BY CORMAN, Problems, Seneca Ct NW SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE ADMINISTRATION. CARRIED. November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 403 UNFINISHED BUSINESS Utilities Committee Chair Clawson presented a report recommending Utilities Committee concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the proposed amendments Utility: Public Works to the public works construction permit fees (Water Construction Permits, Construction Permit Fees Water Meter Installations, Water Meter Processing,and Wastewater and Surface Water Construction Permits)and incorporate them into an ordinance. The Committee further recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 406 for ordinance.) Utility: WRIA 8 &9 Salmon Utilities Committee Chair Clawson presented a report regarding the Water Habitat Plan Implementation, Resource Inventory Area(WRIA) 8 and WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan Interlocal Agreements interlocal agreements. The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the interlocal agreements between the City and other jurisdictions participating in the implementation of the WRIA 8 and WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plans for the time period of 2007-2015. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 406 for resolution.) Planning& Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report Committee regarding the 2007 Comprehensive Plan pre-applications and requests. The Comprehensive Plan: 2007 Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve Amendments,Pre-Applications the request for pre-application review for Application 2007-Pre-01, Alan Kunovsky's request for review of land use designation at 326 Park Ave. N., and Application 2007-Pre-02,O'Farrell Properties LLC's request for land use designation and multi-family policy review at 188 Hardie Ave. SW, including four parcels of contiguous property between Rainier Ave. S., Hardie Ave. S., and SW Victoria St. The Committee further recommended that these applications be forwarded to the Planning Commission for inclusion in the 2007 work program pending successful completion of an application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment by 12/15/2006. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Development Services: Private Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report Stormwater Utilities in regarding private stormwater utilities in geologically hazardous areas. The Geologically Hazardous Areas Committee met to discuss the proposed revision to the critical areas regulations, which would exempt new surface water discharges from private storm systems on steep slopes. Currently,public surface water discharges are allowed to discharge on or near steep slopes in order to improve slope stability. However, private stormwater systems are not permitted to discharge, even when such utilities would reduce erosion and improve slope stability. The Committee recommended that a public hearing regarding the proposed amendments be held by the City Council on 12/4/2006. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Development Services: Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report Wireless Communication recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the City Facilities in Residential Zones Code amendments to permit wireless communication facilities within public rights-of-way within residential zones and adopt the ordinance. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 407 for ordinance.) November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 404 Comprehensive Plan: 2006 Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report Amendments regarding the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments,concurrent rezonings, and implementing zoning text amendments. The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff and Planning Commission recommendation to approve the 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments as shown on the matrix entitled "2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments" and on the Report and Recommendation of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force (dated 11/8/2006)with the following changes from the original recommendations: 1) Application 2006-M-6, Map Amendment for the Highlands Study Area— The area known as "the tail" on Harrington Ave. NE between NE 9th St. and NE 7th St. to be shown in the Comprehensive Plan as Center Village with multi-family zoning in order to comply with adopted mapping criteria for multi-family land use. 2) Report and Recommendation of the Highlands Task Force, Zoning Text Amendments—Notes and conditions section of Title IV will include a zoning use note restricting commercial office uses on properties fronting Edmonds Ave. NE, Sunset Blvd., and NE 12th St. 3) Application 2006-M-3, Rivera—The zoning use table in the R-14 zone will include a zoning use note restricting signage for commercial uses in the R- 14 zone to monument signs. The applicants and the land use map/text amendment requests listed on the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments matrix, are as follows: • 2006-M-1 —Wan Chee; Map amendment to change Neighborhood Commercial/Single Family to Neighborhood Commercial. • 2006-M-2—Susan Larson-Kinzer; Map amendment to change Kennydale Blueberry Farm from Residential Low Density to Residential Single Family. • 2006-M-3 —Manuel Rivera; Map amendment to change Residential Single Family to Commercial Corridor. • 2006-M-4—Springbrook Associates; Map amendment to change Residential Medium Density to Commercial Corridor. • 2006-M-5 —City of Renton; Map amendment to change Puget Colony from Residential Single Family to Residential Low Density. • 2006-M-6—City of Renton; Map amendment for the Highlands Study Area. • 2006-M-7—City of Renton; Map amendment to change the former Aqua Barn site from Neighborhood Business in King County's Comprehensive Plan to Commercial Corridor to be consistent with Renton's Comprehensive Plan. • 2006-M-8 —City of Renton; Map amendment to consider changing the designation for a 49-acre area of upper Kennydale, south of NE 28th St. and NE 16th St. from 1-405 to approximately the boundary of the Heritage Glen Subdivision from Residential Single Family with R-8 zoning to Residential Low Density with R-4 zoning. • 2006-T-1 —City of Renton; Text amendment to update the Capital Facilities Element to incorporate adoption of the Issaquah and Kent school district Capital Facilities Plans. • 2006-T-2—City of Renton; Text amendment to update the Land Use Element to reflect changes in the Center Village. • 2006-T-3 —City of Renton; Text amendment to Land Use and Community Design elements with housekeeping changes. November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 405 • 2006-T-4—City of Renton; Text amendment to update the Transportation Element to reflect changes in capital projects. • 2006-T-5 —City of Renton; Text amendment to update the Land Use Element to allow Residential Manufactured Home zoning to be an implementing zone with the Residential Low Density Comprehensive Plan designation. The Committee further recommended that the development agreement for application 2006-M-7 (former Aqua Barn site)be referred to the City Attorney for review and approval,and that the Mayor be authorized to execute the agreement upon approval by the City Attorney. The Committee further recommended that Application 2006-T-5 and Application 2006-M-2 be held in Committee until resolution of the pending SEPA(State Environmental Policy Act) appeal on these issues. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* Referring to the amendment concerning the upper Kennydale area(2006-M-8), Councilman Clawson pointed out that the Committee agreed with the staff recommendation to downzone the area to R-4, and not with the Planning Commission recommendation to keep the existing R-8 zoning. He noted the environmental constraints of the area, and the need to balance the rights of area residents and the rights of those who want to develop. *MOTION CARRIED. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval of Finance: Vouchers Claim Vouchers 253809 -254369 and four wire transfers totaling $8,923,702.22; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 66410- 66587,one wire transfer, and 641 direct deposits totaling $2,015,422.36. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Community Services: Park Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report regarding the 2006 Budget Fund Budget Increase, Staffing amendments for intermittent parks and recreation staffing expenses. The Expenses Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the transfer of$35,000 from the General Fund to Fund 101 to offset increased overtime and labor costs incurred due to weather related crowd control and the extended Sockeye season. The Committee further recommended that the budget amendment ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 406 for ordinance.) RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolutions were presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution #3841 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an Finance: Fiber Optic interlocal agreement, entitled "Addendum#27 for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects Interlocal Installation Projects," with the City of Bellevue, City of Kirkland, City of Agreement, Eastside Fiber Renton, Lake Washington School District, Renton School District, University Consortium of Washington, Bellevue School District, and Evergreen Hospital, to provide an alternative to the King County I-Net and to better serve additional areas within the City of Renton. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 406 Resolution#3842 A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Utility: WRIA 8 &9 Salmon interlocal agreements among participating jurisdictions with the Habitat Plan Implementation, Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed Resource Inventory Area Interlocal Agreements (WRIA 9)and the Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed Resource Inventory Area(WRIA 8). MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the Council meeting of 11/27/2006 for second and final reading: Annexation: Hudson, Benson An ordinance was read annexing approximately 14.63 acres of property Rd S & S 168th St generally located west, south, and east of the existing City of Renton boundaries defined by a peninsula of land immediately east of 108th Ave. SE, and south of SE 168th St. (Hudson). MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/27/2006. CARRIED. Annexation: Hudson, R-8 An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification for approximately Zoning 5.83 acres, located in two sections, the smallest some 2.02 acres, on the south side of SE 168th St. in the easternmost part of the annexation, and the largest, some 3.81 acres, on the west side of 108th Ave. SE, in the northernmost portion of the annexation site; annexed within the City of Renton from R-18 (Urban Residential - 18 dwelling units per acre, King County zoning), R-12 (Urban Residential- 12 dwelling units per acre, King County zoning)and R-8 (Urban Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre, King County zoning)to R-8 (8 dwelling units per net acre, Renton zoning); Hudson. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/27/2006. CARRIED. Annexation: Hudson, R-10 An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification for approximately Zoning 6.6 acres, located in two sections, the smallest some 1.9 acres, on the western side of 108th Ave. SE, and the largest, some 4.7 acres,on the east side of 108th Ave. SE, both south of SE 168th St., if extended; annexed within the City of Renton from R-18 (Urban Residential- 18 dwelling units per acre, King County zoning), R-12 (Urban Residential - 12 dwelling units per acre, King County zoning)and R-8 (Urban Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre, King County zoning) to R-10(10 dwelling units per net acre, Renton zoning); Hudson. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/27/2006. CARRIED. Community Services: Park An ordinance was read amending the 2006 Budget to authorize $35,000 from Fund Budget Increase, Staffing increased revenues to offset increased overtime and labor costs due to weather Expenses related crowd control and the extended Sockeye season. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/27/2006. CARRIED. Utility: Public Works An ordinance was read amending Chapter 1, Administration and Enforcement, Construction Permit Fees of Title IV (Development Regulations)of City Code by increasing public works construction permit fees. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/27/2006. CARRIED. November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 407 Development Services: An ordinance was read amending Chapters 2,4, and 11 of Title IV Wireless Communication (Development Regulations) of City Code by permitting wireless communication Facilities in Residential Zones facilities within public rights-of-way in residential areas and to incorporate three pre-existing administrative determinations that clarify the wireless regulations. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 11/27/2006. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL REFER THE Transportation: Downtown ISSUE OF CONNECTIVITY TO DOWNTOWN FROM THE LANDING Connectivity to The Landing, AND DIRECTION SIGNAGE FOR DOWNTOWN TO THE Downtown Direction Signage TRANSPORTATION(AVIATION) COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Finance: Business License MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL REFER A Billing Cycle BRIEFING ON THE NEW BUSINESS LICENSE BILLING CYCLE TO FINANCE COMMITTEE. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Inez Petersen, PO Box 1295, Renton, 98057, inquired as to which fund the $1.5 Citizen Comment: Petersen- million set aside for Highlands study area infrastructure improvements is in. Various Regarding the Comprehensive Plan amendment concerning the upper Kennydale area,Ms. Petersen expressed concern that citizens were not given the opportunity to speak publicly on the matter and the decision to adopt R-4 zoning was a result of a staff recommendation. Councilman Clawson clarified that the decision was based on more than the staff recommendation, and he pointed out that public hearings were held on the matter. Continuing, Ms. Petersen inquired as to how Highlands Community Association events such as the upcoming Christmas dance can be City-sponsored. On another topic, Ms. Petersen stated that City staff did not grant Jeff Colee a fence height variance,and he must remove the fence he erected to keep cats out of his backyard. Noting that Mr. Colee is wheelchair-bound, she pointed out that the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requires cities to modify their zoning to accommodate the disabled. Stating that he read the staff decision, City Attorney Larry Warren explained that staff has criteria on when a variance may be granted that has been established by the Council. He indicated that the fence did not meet the standards as established by City Code, and that the original reason for Mr. Colee to build the over-height fence no longer exists, as the adjacent neighbor who was responsible for the cat problem has now moved. Citizen Comment: Lorenz - Stephanie Lorenz, 13515 SE Maple Valley Rd., Renton, 98058,expressed Tree Hazard, Maple Valley concern that cottonwood trees growing on the sloughing slope along Maple Hwy Valley Hwy., west of Riverview Park and east of the former Stoneway Concrete Plant site, may fall across the road and hurt someone. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THIS MATTER TO THE ADMINISTRATION. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: McOmber- Howard McOmber,475 Olympia Ave. NE, Renton, 98056, asked that the City Various review Jeff Colee's fence situation(discussed by previous speaker Petersen),as the problem does not seem to be totally solved. Mr. McOmber also issued an invitation to the Highlands Community Association's Christmas party, which will be held on December 16. Councilman Clawson pointed out that Jeff Colee can appeal the staffs decision. t November 20,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 408 ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:36 p.m. &Z41AA. ,/. Lc)(..&(--e6--,-J Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann November 20, 2006 RENTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING CALENDAR Office of the City Clerk COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS SCHEDULED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 20, 2006 COMMITTEE/CHAIRMAN DATE/TIME AGENDA COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP WED., 11/29 2007 Budget Deliberations 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. *Council Conference Room* COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MON., 11/27 2007 Budget Presentations and (Corman) 5 p.m. Deliberations COMMUNITY SERVICES (Nelson) FINANCE MON., 11/27 Vouchers; (Persson) 4 p.m. Pam Curley Reconnection Fee PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT (Briere) PUBLIC SAFETY (Law) TRANSPORTATION(AVIATION) (Palmer) UTILITIES (Clawson) 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. �Y O C%r bat ��NTO PUBLIC HEARING ADOPTION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEES FOR ISSAQUAH AND KENT SCHOOL DISTRICTS November 20, 2006 The proposed amendment would authorize the City of Renton to collect a $6,136 impact fee for all new single-family homes built within the boundaries of the Issaquah School District in the Renton city limits. Currently, the City of Renton collects a fee of$5,115 for each new single family home. The proposed amendment would also authorize the City to collect a $4,928 impact fee for all new single-family homes built within the boundaries of the Kent School District in the Renton city limits. Currently, the City of Renton does not collect a fee on behalf of the Kent School District. However, it is anticipated that properties within the Kent School District will annex into the City of Renton prior to the end of 2007. A school district impact fee is the amount of money that a jurisdiction collects from each newly constructed dwelling unit to offset the costs of growth in the local school district. The school district impact fee is collected so that developers of new construction pay a one-time fee to share in the costs of growth. Impact fees are only charged to new development, existing homes (or remodels of existing homes) are not subject to the fee. Jurisdictions pass the collected fees on to the school district, which applies the money toward the rehabilitation and expansion of existing facilities, and the construction of new facilities to serve the growing population. School districts ask jurisdictions to collect a set fee based on a Capital Facilities Plan, which contains a prioritized list of construction and rehabilitation projects that the district plans to undertake. Impact fee money is tracked, and if it is not used to offset the costs of growth within six years, it must be returned. Both the Issaquah School District and the Kent School District are proposing to make major capital improvements to schools that would benefit current, or future, Renton residents. In light of these proposed improvements, City staff recommends adopting the requested impact fees for both districts for 2007. f 41 School District Impact Fees F h� • •-, Public Hearing November 20,2006 • Issaquah School District Kent School District • The Issaquah School •The Issaquah School District requests an District requests an impact fee of$4,928 per impact fee of$6,136 new single family home per new single family home • The City does not currently collect an impact •The City currently �� 8 �� fee for this district FIO collects$5,115 on • behalf of this district . . . . . • A portion of the Kent • ••••••••••••• School District is likely to be annexed into the City in 2007 1 Background Housing Costs There are three factors that Ordinance 4808 • Issaquah School District- Regardless of costs... asks Council to consider in the adoption of Renton has the least expensive new single- impact fees: family housing in the • Issaquah School District. tj 't •• Cost of housingin Renton Kent School dataDstrict- • There is no because • Capacity in the schools serving Renton currently the City does - ' e residents not have any territory in �i�I.I kip the Kent School District. "" ilW • Amount of funds expended locallylaillir However,new home prices in Kent and Renton each new home impacts the are comparablecapacity of local schools Capacity and Improvements- Capacity and Improvements- Issaquah School District Kent School District • Additional capacity is needed in schools serving • Additional capacity is needed in several schools. Renton residents. • Major improvements are planned for all district • District embarked upon an ambitious program of High Schools capital improvements last year • Scheduled improvements would build additional • Scheduled improvements to Briarwood High School classrooms for(future)Renton Elementary,Maywood Middle School and residents Liberty High School would improve schools for !11/ ' Renton residents 2 Conclusion - v. • Both School Districts are responding to;1 growth by proposing improvements to schools serving Renton residents. t • Assessment of the full impact fee ensures that those who contribute to growth pay a , share of growth related costs. _ - • • Staff recommends adoption of the ,_ requested impact fee for both School Districts. 3 `SY O Cf. U �; N ASTER PARK ANNEXATION PUBLIC HEARING 60% Direct Petition and Future Zoning November 20, 2006 On February 13, 2006 the City held a public meeting with proponents of this annexation and agreed to accept their 10%Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation Proceedings petition and authorized the circulation of a 60% Direct Petition to Annex. The subject 16.58-acre site is located at the corner of 148th Avenue SE and NE Sunset Boulevard. A major new subdivision, Aster Park was recently developed at this corner. The site includes the Fir Grove mobile home park to its west. The site slopes to the south on its eastern portion and, to the southwest (towards Honey Creek) on its western portion. On September 14, 2006 the City received a 60% Direct Petition to Annex representing at least 60% of the area's assessed value. This was confirmed by the County Assessor's Office, which issued a Certificate of Sufficiency on September 20, 2006. Pursuant to state law, the City is low required to hold at least two public hearings on future zoning before such zoning can be adopted. Tonight's hearing would be the first of these hearings. The site currently has both King County's R-4 and R-48 zoning on it. The western portion, which contains the mobile home park, has the County's R-48 zoning, and the eastern portion of the site has its R-4 zoning. The City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the whole area Residential Low Density and it would most likely come into the City as R-4, which allows a maximum of four units per net acre. This is less dense than the County's current zoning. The County's R-48 zoning apparently was an attempt to reflect the mobile home park density, even though these units are much smaller than a traditional single-family dwelling unit. The eastern portion of the site with R-4 zoning is currently being developed under King County development standards and has 37 units. This is equal to a density of 4 units per gross acre. The Administration is therefore recommending that Council: • Accept the 60% Direct Petition for the 16.58-acre Aster Park Annexation and authorize staff to transmit this annexation to the Boundary Review Board for their mandatory 45-day review: • Support future zoning consistent with the City's existing Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map "Residential Low Density" designation shown for the area. Probable future zoning consistent with this designation would be R-4, four units per net acre. 'row Public Hearing Handout 1 I-20-06.doc\ 1 fc .,..., 1N2otr ce,1•_•.-. i E• NJ.T.261h St41 , . \\ ... ..-.. • i -,-cs-,-.;.--.4„---- . . 1 Nt..: 23rd ,_,,_ NE J1_ __. -74-tr.---- i ...,....., - --I ,/,...1,--......„._ 1 .. 24t-W:ei 71 ! a ; ; !',.NE. 23rd -` SF 102nil: , . . . . ,i, k • _ .._ ,-, ..• .--,..- --- - - - ..-1-.:, ----, NE 23i'qj cr ) F---__7 1 pc) , . . ..,...tiE 22na RF r ,. _ NE ?TS! ... ,..._, ,....:,, . , 1 :7:----"'.., ;' '''', b • .,,,,,`.,,,,,, 1 --''- --'•-:=2----I-- NE 22rLd_%.';Ct ... ; i > I•NE_ 21:-it pv --:::.----=----::-L------,-- , ) ,=-_-_,', ...,.. -, 1 1 Z . .„...., ;NE 2f st .--1 :e-- — l'-' 11 - -1- 4,"C1 r -' 1 ,..., '1NE 19th Si 7-:----j--=-' )•NL20-th 1: - 1-) :,------•1 .......-_____. ___ .7.-_-_____.1___ _...-/ • __. ,3 .4th St, ,,,5,_ \- , NE Jef.-4._S-4,;1 g_, -1. :711 '....;1 ,1 •.• ; ..1-.). 1 . i -.4 a! ; 1•Ii: — . ..--, _ ....,,e , ,_,,, ' -,- E• 77 . '' ; ''.‘, i ' ,,f,.:, Clth 1•:`'l jr.; ....,..1 z--• i r --:' J -, d= 1 ''..:''..) I _ -- . -- '...,..., .I % 11 • -4*/ — ---'1. • 1 N.. \ •I*. I .., ....".... ,,.. _ _ ____ _.__ ....., • i ...r ,z10 , V)I ..'•-."•• ,--414,..1 CL . ' -.'''j I II 1 1 71 1 -r7'i ".• 10,4 I - , • C'. . , ..--- • i (r•- ' I -.1 • - -H i 1 'EN 1 •-f-. - I _T. • . -,, Li..1 i .___: I' j SZ: 113t.-,1t S '11100 E --- ----"," , ci-ri i 2 , r- ..____ , PI! 1 i SE: fiAth St -61' CI: 1, 6in. = --- -4- N !1 o TH St 1 ._ .. . , . SE 116t ,. • , 1 _ • "! - 1 ..---- •SE 111t,i) Si .... .,..., , i NE 9th 11 ..,i . 11 J. ----!! • • st • , -. 1 • ,, 1! 1i I/ - i- --.:.:„ : rl • ' - hit 1; 7t'n s i ' 1 T.',..2.::',''.1.•:..;ritL'trt",=;',..V..trtr .n1:,-.1.o*far n"xr vo4-1,..al a'.•.-..c.r.s.-• . ._ .. , . .-...4 04,....P, .... - • ,............ . I ,.. • Proposed Aster Park Annexation U 800 1600 . Figure 1:Vicinity Map 1 • 9600 r,,,i,,,,„.,..,, Novhkwb.vd,dc:NIraiegic I'liv.n,r;.. — — Perron Ort!,.r_ins .ftpt,,,, ,,..,,,,„..:, U11111/1,1,li.4 ---i Proposed Arnaxalian Area i I'i):,,t,,k,-,',.-",,':/. Public Hearing Handout I I-20-06.doc\ . # . ..:.....';;:•'-.r,:',' ,' ' '-'-:7,..„,',,r1i:,.; ', ...,,4,.,.-.N. .-1.;,-....I.,„,,,, ,,,=., .;., .-**,:'•:. ;,.,A ;, :' ,i,‘, x:,',...N.I.,..4., et •s- ' ,xg.,., . g?.:,.',' ‘,-,,,,, ' -,.-...::4... ..k'''.1,'' i.,:',,•,:. •< ::,%;:•::.,'' •,',7::,1!**;:''' '4C:,',;,4% l'• „ ;,;,•'.'.'',:..:':::': •• :',' ,,r.:.;-.-- .,, F'.4 4,;:: # = ,,k4,4ii4.:::;••'.. ''.?.;14,''''''.44.013;' ' . ' •/..! `, ,•, • •2" „,,‘.,, ,43.''."40 :,;:•,..,.,' ,• MF": ..!PP ,,,z: ,•'..•:' ...'''Y,',.Z.4A-ttp , ,.... :.....,_ , -;:',:•••!•':.V.;-'`f:`:;' ,\ ..... 111*;'1,4iNs••.; ;1'.....•'•`:::','''';'•:'*..- ,::•;:::..' .,••.; • r'.N04::',;.."..4., '0' :.••••';')?•',<•':.'i':•',..:1:::'%, ....,,,,i,:••,:i,:•'..., lit 4•.,....."."., ',,,......•i:...•<.•„ .:,' s'''..,...: ••',"•11,•,.•••, , • ''..•::t:'. ..•:....1,: . :•'..::;•:' '..." • •••W'..• pe.,..i-,••• •• '.....t1:,....S., : '•,'....?*.! .=4.!*'1•4'4.:• •'; ' '.'.: "::',''''':*„.;•'z•i',,,.Ittv:„1„.„44.„ ,„,,,,,..:: ::,, ,..,.. : , ,......„...;, ,,,, ..... .: ••..'..'''' .....,:-.,.. ,. • :,...,,.,,....•,, .4A4, ..,,,,... ,„•,. .:,.„..;„.,. ,..;4044,,,..„.„,,,,,_ • , .. ...,",, .. . .. 77:--., „;,, it Park.. ,. :. , Annexation -' er- Zoning ., .....:, ,an ,606/0 Direct PetliYill '' Public Hearing N. mber 4 ViiI ' :' .7- 2006 ' •• •••:.,'''''''',Q":'' :`•%:.k. •=.%;;,,, •• :'•::: '. ••'• • "::•.:-:'' ' ';;: :'•..••. '' ''''':'''''''''.'1'''''''''':;1' ,i-'-'—' ••••'';q'j:10'..i'''.::.•::". •:::::.:,:;•,;', : • • ''',...:''':'.::.:,:: '•''‘''' „ :„•• • :l',:••. ,•:.'•.:' : •2:'''''''•• 4''r"J•t:';:kif.i,,',..; ' '"1(...,4',/,,:,,,, • '•,)f..::Y;(.,'•••,•„,,, •' ',..!••••••,::',•,: ''i'''''"'''':: ;.Vit=7•;:.;.',,l':' :•'•,'4,,.V„,S),,,,,,,„‘•:4:,-,.,'.2;:::4 :';:;,:1: 4•,':',: .1:'',''''' '''fr'''.•'.,:•. , ''.: ,:::', .•,:;:i'7,2-7•44'''N41,41,W':.:;:', ; 0kk,i;;; •• :•; '•;::: '", "•• '''''::'::'-•?.:•:: • : : : ' ;P.5'''.'If4'. .; 'L ,...''''''.' '..;.;",,•;,...,,.;-.'',' :H: ,. ': ,' '' tftliik.e.„--.'..: .::?...z.'''••."4::: fi'..,!..i''„.'' ','..!.',,,' : ' • 1 City of Renton Merritt Il(Phase II) Current Annexations Perkins 523 ac. 15.6 ac- _ --':H...:11.-- , Aster Park ''' -' - . 18.5 ac. � H . d Hoquiam, st•Ar III, i 24.4 ac. t ,`,' i• ,;71Preserve Our Plateau .'� 41 w > 1474.5 ac. 'C �. , 1 , •^ �., ": Yi '): - ,i. 'w.,,--- 's'a, 't, 'Vain*-6,,,.. ,,,d`,—„,�'..".. s \< P .w”"Zw. N Leitch"_;. ' , � . 16,2 ac. Maplewood .,r� Addition i ,k `` I r• —iw, I. r Hudson Akers Farms .. 13.9 ac. 11 14.6 ac. 1 Li sBackground .=,:w , ° cenDmNoMt n submitted inDeceber, 2005 , • • k •Pubi c meeti .,g'held in,February, 2006 ' :60 Direct Pe tion, eceived on Sept 14, 20 •06 .., `' 60% Direct Petition certified byAunty cpteber 2Q, Q6 [SkkiFt -- '�;w�'�moo �"`;��- :a , 47 'g° ` *"`£fie,b.,, t,,,, • 2 .. " :fi�5%�z '4,y' '''r;" `ay . ,.4,.W, �'a ..£a s•i''.:m kH"' fiDR"". ..l 5 p t ., } ...,4''-'41.P'n'''''''''''rs'Conditions. la . A 'Wit u e ton s Potential Annexation AreaA. , ! L,ocation.;.`W+ st cif 148 ' Avenue SE:and south of ,,,';,H, ,` Suz et,Blvd.(SR:900). Abuts'Urban Growth Bounce ; �.Size + 18.48 acres,including SR 900 ROW •. Uses bew 37-4ot;single-family'subdivision, 2 existing.homes,,and existing mobile home park * .,.,-,,,-..,,,,,,r.. ..:...,..„:,.....da . annexation'site abuts Renton on'a 4boundary .poofits northern bu • w : 'E Is iri n,'''d' tions = Vici•ni•ty • �C.:S ,°:•G ,'''''•••'••••'1'..,•• '.2`'2€y „; ' ofs.',tK•'�,'•1�{"'^ '•,'' \, aa:•¢.,„f, Jv? w -.:•.,...-,,,.4,,.:.: .:•. " 3, _i,,'7a'f•" r£ V.t"4•h;f . 4•r,r'''"•';',- . 5 'lir.1 : wx x ��"'��'< as...y F:2nd w' .. n.2�4g C>t � A A �v�y7�{NYS h� [ ,_ x ,H:`ltrf'rx• i:..• k£,IrQ'cf.€€f^' '' 'i « :So11th of- t9.11,M � -it"'lrst . L.F if!!, !:'aL,?t'r 4. A inexatio2'1 :� ., • r: ' © 1 � :': •r t , '� , , A•-ttuexaiioi£ 7''''w.4'72....:.:', ,or,: , i, . l o ..,w's ofrban ' --''"\-:-.41.•:9, ,,, ,. ' ';Growth-Boundary ; ,.,_ � , '<. z.. : iv q s .., �•Annexation ' z is Sf .._ Ls v ry a • 1 ,,."_".._ ',fate 5 . .n ,-" mid , �Y'�f4'i qR, • l>•7c'ii ... > �. � �•*.. ..... NI.5th 'S£••• .... •„-.n_� y 3 , + , -Existing a,.,n..., ditio. n, s -. Structures ... fl '-,,,'- " -• •.,, ' L-,-, •., - oc • ' ...?-:,,..'.Z=',. - --, • • ' 1 , ' ''• ,''• -',:,,,';';.,'`' ' `'''''' "'" ''' '' " Al. •;‘)c' L'-'," '`'C-2 c • ,,' i : :- •,,,r, •,,,','-',',-'-'''• ''''''''' ' , , ,, ,,,,,,,,,, „, ‘ .=,:, ,,) i , ,- "c:' ''; <6''' '' ,, ...,:,:,,,,,,,,,, ,;,..,'-:-.'•'-. • 2-•,:e* 1'E•1,- 1'.‘4V 4:.; „•,'e,",•,n,-.'-, n•'',"gS 41i,"o03,174sub- division \• \i: .1••-''- ...- ' '.:, ,,,,---,:,•,,--,• - • • bile ,,. -...-. i./.% .,,.....,„ 37gp4c. ,,,, ,,-2„.,„ , ..: • ... a -,1— , I ;A* , , ,• home Par , .),f s'.' 4.,,,..,,...,..../ ...,;',.:,.:,)„,:,,,s,.-...:,..,.. • , -- ' L - •••r„), :- L ' ''• -•; ''..,',....',• `..' :'' Structures,map ,- -... ,,.. „. -- - ',,,,,,-, •- —f-'- , ,... „, , . . , . - , .,. ,,,<„,,,,,,v'.,,•,,,„,„:„‘„,. -„,,,,,,„,,.. , ... ,. ., . • „ ... , . „ .",y4,1-,.., ,',;.,',*4. '• \ 1''' • "*.•,. . 4•1*••''.'A 4t ' ',.,..: • ,$,, ' ''. ,,, ''.2..:''• • it:,!;r.- , ,,,';'; ' ,I,',;4•,v1.-:,-*--;:;., ,.,-,t,tile.4,...., - '.S.:, 4;4.. '''.: ,'' ' ,i-,4, i, -','" ".''. -Vint,— ,,,W.**.lt ,1,4* fcl• •••• .,,,:::',- •:, -,,,-*•;- ,,:' Ak• , ;,t,'''''';?ei'', Is.. C.N gin ,:Z.',A •* •'41:t1:•?,..4:,il :. : -' -: 'i ,t* Z' . '-' ' *i'',, ''', ''''''`I'C'.%*,' tfli riP%';'''fr ''''',:::•i'::' • ' ,:, ,'t'• i'-, .•-,, '..-A'.'• :: •''S,.. 2 ., , t,',.:-.,-,, ,,451'404' ...i..••,•••- „, ,,,,,, t',. - ..,„ ' .-,,," •... , -I. - -.-,I *..404500 , 0',,W.- ,-- .,.,•1 .;,:,-;,,...,' - :44 -:. . ' '''' ''.. * ''- ';'..., ''' ''' ''••••''''''s'''''':::.''T"," - *-".'.-''''-•:'''',+7 '''''''''' , . :`„ ,- . . . „,„. „ ',-;',;;,',, • ss SR 9OQat the ..,t,..,.-....--„,-soutik,4 ,c,,,,, ViOkr1904*Y - f. .„ii;':',:i'-,.., ,,,,,y/..;, N...,!,,,,•:. ; ,,,,,A - Home r..,, • ' , ' .. ' Mob10::P'!"'+'1• , . ' ' :,,,,-*,•:'„,:., , ,37-space Fir Grove 4 'Existing ConditionsTopography 3 p E , , iii - . cY , 'tip. } relatt vely flat` th ;_Y' ,,- f` eastern::80%0`'of site : ' . i 2O%,m . QpeS along C��; L. '` .,Topography, rP i, n?a'� l'4< , r < Zig �,. � ? �.�,�' ` =q3 -,-Ais ._,.. at t a:ui+' ..:2; 1\ 1 , f 4 '' g'�i �. at too ;Qwest from 148th Avenue'SE Aster Park across _d��e$,tent4i k r a 5 ' - - •• '•-.".!"."..t.*.,.4.,!.;"",:::,,', , ,, , •-,: .4irwg,,,k,*,v,„, ,',;, ', : . : ' ' . . ,„ ,s, :Us , ,• : „ ,", -,, ..."1'0;.,4 '','.,P.,'„kiies,'.,,:' ‘','• •.• . . .''' ' ' ' ' '',; , :.i,x,'./..,..,-:• ,`••• "',,; ,'•' .' .' 4'', • ':','',:' .' ''''' '' ` '',L A k' '''''.'4 AO it.'• ,.."2:'' ' .V.,'.,..,'•'',44(,'„4 " .' • ..• • •. •, '. . '' ''' Z' .f.,%.,-;,*:1. ;•••• * .';,,, "::,4;',..;-,' ' '• " . -' • s , .,,,_ , ' ,:611 ..",:, ' :iii•Itti'.:;" ' ", - ° U 1; ''" " ' r ,i,:•:4 NIES '''' rJul g min , ..3.1.. . : ... ill - - • •. - . ---- * - I ' °:'—7.-'!LI:,4•,,..:''•:g:,:;'•:.*Ini"..' -.-- -:.,, "'?I ,',...,,•• .„.,. <, • . .,., E ,''''''.1r.",:',,, ' .' .: , : '•',, ;:,,i, 1,—.-;,,;::*,,,`,.,,,,,,',.. . Looking :1 . 119, i,7 i..f,..„,..,,,,, rn. 148,ii, - 6:flatness 0„sl • ' , '-' ' Avenue SE showing relative ,•,.. ,."," , •, . ,,,'-',' ..," ,,, -,.6.:t.<41344*.4K•04$4..1,,,, , PublicServices -- -4-r.v.is",,,,,%,,,,l,,,w,,„,„ ,,,,,,, . • ,,, ,,s........--,.::: --- i.,,,,,„- ,.,' ,Coridit1011S xi kluz.i,“:: ;....,,,,,,:,.0„ ''':,,,, ,-'zIA-f,,T,,, , ,,,:::',,,,,,.,-' .4.4.',:K1',i,-, , ' •','. . "''':•'"-lir— ' 1 , ----,--i 4,,,,,.Fire .:, ; - ,..-.; 0, r:N. +h- District 10 Within,Fire ; Utilities wtistrit (i l alpr ,,,, ,. ...... s- iiti" , , ,..;::.:.'".:N., ,, ,ii..) c', ,. r. .ice ea 0.ea ;,-;.:"..,,,,.,.,:.p ,, ,-,:-- , „, •'-""-~s •„:„,,,,,,44„..„ :.,„,,,-,' • ,,, ',';'ftl''''Ti'',':','-'•''''.,,,,... .'' iit Renton Sewor, :f:.- • ',,-,,,,,,,,„ '•.7,Jw :ar erVil01.'eii A, ,"''" •,.....:!Y:, • ••','4.1,5,1:, ' .r.} ' ' ' 1,1e„ig.,,,,-,A;i,,,,, '-. ,,f ' , - * tak••• oe ON.'„ ',...'Ir.4;r ,,.. I.,.. .ifitatitua.a.,,..,„..' w, itni..J!41,AsiDwisi-irict ,,,,, , :., ..:',•,:. :..,,„, schou ..,.,., ' , ,, . .1. - ''''-':1'1:,:'!„"Jkriy4-,:y.,,C:i'''';'''''St,kt.,...„•,,,, ,: ' ,...',..• - - 'i / ' , -.,--,,;,,, •,.,„''27,"--',;*1•4,,i, ',,' - .'": ' '• ,' • „,,'--'";,,,):,,,- 6 . . • • .-....,,,,,,!„,..,.......L,..H•••.'•.,,.',•.:,. . . Comp,. .,Piall:Zoning .0„iii,----0.". '-'0 ,3'''eitiH..'..ftent • 1),,, 4. 4„4.4.,,•i..: nu-., ,, ,..... n •• .:.,::,,,,•,, :p da,, nigna..149:--';.,:,...': ,, :.... . : ,. .;. , ...-,.-.•- --;. 'T.-.".'-- •., *,..','-' c.01 cp. ""'4.",'-','-.',..".',':' --"-- • "'"c---'.. ' ''''-' -'.' . '- - ., ,!::,?-:40$0,.**..,••e•Y'-z-:7..,,,:.4 . . , i,oRti,,, , .,:•.,:,.....',.-.,`,',.',4:,,, i'...-. ,`,...',,,, ,.i :..''.<:['''',"':',.',..i.:A---‘,'..,:''''''.,-.'''-ir'r•'••'-'":'''•'•'''''-''•••'•-•''" " • ..--,''•:''''-' ' •,:-......,::r.,:, ':-.. ...„elr•,;.,-,,,,,...,•,,,.,...! ,''''•" :....,........,,,,,,,,:, „„.3......„:4.;;..;,,Q-"1",.!•••.-1-i . .!:....f.:..,....::.:,,,;‘,....,..:... le .. •....lefir:qT:.,4:::‘,,j0I.,',,,,,t,t,,,.:.,, . ..-,„,...;;., ,,,.-:,,'duse m,p., , .. st •, i. ii„,„ if,•,„,..„•.:..,,.„..„...„;„...,,,,......,,. ...,.,, k.c:lan „ ...-';'.".f 44.241, ,,., 4."....,.0...•,..,;.-R-4 - . ., . .,,,,„ cidenila_ .:.. ..::' 4siivatt.',....c,-, ..:,'.,Ill47,: 14.",,,,, .44,,t.. ...12 du/ac : --- : .;- . ,,,,iianu..!,..n- s,,i...).,,,..,.:, ...:ii„,:::,i..:::.„.,,k,,,,,,,,tg!ki,'. ...,, ':011:' .- :H.4--'''''4•t''' ••:.:,:-•-,;,4,..ljr*4Z.4*3t:4•:':4'''k,"•-4:,;,,,,; .:';„ : • ' Iiii kcii4AMair ;kW Pit,,,-;•-•-•'Artga<I''' ' a'''''''H'''''''''ft:.'''''.i.,%Fi,%1;:4•,.,.. rill' 4Stail,i'---• - ' lir E''AR 644* . , .,'. ILt kid.t':'4PIn...i '' +jaI. ..4 d:,a°''''''' '',.' .44.. -_,44 y-. 40 :;;i1,411.:.::.&.:.,;,'...:1-:.......',*-,: ii'.. --;....L.,:tztstue4p...4,0'.'''.;,,,,,,,,.., .... , - ::. : 1 iieduiat'''''' ''''' dtriti,,*-7:,, ..,,, ••, ' 4- '. 1,:',48..i.;.iP.ts,11, , . '.' acre ...‘ . r''' ,.;,7 t6units/gr. •4 ' ...,, Z4 • ,.,. 411.011ti$0P;;71.:''',. :".';:%.!4:.r',:i',..,:.'.." , ... , 1,6 ,•'... ,,, Ti..,:,,,,.°4*,,fiNki.....4;•4, N•'.t,,4i...,SITIF- • • '• —'Inning Map ,,,,,,,,,..,-..;,,,,..f.:1.,,,j.'...:.,,,..i::,.,...1..,,,..,4,,,...,,,,..,,4,• •. Count...'..,...‘,..:',„-i,,,,:-.4;,:-'--;: -'',-'1,:;'A';'.,',','. .:.'ig,,,. . • ' , . • :,, ",,-.-........,,...,......'....... ,,,i.,,.,,.:,,,,,.,..,.,.:,,..„..,,,.,,,,.,.q•„..„:,,i,,,.„,„ i,..„•,0,.,„„,4..„.i...;„.,,.i,,-,,„„,„„.en,...,„,,.,.,,,.,,,,,,...,.t „,.:•,6i-.-;•,:-,,u,,,,-•,um,..„.-..,..',• p''':'-.,'p...-..l.-. a'. ..n •< •Designation and Proposed ZOling .. .. .. , • ••,--.••-„...,. ..,,,,.• ....• ” , :,„,,,,,44,,,,,,,t, . .... .•„. • , •,,,,,,..,,,,,,,,,,,.,,„,„,..,..„:.. . .' .. j - ,'.1,',.,,,c.!:,.,4,-i,.,,:,,,,,,,,....,,,,. ,„,... -•.• -- , .,„..:,.„.,:...,.:, .. .. . ..,. ,„-•-,,,,,,,,,,,..,A,,I.4.?0,„.„,,,,,,,,,,.„„,,-...., . . •:,‘„„... iiitial rlik: .:,;4,-n ,-,. ..',....„„,.,,.:„,i,J-J.;...„,..:,,;,.....„,•„... , -..,......;w!f•+; :..• ' --; it,,,.;,„„i-„,. .,0.Niq5,11-#:,,,,f,,,,..,„,„r ,?..,2. .,,,inn---:Land . ..w..„,,....Iii,:i.:RN,„.3.J..k,„;,. ..,;,,,•,:,1„liillr, ...< ,.......„:„„:„.:,,,,,,„,,,•:„„.„....„:4„,„..•••,„, ....„,,,s,.,....„:„:„.,,• ,,•=:,,,,,-;-_ ,comp K-..77]..-,• -,.,,,,....y,•-•'.! p.%Ni,.„•,!,,::.i•i•ol!z:nrr-!: ‘z.,4•04,010 , R.,.nto,, - . ..'f...,..ii, . ,...„--- -, !..,,-7;ki,„ • •.,„:,...,..,•''...,. ; iiiiiiiiiiii*: ::.,romr- - ,, vi-: e14-ap..,,:::-, , Dertsity .:,,,,,"!1*.,,,,,,,e-,,,,,,liciiiiiii . sr 11.3a . • 0 .4''' 44 ittLOW .•'-':''''''';'. ;,;;'''''' 14`-'°!;';'r.--:'''l'•.•.Mitfr• • Slt 4 .,..40: siaen.4, ...,th.,?,:ti QziggiNg, 1. lt*k .•;At.f:'•:1.n.,.,,..',:.$...4:ft"tt:,„.•4•4''' ..,,,,,...•;. '.. * ,,,,,>;i-. 1.4_6:!ti..R.Viiiii ' ,4,. ' .46.''..',;;',"',..7.-,,.,-ii.s..',- •'•- .:""p•i•-: '..,-•.,','.,4:.:'-::::,:.::..,,:.,,.;'...-'.,..:.:,.4..:'...-:2.-.'i,,,,.,.,,',:,..1.7/•1i:',','t,',".'it.:L7i.,;.Y•..,,:.,.:;.•.t.,..s.1•,',;•,:,,::•.i,.,,K,...,,:,'-,4(:. e,2.:i:•'•::-.;‘,.4i,i,,e%';k„4',,,,•,•..1.::.4.::,,:4:;7..:.:,•4•.,,,],.,g.:,,,::,:,,::;i"-::,'t.:.4"-,.,•:..R:......]..,.‹,. .,,:..e•g.4.:H,-‘.„:n.::::,;,.,-24-:i..-i•'.•t.'”-io--.,..i'....N......7.4.,",,':.5,,,.rs7,.-.,„,,,I,..,.4.,,,,'.4.,,'r,c:,,,•i,.i:,,„,,-;.,,,,',k.,ff::..,•,7;,.:.,,,,,,;q..,.•,,4:."..,,•-.H,..L..,,!o..,:;•:1.7'1',.•:,r.,:in1;t,.'.,•...,:•F „ 71nax4'auf9Iacre) :; 1 ' :7.i'.;,i'",,H......'...,,.;:%:::-:,•:,.::••...'..:,*. ,,.'..• ;,. '_.:.'R',• s,,.,,,,....,i.a1,,';,.,...,:,::u;.:;i!,..Z,ii,i,Lnt.ii:7,iio,,:,i,,t,,,,,*,t,:!.,.,.,:.,,,,.g:i:::4,, _'..• r It Renton 7MP:i1;Land sdu se 7 ... ,, ,... . : - .....,,„,,,,„,,,,..'5'. 5W.,'''''Y''''''3..ii.,Q,,,....,;.1%.'!i.5.:$55q;. '5'':; 1...:,;;..' '.;v5 5"'•I'.,..;;,..:.'.:5:5.:''':''''.. .1',, . . . , . ' ' . '' ••'-5'2.,',:r1..,„;5,:'5 ,15;,;5i0,. '!Kt/5,fi'f'".."'r*5. : ::'''' ''<*';'''''';:'5.'i?6''''57'1"5'51'''•:, '''''''. •: " " .,...,'1..,4.,::,,...,..,:,5',..:.';'..,;',:,..',,:5'.4,,',,,',:r,4,„,'',„',,:''„,.f,i*fi,..0d,..,,,',.,..,1'„:,::,':1..'.„.•!,R.„4„.,4,d'''„'.'.,'',.,dAV."'.''-,4„a5,f..„n.'.:,.,,,„t5:.''„. Boundary '.. o- udaf y.R,. e.v, i ew B"ar Objectives .. • 4i''.,‘,I....•;;.LPre...4.PSt;rV,,!.•'•.•a•••4U'*0,..:,P2..1..,.611.)1141';4i.-,,•.,4"1.24.•,,L4,.„•,.,.;.,:,:: !: ,• , !,....N.!Moi...... c. h,;:..g,change„:,,....,.c ' rie o ghbrib ds.Pd •.-.„,...:.„.,...k,„i-, --:- . , .99 ,, :.., ....,,..',:',,,,:,,::.,.:,,,7.:::::.......:,:::..,, '-...::.:dothriplities-, l „ ,,:b,:.:.::. -... 4.44i.k.s....,.. Uses City and parcel U. e of physical boundaries • •••• • ' boundaries •:. .. . : . -. . , •-, . :...... "... . '-.:..r,'...:.:;•„'.•':•'4!'',.':i;:,;'.:.x•i..'';,'',,7C.‘iea,,...., ".9P.'.:,.i.",4"•,'21.',.!:2r'bserv.ation •..-. S..-e-riie• -a ea boundaries s ol'l016a , 6r8iareas : piowpaslyagreed toby A `•';',..'•,.'.'•','''''..'''''''' ' :•'•'''.'!:1' districts ., • - . : . . :.... .:. ..... ,;,i,...,.:„;,..:,,,,:,...6.„:„.. ,.,:,:„.,,,,,,,f.,,,,,•4...,,,,,,,,„.s.., i.,.,:y.4.:,,,,....':.1,,,I,;,,,,,,,,,-,,,...:,,.,...,,.;• ,„,,!,•,:,:.:...1„6:;,, e ,,,,z....h•••••6•1.4:.•-ni••a_iwy is interim. ii''''''ili6entiOtfofa:bnonna y ..,. i'*rAe7tgt: jar,,D"aq,:.<aa.n, ..es, „ ..' pending- other annexations within:Citys FAA ,...... ....„.,_,,:,:*„.„.,.„:„..,,.,,,„!koiwnzo,•,,,,,,,,, . ..., . . , . . ... . , .• .:..:•:.!.:•.-.•- •,-,.:',1',,,,, 4f44.,:,•i,,,'".,,. ,.:,.,i:.,:...... ' . ' ''''''''''' '''''•':2'4'i',1.4iiit.::::.'.;•':.1.,:;,;4d . . .4,n.:':04::.:44.::. ,4,.:,•Retevat'.136„. vitidary, . ..... ...Review Board Objectives • ” • ----,:,...---- - D;g:0;111:7(;r1Q,';'Ji ; . ;, Y-01 , .....,., Aoap. p. l....ia.b leThere districtspoc44i.pm.wy., , , 4rL., 00activespecial purpose districts 7 ,_ , .'1',':';',...'.'i.s'3iliapractioai' Boundaries are interim. .A43:4$tmen .,;,.. . , ,:•., ,. •,„..:... ''.6Y-6*.-iiie:s.',,,,•::,. :,;,0!:.1/?':,q," ,! ' •-',!'all0 'its FAA . _. • .: .. ,:.....:„.•,:.,..uli„,...,.: • ...,..,:. ., :City policy is to annex . .• ' ' site is in . . ,,,:,,,ik.,‘",.,,: :..,•",,.,F;.,..i,', - • • .. . .,,,,, ,•.: Annexation ' :"*"'"''''''''4ti°11as cities or'' ' ' 'designated FAA •••• 10,049r ---.........City Av. "''ekationLP).. ..• . . urban in 16*.no.,..pTiP,M ,,„ , .. :: „ ::,, ...............as such' is ••,, ::: - ties or towns pi .- - .. •:.....:.,;:,..., . . .' ter.• . ,.. • , . • , . . ..-..-'',..-P.:, ,--- 'hich- ':---'.en4rac 66-ittota,taabfta!,W .... • : • ,....;;.. , .: . ter ..:,:.,:.[,:tw,,,•aitiltibart me arac..,.;,..„„,..,4,.,,.,,,,„ .,,,. .,..• :.:,,...••:.;::, ..;•. • . ,4, 4i.y.,4,„,...,:.„:.. .,,.,. --••:•••!:•:,-,-,:.:,,:.:,..,.,... , . . . ,':::',! ,;::.,•,:4-,..i.,-A1-,-,p,,„„r,.".Ac.,..,,,....' ,...,. -,,,• , -:••••4,...... ,•,..,....:*;,...,, , ..• ..,.:......::. • ,'''..•',..:.---:-.;,q5*:,:ly'.:.::;‘, .. --,.' 8 fiscal Impact Analysis • General Fund cost and revenue implications Assumes potential of-±61 single-family homes at full development Assumes new assessed home value of $500,000 —Assumes retention of 2 single-family detached dwellings currently on site .ti Fiscal = Impact Analysis of$27,724 -.n, = Estimated one-tuneparks development cost 9 �C onc • 1us c ,,,,,„,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,„4.71,Best nterest7 .n v= eneral _ve1far " � stir Y ed iit,1\�F 7�Y � -, ' M 4,,,,, , )�^Y f,i 'n, 'Y� u s Cit Business, real :byren firing higher. meat a` efficient urban services • `Y'' $F � r n 11���+ tout with City s.. exati+ n policies > ener l 3 con ste ,t wi ll Boundary Review Board •• C�,"b eC lY ,. ', 4 y x„ K l arlltu xe e ue su plus a„..:..full development 1`4,��k =ate ; :�-,x,-.-..,,-,,,,,,,,,,,44,,,,,,:',-4"00„.,,,,,,' ry no otbe maj •or service issues yp 'diea.,`, _ r n '''s7� . ¢d •nn intra Ir.--econunends that+Council: . ,,A c e O e Petition•fdr:.the 18.48-acre r „ # °.., eAatox,, ' . :utd: z�a to forward the Notice of Intent „ _age to tle�uidary,review Board, upp t =... zc €n c,49;0onsistent with t .e current ' cmp�r,��venL,anidTse leap RLI , ' a � orU4�• d , '''• - ►� ”' $ta tQ begin p epa-i relevant . � �t .c v"zo I •g ord n c for;future Council �dh „�the B1appiroVe :this annexation 10 `SY O aa m, + -NTO� HUDSON ANNEXATION PUBLIC HEARING COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF ANNEXATION & FUTURE ZONING November 20, 2006 Tonights public hearing is decide whether to now accept this annexation into the City, and if so, whether to finalize future zoning. The annexation site abuts the City on its northern and a portion of its boundary. A portion of SE 168th Street is proposed to be included in this annexation. The site is relatively flat where it abuts SE 168th Street but falls off slightly to the east where the eastern portion drains into Soos Creek. The City is now in receipt of the Boundary Review Board's closing letter approving this annexation effective September 29, 2006. In light of one public meeting and two public hearings on this annexation the Administration is recommending that Council now approve this annexation. It is also recommending that Council adopt concurrent zoning that would be applied at the time of annexation. law Under RCW 35A.14.340, a minimum of two public hearings is required on annexation related rezones. Tonight's hearing will be the first of these two required public hearings. The 13.69- acre site is located in the City's Potential Annexation Area and is designated Residential Single Family (RS) and Residential Medium Density (RM) on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The site currently has King County NB, R-18, and R-12 zoning on it. The R-18 zoning, allows up to 27 units per gross acre with bonuses and TDRs and the R-12 zone bonuses up to 18 units per gross acre. There are also three lots that have Neighborhood Business zoning on them. In order to be consistent with the City's current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, the Administration is recommending that the non-street portions of this annexation that are currently designated Residential Single Family on the Comp Plan Land Use Map be zoned R-8, eight units per net acre, and that the non-street portions currently designated Residential Medium Density on the Comp Plan Land Use Map, be zoned R-10, 10 units per net acre. Hearing Handout 11-20-06.doc\ . '.',. -----_.-2-1-„/ ,-, 4-1 i ' .' .... .o. I 1 1 SE 27st •.,-5t ,. -- ....,I I 1610 . , . . .. , , . SE 161st St . . . , . . ) I , I - I I \\ SE ?:2 . SI t, I I 1 1 rliaL >i I < , I 1 I I I i \ -_ -——, 1 • -- -- 4' 1 "•:cr I Sf 164th St . _____ C/iI _ S 27th St i I- - — •— I 1--- ---------- •,,-' , I ----.. __ k 0,'',153.:''', ---7. 'ii. ,... "NN/i,S`r, •,,, ) q) • %, %,(I's'..`..37" 1 ,(D `,.....,lib t..., '''.:,,} - 1 i -5_, V% p 't', ..e., 1 , _ , % •,'.-3,,•, cr• I,, 1 .co ____ , -----I ._.c I . ._c • .er _z- ,_ ..._ • • 17'3 — • A -,--- c..c . — 1 1 4.--- • ...--. o .--- 11 _ • SE 168th St . , ... id Pi • ... ,,, 1 v) CA+ V - • SI, 1-69.th St '; '4411110' S I ; -- to , , 1 r- - • - . . , 1 — i , -4: , •,, .„ , .,,c) ______:„& . - ,1 cz-.> • : . /,... .,. .,,f c:›, !I 1 . .--'''', . ! i— i I ' "*--I I____ 1 _ ;.,-- . I,- . If S t 1 1 1 % 1: . 1 ' I j , i 1 I LJI 7 s' i d SE1 172n St sE 172nd St - 1' Q) , ›.. ,• ___, — . -cc I - '-`-• / I N ".,, I.\/ -.....- '-, -,„ - ''.. -'•-• , N / \ N / r SF . 173rd St . ..,, ,....._ .. . as, — _ .,„, ....4 -.... \ i . \ . . .. .. ---,, , ,. • . N : b , Proposed Hudson Annexation 0 600 1200 i Figure 1:vicinity Map nazistommanowassemessis City Limks I . 7200 14 *lit I. :::4',-..'....-"-'••-• Piwgio Arno At44 •.h 'IWO Hearing Handout 1 1-20-06.do6 144. 7.77 Hudson Annexation Public Meeting to Consider Effectuation and Future Zoning ?:y: ^ November 20,2006 City of Renton aroma n(Phase of CurrentMAMMns Perkins 52rac. Background"I Park Ouerin `� • 10%Notice of Intent Petition received Sept 2006 ? Preserve osa. ■Public Meeting held November 14,2005 Our Plateau s< ,4'4.5 ac •60%Direct Petition submitted,January 2006 •Petition certified by King County, February 2006 ▪Notice of Intent package sent to BRB,Aug 2006 ;a;`"='" • • BRB Closing letter approving annexation,Sept i„ Maplewood 2006 . Addition •PBPW notifies staff in Nov 2006 that signalization . � �-',Hu Paan Aae9efarmn ... i funding for project at SE 168th St and 108th Ave Pala ti SE could be jeopardized if area annexes before 57no ao County awards contract Background, continued Existing Conditions • PAA—Within Renton's Potential Annexation Area • County now anticipates contract for the ■ Location—Southeast portion of City at signalization to be awarded in April 2007 intersection of Benson Road South and SE 168th . As a result,proposed effectuation of annexation Street would change from December 2006 to May 1, • Size—14.63-acres(includes streets) 2007 • Natural Features—Western portion of site is • Tonight's hearing is to consider whether to now relatively flat whereas eastern portion slopes effectuate this annexation,and, if so towards Soos Creek to the east • To decide on future zoning that would apply on • Existing Land Use—19 existing single-family the effective date of annexation homes, 152 multi-family units,and at least one vacant parcel • Boundaries—as shown on next slide 1 Existing Conditions - Structures Existing Conditions - Topography .- . • 19 estimated existing SF dwellings •7%slope on • 152 Multi- .' eastern half of family units ...4% E 168"'St site • w Structures Map - „>, d Topography Map Existing Conditions - Sensitive Areas • Portions of site west of 108th Ave SE ;� ,, 4, ��st � drain west to Panther r � t Creek ;.,. `_ 'ti.,." a.�,� sr � Y ■ Portions of site east ,, of 108th Ave SE / drain south to Soos •l" '�`�,` - ° ,- '` Creeks :` View looking southeast towards intersection of \ Benson Road South and SE 168"Street where joint Sensitive Areas Map > City/County funded signal is proposed 'a , 4.�.d�" h 4 °a� dfit'y,. s2a II - ��a et.,:. £ � Yee . g g = View looking northwest towards portion of site west of View looking southeast along SE 168x Street from 108thAvenue SE 109th Avenue SE 2 Existing Conditions — Public Existing County Land Use Services Designations • Fire • Within District#40 ten ` K.C.Land Use Map i � I: -::Y L,-111,,L,.. �' ■ Urban Residential ,.::.,,r.:- n�'� • Utilities 4-12 du/ac ,, . .r ='712 • Water-Soos Creek Water&Sewer ri -� . . District water service area • Urban Residential , '�' r- >12 du/ac \ 'XS `i ;,'"' ' • Sewer-Soos Creek Water&Sewer "r .�y .� ,w *-„+. District sewer service area I �a I ' It] • Neighborhood , ' ` I ■ Schools ---� Business Center p V ■ Renton School District 1rt "ii fi4e SITE . ; Existing County Zoning Possible Zoning if Annexed RLD K.C.Zoning • Community Business Renton Comp Plan Land Use Map • R-8-Residential 8 du/ac* }a't,.a. --;y- • Residential vm4 if 4=== Single Family(RS) "Bonuses to 12 du/gr.ac. `i ,, : --..--2--r_, 9 4 .Y wow a ' = ■ Residential Medium(RM) '`r 1 • ir.. du/ac**Residential 12 "41, N a � „ Possible Renton Zoning . ill r• **Bonuses to 16 du/gr.ac. ; -» •* 11� ......r si" � • R-8 (8 du/net acre) t' ■ R-18-Residential 18 fi t RM du/ac*** j- ■ R-10(10 du/net acre) tt�.... SITE *'*Bonuses to 27 du/gr.as �_�i,.... . ", E _...._ _ .. SITE King County Zoning Map RS Renton Comprehensive Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis Fiscal Impact • Assumes 19 existing houses w/ average assessed value of$220,000 ■ Assumes 152 multi-family units • Assumes average assessed value of $350,000 for new infill units One time parks acquisition and development cost of$138,108 3 Conclusion Conclusion, continued • This proposed annexation is generally consistent • This annexation is estimated to cost the City with City annexation policies and relevant Boundary $53,545 in 2006 dollars,if it were to come into the Review Board objectives for annexation City now • No major impediments to the provision of City • Assuming build out in 10 years or so,because it is services to the area have been identified already significantly developed,this cost would • Surface water costs are estimated at$3,258 per only be slightly reduced in 2006 dollars,and year,and • The annexation appears to further City Business • Transportation believes that unless the City delays Goals by encouraging responsible growth and effectuation of this annexation it will be responsible possibly serving as a catalyst for expanding its for the estimated$789,000 cost of a traffic signal boundaries to the north or west to result in a more and other improvements at the intersection of 108th regular City boundary Avenue SE and SE 168th Street Recommended Motion The Administration recommends that Council: •Approve Ordinance 1296 effectuating the 14.63-acre 4 Hudson Annexation on May 1,2007 •Approve Ordinance 1297 rezoning approximately 6.60 F' acres of the Hudson Annexation area to R-10,ten units 10,4 per net acre,consistent with the Residential Medium ,.> land use designation shown for these areas on the City's t." Comprehensive Plan „ •Approve Ordinance 1298 rezoning approximately 5.83 `n acres of the Hudson Annexation R-8,eight units per net 4° ,•• _ • acre,consistent with the Residential Single Family land use designation shown for these areas on the City's! Comprehensive Plan 4 ti`SY O`e ADMINISTRATIVE, JUDICIAL, AND ' , LEGAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT • MEMORANDUM DATE: November 20, 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 • Kick off your holiday season on Friday, December 1st, with the 13th Annual Clam Lights event at Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park. Join family and friends for an evening of entertainment, holiday spirit, and stunning visual effects. Co-sponsored by Ivar's, Inc., and the City of Renton, this free event draws thousands of spectators each year. Entertainment will begin at 6:30 p.m., followed by the official lighting at 7:20 p.m., when the park will be transformed into a winter wonderland. Marvel at the beautiful array of lighting on the buildings, trees, shrubbery, and walkways nightly through January 1st. • Following the official Clam Lights lighting on December 1st, watch for the Rainier Yacht Club's popular"Parade of Boats" at 7:30 p.m., with each lighted boat decked out in the spirit of the season. • Continue in the holiday spirit at the official Tree Lighting event at the Piazza Park(corner of South 3rd Street and Burnett Avenue South) on Saturday, December 2nd, from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. This wonderful community event in downtown Renton is sponsored by Piazza Renton and the City of Renton, and features a line-up of local musicians and singers, a visit from Santa, and refreshments. Be there for all the fun, and remember to bring your camera for photos with Santa. Non-perishable food donations will be accepted for the Salvation Army Food Bank. Call 425.917.0173 or 425.228.1977 for more information. • The Rainier Yacht Club's lighted boat parade will make an encore appearance at Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park at 7:30 p.m. on Saturday, December 2nd. • Featuring entertainment by a local northwest choir, the Argosy Christmas Ship will be just off the shores of Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park from 6:00 to 6:20 p.m. Sunday, December 3rd. This annual visit delights thousands of spectators, and is sure to put you in the holiday mood. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT • The Parks Division will remove two Raywood ash trees growing at 416 and 418 Shattuck Avenue South tomorrow. The two large 18-inch diameter trees have begun to lean and buckle sidewalk and curb sections, and have poor branch attachments that could fail. Replacement "Leprechaun" ash trees will be planted along with other trees scheduled for Shattuck Avenue during the spring of 2007. Administrative Report November 20,2006 Page 2 • The annual K9 Candy Cane 5K Fun Run& Walk will start at 9:00 a.m. on Sunday, December 3rd, at the Renton Community Center and travel along the Cedar River Trail before looping back to the Community Center. Competitive runners, fun runners, walkers,junior athletes, and families(with or without dogs) are all invited to join the fun. Free after-race photos with Santa will be available. Pre-registration is $17 (includes t-shirt) and must be postmarked by November 24th. Race day registration is $20 (no t-shirt guaranteed). Bring a can of pet food to be donated to the Renton Food Bank to help the pets of those in need. PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT • A project to improve Rainer Avenue between 2nd Street and 4th Place has been awarded $1,906,200 in funding for FY 2008 by the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB). This project is part of the overall improvements to the Hardie/Rainer corridor, and includes replacing the BNSF railroad bridges and pedestrian and transit improvements to this important gateway to Renton. • The cities of Renton and Tukwila have submitted a joint application to the WSDOT Regional Mobility Grant competition for $5.5 million for improvements to the Sound Transit Longacres Station. Project improvements include a 400-stall parking lot with intermodal connections such as roadway improvements and non-motorized connections to enhance access to the station. The application was scored highly by the selection committee, which will forward its recommendations to the Legislature on December 15th. The Legislature will approve the final project selections during the legislative session starting in January. CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: • t 414.00 Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 11/20/2006 Dept/Div/Board.. AJLS/City Clerk Staff Contact Bonnie I. Walton Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated Correspondence.. 10/23/2006 regarding the Linn Office Conversion Ordinance Landscape Variance application. (File No. LUA-06-108, Resolution V) Old Business Exhibits: New Business A. City Clerk's letter (11/6/2006) Study Sessions B. Appeal - Alden Linn (11/1/2006) Information C. Hearing Examiner's Report & Decision (10/23/2006) Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Legal Dept Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: N/A Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance application was filed on 11/1/2006 by Alden Linn, accompanied by the required $75 fee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council to take action on the Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance application appeal. cc: Jennifer Henning Larry Warren Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh ccy G ��, CITY OF RENTON + ♦ City Clerk Kathy Keolker,Mayor Bonnie I.Walton NZ' November 6, 2006 APPEAL FILED BY: Alden Linn RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated 10/23/2006 regarding the Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance application, located at 337 Park Ave. N. (File No. LUA-06-108, V) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8,Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's decision on the Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance application has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110F, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited • to support of their positions within ten(10)days of the date of mailing of the notification of the filing of the appeal. The deadline for submission of additional letters is 5:00 pm, November 16, 2006. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee.- The Council Liason will notify all parties of record of the date and time of the Planning and Development Committee meeting. If you are not listed in local telephone directories and wish to attend the meeting, please call the Council Liason at 425-430-6501 for information. The recommendation of the Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Attached are a copy of the appeal and a copy of the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeals of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. For additional information or assistance,please feel free to call me at 425-430-6502. Sincerely, 650144.44v IJaztorti Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Attachments cc: Council Liason 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055-(425)430-6510/FAX(425)430-6516 RENTON City of Renton Municipal Code;Title IV,Chapter 8,Section 110—Appeals 4-8-110C4 The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170,the fee schedule of the City. (Ord.3658,9-13-82) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council—Procedures 1. Time for Appeal: Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body,any interested party aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Council, upon a form furnished by the City Clerk,within fourteen(14)calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five(5)days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten(10)days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report,the notice of appeal,and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982) 5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required, the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional evidence or testimony,and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or testimony,it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council,and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner.(Ord.4389, 1-25-1993) 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050FI,and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration,or modify,or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. 8. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F2 and F3,and after examination of the record,the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record,or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration,or enter its own decision upon the application. 9. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant.(Ord 3658,9-13-1982) 10. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving,modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord.4660, 3-17-1997) `"'0 CITY OF RENTON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION/RECOMMENDATIONNOV 0 1 2006 TO RECEIVED RENTON CITY COUNCIL FII.F NO. ? f1 -61';.�'_ _ if, I -8 CITY C ERK'S OM CE S APPLICATION NAME 1 The undersigned interested party hereby files its Notice of Appeal from the decision or recommendation of the Land Use Hearing Examiner,dated //// , . 1. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY APPELLANT: i REPRESENTATIVE(IF ANY): Name: !±f�` L-r) 1 ? Name: Address: ,;(4776, . Address: I l f t`l'1 6 2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets,if necessary) Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based: FINDING OF FACT: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report) No. Error: A- 'I- - - Correction: CONCLUSIONS: No. Error: Correction: OTHER: No. Error: Correction: 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation,if desired) Reverse the decision or recommendation and grant the following relief: Modify the decision or recommendation as follows: Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows: Other Appellant/Representative Signature Date NOTE: Please refer to Title IV,Chapter 8,of the Renton Municipal Code,and Section 4-8-110F,for specific appeal procedures. CC L,. y Fy c . %Id 1ff/r�,�j_� H:ICITY CLERKWPPEALNAPPEAL to Council.doc fL.'. ;\ 'T) b 4 r. :.<< 44,-' • Alden and Tisha Linn 2907 Park Ave N CITY OF RENTON Renton WA 98056 NOVO 1 2006 RECEIVED Nard October 31,2006 ( TY CtERK'S OFFICE City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 Dear Sir or Madam: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision Project Name: 337 Park Ave N We are appealing the hearing examiners decision to our variance request to use a commercially zoned property as an office building. We have investigated all possible uses of the property and found that there is a great deal of demand for boutique office locations in this area. With the build out of the Landing project we have noticed numerous small boutique shops opening up in the area and specifically on Park Ave N. The property was originally bought to run my wife's interior design business out of but we now have a 6 month old son and our plans changed. We decided to rent the property and presented it to numerous people as both a house and an office space. We did not have any interest in the property as a home and found that the best use of the property was as a boutique office type use. We currently have a lease agreement with Renton Realty to operate a real estate office out of the building contingent on this approval. Technically our variance request is to mitigate the landscape requirement for a commercial arterial property abutting an R-10 property. The existing building is 13 feet 3 inches from the lot line. The code requires the building to be 15 feet from the property line. We have thought about demolishing the building and building a new one but the feasibility and cost required for this prohibitive. We have looked at numerous layouts to build a new building and have not been able to come up with a layout that is of a significant improvement given the current codes restrictive setbacks for this size lot Please see Exhibit A for a view the possible footprint of building that could be put on this lot We are requesting approval of the variance request as stated by the planning department recommendation. We also have a signed document with the abutting neighbor with approval of the cities suggested plan. Exhibit B. Sincerely, a(4,1 t/orp-x, givwyti Alden and Tisha Linn ( ( Z , • \----- , \\, . ,,,,</ . ,() Kei ., -- ( _ \\,,, . ,N, \ , -Aki ,r,,,, elloce ,(1 -,` ) 'R ,,„:,,, . ,---,_.- e.._14.1116-11 4r1460 ---17___. , \\ (7110 , • *ogot.ikv-- \ , ....`...) ?' 51' ' 4.311.- 3`.f'' ` 3 4 \ N _ /P. '1k ' Z Loer AgP\ ‘14 aw.; fx/r 5 1 a t a , "ilk ';,X/1/. (L7A f"Al"'Ct ���.. I ?AR.K.14c I r *** I 05 1....0 0, le0111,g_ 1 I. C1)4 OP.6d.i0(5": i17EWALK 1 1,-A14 . ` t/ Josephine Ganuelas —if JJJJ ���t 335 Park Ave N titX-- (1Renton WA 98055 October 6,2006 City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 Dear Sir or Madam: Landscape specifications approval Project Name: 337 Park Ave N I Josephine Ganuelas residing at 335 Park Ave N approve Alden Linn whose property is adjacent to mine to remove my chain link fence and replace it with a wooden fence on my property. I approve Alien's plan for replacing the fence, adding a climbing plant and planter boxes as designated in the "Office conversion landscape specifications°document attached. Sincerely, r-- - .,::'..------/4-4tic----t-cy Jose ' uelas '` / flif i r 1� Ng 6 i 1 T-- .7 G r 7 i !' ' ,I)7 `G/L e ,ll et I C .: f i i i'. f' . / I v; } 6) ,epi /t ';'`c. ! �''/6 C t. 6" i'l--/ 1rr /Jrr'CG �i- /1 4k i ` �� . i -: C fif /) P /6, 4„, X pfrirty-e-k_ -(c-.211-._'-e ..... tz1 +' /, 11 el P -vial , f i October 23, 2006 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON Minutes APPLICANT/OWNER: Alden&Tisha Linn 2907 Park Ave.N Renton, WA 98056 PROJECT NAME: Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance File No.: LUA 06-108, V-H LOCATION: 337 Park Avenue N; southwest of Park Ave N and N 4th Street SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicants have requested approval of a variance from the landscape requirement in the CA zone. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve with conditions DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on October 3, 2006. 441tirr PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining available information on file with the application, field checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the May 16, 2006 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, October 3, 2006, at 9:02 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No. 2: Site Plan application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No.3: Staff Recommended Site Plan Exhibit No. 4: Zoning/Neighborhood Detail Map The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Valerie Kinast, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way,Renton, Washington 98055. The project is located on the west Noir side of Park Avenue N just south of N 4th Street. There is a lot on the corner, a restaurant with a beer garden. The site is zoned CA and was last used as a single-family residence. • Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance File No.: LUA-06-108, V-H October 23,2006 Page 2 Along Park some of the lots are zoned R-10 and some of the corners are zoned CA or CN. There are a number of single-family homes that are zoned commercial along Park. The lot to the south of the site is zoned R-10, residential zone, the applicants are required to meet a 15-foot landscaped setback as a buffer to the residential use. The applicants are requesting a variance to eliminate the requirement to provide the 15-foot site obscuring landscape strip along the south property line. The lot is 47-feet wide by 103-feet in length. The existing building is 1,600 square feet and the house sits approximately 13.5 feet from the south property line with a 10- foot driveway located four feet from the house. The house to the south is seven feet from the property line. The site has alley access, its main access from Park Avenue N. Given the commercial zoning of the property the site is unusually small. To convert the house to a commercial use the applicants must provide four parking stalls as well as the 15-foot landscape buffer to the south. Due to the narrowness of the lot it is impossible to meet both parking and the landscape buffer requirements. Even if the house were torn down and rebuilt, it would be impossible to fit both the 4 parking stalls and the landscape buffer on this site. Accessing a commercial lot from the alley is very unusual. Hearing Examiner stated that hardship really needs to be shown,the residence to the south needs protecting otherwise the use of this lot imposes on the lot to the south. Ms. Kinast stated that they considered reducing the size of the parking,but given the size of the lot it would be a problem. The driveway is an existing driveway and it goes right to the property line, there is a gravel strip between the house and the driveway, so it could be shifted. This request could be detrimental to the property to the south,but if decorative fencing with climbing plants would be placed along the property line, the effects could be minimized. A visual barrier affects the perception of noise and the fence can also reduce noise. A three-foot landscape strip would also reduce the noise of cars maneuvering in that area. The subject site is intended to become a real estate office. Staff feels that this request does not constitute a special privilege. Precedence would be set with the granting of this variance. Alden Linn,2907 Park Ave. N., Renton,WA 98056 stated that he and his wife bought the property last year with the intention to turn the residence into an Interior Design business. They had a baby and plans changed, they decided to lease the site, they looked at several options and finally Renton Realty made an offer to rent the site and signed a contract conditional upon approval of this variance. He has worked with the neighbor to the south, he showed her the staff report,a drawing of the style of fence proposed to be installed and pictures of what that would look like once the shrubs grew and pictures of planter boxes that would be used for the 3-foot landscape strip. She agreed to all the plans. Neil Watts,Development Services Director, stated that this is a small structure, it appears to be approximately a 1500 square structure. Trip generation for an office runs about 8 daily trips to 16 daily trips per thousand, on a smaller level business it would be considerably less. This site makes perfect sense for an office, it becomes more of a problem if it is retail or restaurant. As a condition to this variance,a restrictive covenant might be considered in order to limit the uses of this site to office or residential. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 9:32 am. Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance File No.: LUA-06-108, V-H October 23, 2006 Page 3 ,44,000 FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS& RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicants,Alden and Tisha Linn, filed a request for approval of a Variance to allow less than the required setback between a commercially zoned property and a residentially zoned property. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit#1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee(ERC),the City's responsible official, determined that the proposal is exempt from review. 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located at 337 Park Avenue N. The subject site is located on the west side of Park Avenue just south of North 4th Street. 6. The subject site was annexed to the City in May 1909 with the adoption of Ordinance 156. 7. The subject site is zoned CA(Commercial Arterial). The parcel immediately to the south is zoned R-10 (Low density multiple family)and according to staff is a single family home. The parcels to the west or No'` rear, across the alley are zoned R-8 (Single Family Residential). 8. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of commercial uses,but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property south of the subject site for low-density residential uses and the property west of the subject site for single family uses. 9. The subject site is approximately 0.11 acres or 4,838 square feet in size. The parcel is approximately 47 feet wide(north to south)by approximately 103 feet deep. 10. An alley runs along the western edge of the subject site. The alley provides access to the rear of the lot where the parking is proposed. 11. The subject site contains a vacant single family home. If the variance were approved, it would be converted to a commercial use. The current proposal would be for office space but it could be used for any use permitted in the CA zone. 12. Potential uses in the CA zone are quite wide-ranging and could definitely have an impact on the residential quality of the adjacent property. The smaller size of the lot would limit the types of uses but not necessarily limit the hours of operation. 13. The driveway for the subject site is located immediately adjacent to the property line shared with the residential use along the south side of the property. The concrete driveway that serves the existing home/building is 10 feet wide. It is four feet from the home. That places the actual building only Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance File No.: LUA-06-108,V-H October 23, 2006 Page 4 fourteen feet from the property line, one foot less than the required setback. Therefore,the applicants have requested a variance to allow a ZERO FOOT setback adjacent to the driveway. 14. Code requires a 15-foot, sight-obscuring landscape strip along the south property line. That landscaping strip would be located where the current driveway is located. The implication of the 15-foot landscape setback is to require a 15-foot setback between the commercial use and the residential property line and not just landscaping. 15. The subject site when converted to commercial use would require four(4)parking stalls. These would be provided in the rear yard of the property. 16. The home on the neighboring,southern residential property is located seven(7) feet from the common property line. 17. The City has recommended that the variance be approved subject to the applicant installing a decorative wood fence,trellis and climbing vegetation along the side yard area and provide 3 feet of landscaping in the parking area in the rear of the lot. Staff also recommended that traffic only be allowed to use the driveway for entrance to the site and exit the site via the alley. 18. Staff has written the following language in reviewing the impacts on the adjacent residential property: "Granting a variance to reduce the amount of sight-obscuring landscaping to zero could be materially detrimental to the neighboring residents to the south, although no comments were received from them. The intent of the 15 ft. landscape buffer is to shield the abutting residents from any impacts from the commercial use. An office has the potential to generate more activity than a single-family residence, with employees and customers entering and leaving the property" 19. The applicant testified that the commercial use of the adjacent parcel to its north has had a negative impact on the desirability of the existing home on the subject site. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Variances may be granted when the property satisfies all the conditions described in part below: a. The applicant suffers undue hardship caused by special circumstances such as: the size,shape, topography,or location where code enforcement would deprive the owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by others similarly situated; b. The granting of the variance would not materially harm either the public welfare or other property in the vicinity; c. The approval will not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other property in the vicinity; and d. The variance is the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable development of the subject site. Nod The applicant's property is not suitable for the variance requested. Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance File No.: LUA-06-108, V-H October 23, 2006 Page 5 °over, 2. The applicant does not suffer undue hardship. There might be a modicum of hardship if the applicant cannot use the existing driveway but there is reasonable access to the rear parking lot via an alley. Signs can direct patrons to the alley access. 3. Approval of the variance would be materially harmful to the adjacent residential property. The variance would foist off on adjacent,residential property impacts associated with commercial development. It would particularly nullify a specific setback required between residential property and commercial property. The traffic from a commercial use, one that could have evening hours, would run immediately adjacent to a single-family home without little or no buffer. As the applicant admitted,the adjacent commercial use to its north has had a negative impact on the subject site's residential home. Approving the proposed variance could propagate the same negative impact on the neighboring residential parcel. The proposed ZERO setback, even bolstered by a fence and landscaping will not adequately cancel the sounds of commercial traffic entering the site and using the driveway. 3. The approval of the variance would create a precedent in the area of North Renton. As was noted at the hearing, there are a large number of commercially zoned nodes carved out of the corners of blocks in this area and immediately adjacent to those nodes are residentially zoned properties. As in this case, many of the parcels are modest or even small in size. Approving the variance for these applicants will create a precedent completely nullifying the required fifteen foot setback that code specifically requires to buffer residential uses, in some cases even single family uses, from commercial uses. It would create a special privilege unless it was offered to other similarly sized, small lots where new owners want to convert older homes to commercial uses. Now 4. The variance is not the minimum in any case. The driveway could be moved but even that would not negate the material detriment and harm that would be inflicted on the neighboring residential property. Again, it matters little if the current resident did or did not object, as the blight would be perpetuated into the future making a residentially zoned parcel less suitable for its intended residential purpose. 5. In conclusion,a request for a variance must satisfy all of the criteria. None of the criteria require a compromise or partial fulfillment. The property to the south of the subject site is entitled to the full landscape screen. Providing a fence with some climbing vines is no substitute for fifteen feet of sight- obscuring landscaping. A ZERO setback of the driveway will create impacts on the adjacent property. Even if no comments were received, silence is not acceptance. Further, it is not only the current resident who is protected by the setback requirement. It is this resident and future residents. Degrading the residential value of the abutting property is not acceptable. Deterioration or blight might occur as future residents don't believe their residential values have been protected by the City. It is unfortunate that the applicant has acquired property that is limited but that was their purchasing decision. They have no right of expectation that the limitation their property suffers will be relieved by harming the adjacent property. It also does not matter if the current applicants are well-meaning or not. The subject site could be sold to less well-meaning owners. The intended use could also change with more deleterious consequences. In other words,this variance is simply inappropriate. DECISION: The Variance is denied. err✓ Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance File No.: LUA-06-108, V-H October 23, 2006 Page 6 ORDERED THIS 23`d day of October 2006. k FRED J. KA MAN 1 HEARING E)AMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 23`d day of October 2006 to the parties of record: Valerie Kinast Alden&Tisha Linn Nancy Terry 1055 S Grady Way 2907 Park Ave. N 338 Pelly Avenue N Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98057 Josephine Ganuelas Alden&Tisha Linn 335 Park Ave N PO Box 2288 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056 TRANSMIYI ED THIS 23`d day of October 2006 to the following: Mayor Kathy Keolker Stan Engler, Fire "' ar Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Larry Meckling,Building Official Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Planning Commission Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Transportation Division Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Utilities Division Jennifer Henning, Development Services Neil Watts,Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Janet Conklin,Development Services King County Journal Pursuant to Title IV,Chapter 8, Section 100Gof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,November 6,2006. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact,error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen(14)days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of$75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,November 6,2006. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants,the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. Linn Office Conversion Landscape Variance File No.: LUA-06-108, V-H October 23,2006 Page 7 The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one)communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. Project Location: 337 Park Ave. N; southwest of Park Ave. N and N 4th St. ii" . Ili -iiiiri ,� SITE I, i , ' 411( yam `` i5-r w _ ., mum. . 1-- 11 , ‘' . 1:i , j , .1- ' ---i, iiirsi,:ynli, . *,- -i/- ' t_______H-i-' --''''''' : ' . ;,1 11611-4:100::1 -----' ' L, 'i . -1 , i i 7 a 9. J .�P R 7fr/iG.M" l : -. - . - s- lin Z .Pg-'i'-' Xlyii 0( c/10c- I r- J -I L1c1 5'F'A 4,' — 54' -- 1 DE 2 �- II 4� 4' �� -I >;x�rl► sae ska LoerAgA i-fiq,.3 ,P aT 31.20 4 ,. ,5-1 7 ptil LP'N6 10 1 El ; • < X-1" C.7 g A.Ct 21 t-1 t Z e -� a SAY.KJ v�. _a' ,Q (_Cr bV PA�Z� Z( Al7JAC tJT• = 11111111.. USE -fr iu '--o"___._.______,______n!lbt_ 1 1 -1 of \A/AY ,4pp11'cA x • IinWALK �I-r fLA►i i ' Ei 7/2o ^4ENT PLANNING r*' , :v + RENTOR! N AUG 10 2006 ( EwED ,. (k. ( . ( , - =. .1 c))2..f.,- �xlOk� c1 Zc- 3 I II-CV-1(16i S'P'/AG .:1- � —4,k/11- 541 ----44__ 4 ________.,5;4d-1- ; � , >.. N t-�, f 4'-A 4' 1'.;,� Exw fX'r 3i-a `tea 4' �U w 4- --- -- �� �vILP:NG I .o �? � 2,1‘-f� Z ...,. �,�"'�, 424. c ' - -- lei' Gov����t 25i� "c `Nl PA�.KINCT b ' - 4 'o L f -"""�a VUdV • 1 3' hc6Fe-ice w urnrbintom-to t---U,lf �� �-� �1.f ' CUV$ DP iNa M 1 . PrJ Vf \/A Y 9.7her K9m0.t1-t19,110.11 •51PEWALK ITr 1LA4 1'0 2.01' rn /g = 'z, zeoto 7/Wok, Q' ..,.iEN PLANNING f"r . :V ,Y. i1FErs.I1UN W AUG 1 0 2006 i.COVED F3 - 18 T23N R5E E 1/2 , : - -,1 ,-”iiit am .riltM ...,.: t! ; n-,....„..„... • iN ... ....,.. iiimet Ave.- z''.• " ill ' ii ' ; 1 ..-r) \ .' C3 T-7;-!...•.. : ,, iv;.4.4,,....,-....rr.: ‘ , , ,,.., i.....1..., g) , ..... ! , I d, i::::::: L , c ! T a; miiiiiati$ H ,I 1... 1.-... Ot:11 Li Cti I • ' i 0 . ; C *<3 UCNIZ i4,p 1-0 ; Ci 6 g ...i 0 : NI g ,.., zi, , , : 1 1 i' i $eil's. 'A. ; ;•,1 ' ;t:9 '5., ;.Li 11)„, ill e)11 - gl.' -"H.7. i -rl 1-' '", .'"'" '4,,.i 1 bbi--;;;;;- ig! ! ,!`,"2:, EWA ••••.,ntz ,:.,i-,.! L! I 1): I cf.,0,c4 . 4, g J ., 1 / // R,-.E3 REDD cc / 1 , 7F('// it:0- !co. _ ;; ....-: fl.i., i„' ' . 0 > 0 - - 7 ' RL'a il IIR-L8! /b-, •R4! R10 g , 0 1_11e,in:F/Ave. FS. LAMM 1 0 i ! ! • to 1 ! ; 1 , , 1 . . .\. I . -.) 3. ! ,R.-8 ' , . ' ;R4-8, R-io R110 0 1-405 - ! 1 1 1 g 1 o' . -..Oa' i ' 7 \ • s::,:°. :. _. , ,e: ,4 - -- „ „amiss R"-Er ' lie.mr: fAv ;.!FO-8! !R-i FR 10 -th. 7,\D<P) CD til IL RI-81 i 1 t ! ! 1 IR1713,, ' L , , I 1R-1° r-10 I co 1 8 1 1 tRhol 11 0 tz, */ ! it . . "-',R- 0P`alcIti gle.14-1: , CA p-3 e-.......-S- f!z0 ! ; 1 1 kke1 1 i !Ri-81 ! 1 ! -... h c-Irci t..4 , , . , 1 1 H 1/4t , 1 ! edar !mt.; ; i ,,,--,.1.1 !, 1 , ...... . .... 1111111111E1111011 z, R-11,P1 1 oti CN10, ,#"---7 1.--.L , I P--3I , I '70 i 1 T '- 7:1' r t..-.1-+.-- *8 1: i .1.1 •--1.. i- •:k•••!•••P•-• 1 I I 1-'" ill )...1.4...1- ,. .: ,, : . ' L • i 1 r !:...:,;_ 1.1 il,i 70 PZ 6" SI 1.-• 1 1 Re t6A A,v0.1 Si li'M''',1'rl] l 11 I F'..- 0 (31.,,s,,' i.. a !•! 1 c:?i. 1.1...., 'CID,. • G • , . ' i ,c1,4! ! i Garden. Ave. !:. 1 1 ! ‘'‘. 3> /-!•\; * i 1 ! •Hei 1 1 i . 1 ; r!TR.4)...',,r-th ti : 1 Ili „.,' i ,...,i 11— i ; i \ 71 , ,,1111,1111 ' R.-9 i . , R•-•(3 , RI-10 ' rn,_„..i.,;..,. , • .„..1:. .!,:.,„„ , ••H-7.......t ! ! i•••••!4.,...K b! 1..; 76 hi g _ 1 tit....- ••••R4 I ! i FT ! ,i-,- ! , ; 0'3; I ; 1 ! ', co N-/ 1 Viall. ORM -liteadow 1 AcR.-.431; ;R10, e,) ,-71-.... ‘ ! , L 1 , ! t • — . ' 1 11.---- ••••R+8, ; ; t i),' , s,',,V I - WM 0 : i ! i R-it3 I: L:R-',8: R1-41 . , .. , 7 • .. . .•-..•• , , 1 , '-''''.-::,::::7?...., •g.:::..,i1 :6°. ',,--c9 ' . I , z 6 1 . / / ...... ED ' / ,,, • ,,,,,,,, ,.._......... ............,.. . , ,• , /-\ 421 . ,. , .,•,,,.....,., . ' .. . 7--) - \c75 • ' 3? CT77. •••-•-•1 ///„' 7) • ! " ' , •• \ x. 7=4: .to.T.:: ::::::•Y ,if \_, t \ \ • Z/1 a aS11 MeV, LI - .6,1 --&---:-Qzt, (k,,, C. ( . , CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: i. I Submitting Data: Community Services For Agenda of Nay' Dept/Div/Board.. Golf Course November 20, 2006 Staff Contact Leslie Betlach—ext. 6619 Agenda Status Kelly Beymer - ext.6803 Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Transfer of Lease and Concession Agreement Ordinance All My Restaurants, Inc. dba RiverRock Grill and Resolution Alehouse to Newcastle Restaurants, Inc. Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Addendum to Lease agreement Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Council Concur Legal Dept X.... Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... $ Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted $ Revenue Generated 11.00 Total Project Budget $ City Share Total Project SUMMARY OF ACTION: Transfer of Lease and Concession Agreement between the City of Renton and All My Restaurants, Inc. for a three(3) year term to Newcastle Restaurants, Inc. Lease content will have no changes and has been reviewed to satisfy staff. The City has the option at the end of agreement to renew for six (6) years. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of staff recommendation to transfer the lease and concession agreement in current form for a three(3) year term to Newcastle Restaurants, Inc. 1/kbeymer/concess/agenda bill concess. CITY OF RENTON Community Services Department tiCY ♦ i err+ ��NT�� 0 Committed to Enriching Lives 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Vit. Kathy Keolker, Mayor FROM: Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator STAFF CONTACT: Leslie Betlach, Parks Director X6619 Kelly Beymer, Golf Course Manager X6803 SUBJECT: All My Restaurants, Inc.—Lease Transfer DATE: November 9, 2006 ISSUE Should the City of Renton allow the current concessionaire, All My Restaurants, Inc., to transfer the remaining three (3) years of the existing lease to Newcastle Restaurants, Inc.? The City has the option at the end of the agreement to renew for six (6) years. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the concessionaire, All My Restaurants, Inc., be allowed to transfer the remaining three years of the current lease and concession agreement between the City of Renton to Newcastle Restaurants, Inc., for a term of three (3) years, commencing December 1, 2006. BACKGROUND SUMMARY All My Restaurants, Inc. has been the concessionaire located at Maplewood Golf Course for eleven years. The current lease agreement commenced October 1, 2003, and will not expire until September 30, 2009. The City of Renton was notified September 7, 2006, by Cindy Pederson, President of All My Restaurants, Inc., of her intent to sell the restaurant. Ms. Pederson has identified a prospective local buyer with 13 years of restaurant experience. Under the current lease agreement, the City has agreed to not unreasonably withhold assignment or transfer of the concession. Staff, including the Finance Administrator and the City Attorney, has reviewed all requested information from the prospective buyers and are satisfied with the competency and solvency of their restaurant experience and recommend transfer of the lease. City of Renton Memorandum November 9, 2006 Page 2 of 2 *4101 The proposed buyer would operate within the existing lease with no changes. The name will remain as RiverRock Grill and Alehouse. If the transfer is approved, the City of Renton will have the option, upon satisfaction of the three-year performance, to renew the lease term for an additional six (6) years. • Lease percentages based on gross revenue will remain unchanged per existing agreement. By utilizing and evaluating current staff, the transition plan between All My Restaurants, Inc. and the proposed buyers Newcastle Restaurants, Inc., would be nearly seamless, thus minimizing any disruption in business and ensuring the current revenue structure to the Maplewood Golf Course. The proposed buyers are enthusiastic and committed to developing a strong relationship with the City of Renton and continuing the high customer service standards. CONCLUSION To authorize transfer of the remaining three (3) years of current lease agreement to Newcastle Restaurants, Inc. to allow a solvent and profitable business to continue to provide quality service to the City of Renton and patrons of Maplewood Golf Course. C: Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Larry Warren,City Attorney Mike Bailey,Finance/IS Administrator H:\CS_ADMIN\Sandy\Issue paper-concessionaire lease transfer06a.doc ADDENDUM TO MAPLEWOOD GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE LEASE AND CONCESSION AGREEMENT This addendum is entered into this day of , 2006. By and between the City of Renton, All My Restaurants, Inc. and Arias-Barajas, Inc. WHEREAS, All My Restaurants, Inc. has been the concessionaire for the Maplewood Golf Course Clubhouse under that certain concession agreement dated September 29, 2003, and WHEREAS, Section DD entitled Assignment of Agreement indicates that the concessionaire shall not assign or transfer this concession agreement without the written consent of the City of Renton being first obtained, and WHEREAS, All My Restaurants, Inc. desires to assign its interest in this Niro, concession agreement to Arias-Barajas, Inc., and WHEREAS, the City of Renton has reviewed information provided to it by Arias- Barajas, Inc. and found that it would be an acceptable assignee of the concession agreement. NOW THEREFORE, the parties do hereby agree as follows: 1. The concession agreement whereby All My Restaurants, Inc. is the concessionaire under the Maplewood Golf Course Clubhouse Lease and Concession Agreement is hereby assigned to Arias-Barajas, Inc. 2. Should Arias-Barajas, Inc. perform its obligations under the lease and concession agreement in a manner satisfactory to the City of Renton, then the City of Renton shall, upon request of Arias-Barajas, Inc. extend the term of the lease and concession agreement for a period of an additional six (6) years. 3. Except as modified by this addendum, all terms and conditions of the Maplewood Golf Course Clubhouse Lease and Agreement dated September 29, 2003 shall remain in full force and effect. All My Restaurants, Inc. THE CITY OF RENTON By: By: Kathy Keolker, Mayor CONCESSIONAIRE Arias-Barajas, Inc. By: ATTEST BY: Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS By: Timothy Searing, Chairman T10.46:01 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Al#: Submitting Data: For Agenda of: November 20, 2006 Dept/Div/Board.. FIS /Information Services Staff Contact Michael E. Bailey Agenda Status Finance/IS Administrator Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Interlocal Agreement with the Eastside Fiber Correspondence.. Consortium. Ordinance Resolution X Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Interlocal Agreement Information Resolution Recommended Action: Approvals: Council Concur Legal Dept Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... 0 Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated "' Total Project Budget 0 City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Staff presents the second in a series of interlocal agreements between the City of Renton and Eastside Fiber Consortium. The agreement allows the City to leverage its resources with other public agencies to provide fiber throughout Renton by adding Bellevue Community College to the consortium. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize an interlocal agreement with the Eastside Fiber Consortium for extension of the City's fiber optic network, and adopt the Resolution. Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh C.)ti`SY � FINANCE AND INFORMATION SERVICES r- ® •, DEPARTMENT • .. NT0 MEMORANDUM DATE: November 13, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: ' Kathy Keolker, Mayor FROM: ''" jJ Michael E. Bailey, FIS Administrator STAFF CONTACT: George McBride, ext. 6886 SUBJECT: Eastside Fiber Consortium Interlocal Agreement#2 ISSUE Should the City enter into an Interlocal Agreement authorizing the addition of Bellevue Community College to the Eastside Fiber Consortium? RECOMMENDATION *rr Staff recommends approval of the Interlocal Agreement. BACKGROUND Several years ago the City of Kirkland, City of Bellevue, Lake Washington School District and University of Washington formed a consortium to install fiber throughout the school district, connect the two cities, and begin the process to connect educational institutions to the University. Through resource sharing and joint funding, the consortium has built an inter-connected fiber network covering the school district, connecting the two cities, as well as Evergreen Hospital and now the Bellevue School District. New additions include Bellevue Community College. The City joined the consortium in June of 2006 through a previous Interlocal agreement. This Interlocal Agreement authorizes the addition of Bellevue Community College to the consortium. DT/drl Cc: Jay Covington,CAO George McBride, Information Services 44irw h:\projects\2006\eastside fiber consortium\council position paper eastside fiber consortium adding bcc.doc ADDENDUM #27 GENERAL TERMS and CONDITIONS For Sharing of Fiber Optic installation Projects WHEREAS, the City of Bellevue, the City of Kirkland, the City of Renton, the Lake Washington School District, the Renton School District, the University of Washington, the Bellevue School District and Evergreen Hospital, (the Participating Agencies) have entered into the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects, and; WHEREAS, the Participating Agencies desire to enter into a Fiber.Optic Project Agreement for a planned Fiber Optic Project, and; WHEREAS, Bellevue Community College desires to participate in the planned Fiber Optic Project and future Fiber Optic Projects but cannot because it is not a Participating Agency subject to the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects, and; WHEREAS, the current Participating Agencies desire to amend the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects to add Bellevue Community College separately and individually, as a Participating Agency for participation in the planned Fiber Optic Project and future Fiber Optic Projects; ftd NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1) All terms in this Addendum shall have the same meaning as the defined terms in the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects. 2) Bellevue Community College hereby acknowledges that it has read, understands and accepts the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects, hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth, and agrees to be bound by them. 3) As provided in Section IX, paragraph N, the current Participating Agencies hereby amend the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic installation Projects to add Bellevue Community College separately and individually, as a Participating Agency, and Bellevue Community College separately and individually, by executing this agreement, consents to becoming a Participating Agency. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Addendum to the General Terms and Conditions For Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects on the respective dates indicated below. 1 *to r Approved as to Form: / ____At-t-ee Y/ �� David R.,msay ate City Attorney City Manager, City of Kirkland Approved as to Form: Steve Sarkozy Date City Attorney City Manager, City of Bellevue Weldon Ihrig Date Executive Vice President University of Washing vn A 46,07:* • ,,- / h�: #1/ TA le,-a r Barbara Posthumus Date Coordinator Business Services Lake Washington School District ,48r4,jec:01,71 q61141 /Clw. 6 Date Chief Information Officer Evergreen Hospital TMcLeq , ` i [Yate !rector, Facilities(and Information Services Bellevue School District Approved as to Form: Kathy Keolker Date City Attorney lomir 2 Mayor City of Renton Bill Hulten Date Chief Technology Officer Renton School District Approved as to form: B. J n lot n Date Preside Bellevue mmunity College Assistant Attorney General 3 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO ENTER INTO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, ENTITLED "ADDENDUM #27 FOR SHARING OF FIBER OPTIC INSTALLATION PROJECTS", WITH THE CITY OF BELLEVUE, THE CITY OF KIRKLAND, THE CITY OF RENTON, THE LAKE WASHINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON, THE BELLEVUE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND EVERGREEN HOSPITAL, TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE KING COUNTY I-NET AND TO BETTER SERVE ADDITIONAL AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON. WHEREAS, the City of Bellevue, the City of Kirkland, the City of Renton, the Lake Washington School District, the Renton School District, the University of Washington, the Bellevue School District, and Evergreen Hospital (the Participating Agencies) have entered into the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects; and WHEREAS, the Participating Agencies desire to enter into a Fiber Optic Project Agreement for a planned Fiber Optic Project; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton approves the participation in the planned Fiber Optic Project and future Fiber Optic Projects of Bellevue Community College subject to the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects; and WHEREAS,the current Participating Agencies desire to amend the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects to add Bellevue Community College as a Participating Agency for participation in the planned Fiber Optic Project and future Fiber Optic Projects; 1 RESOLUTION NO. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Ng SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION IL The Mayor and City Clerk are authorized to enter into the interlocal agreement entitled "Addendum #27 General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects" and similar agreements adding additional parties, or extending the agreement, or agreeing to implement administrative actions. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2006. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2006. ftiloo Kathy Keolker, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RES.1221:11/6/06:ma 2 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: f t Submitting Data: For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board.. Finance& IS Department November 20, 2006 Staff Contact Michael E. Bailey, Administrator Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. 2006 Year End Budget Amendment Ordinance Ordinance X Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue paper Study Sessions Ordinance Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept X Refer to Finance Committee Finance Dept X Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project SUMMARY OF ACTION: The proposed 2006 Year End Budget Amendment Ordinance amends the budget by$1,031,418. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the 2006 Year End Budget Amendments and adopt the Ordinance. C:\DOCUME—l\BWalton\LOCALS- 1\Temp\2006_Year End Budget Amend Ord.doc FINANCE AND INFORMATION SERVICES Cti „ C. 1, DEPARTMENT iPiNT MEMORANDUM DATE: November 13, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: -Y-' Kathy Keolker, Mayor c 1 J FROM: Mike Bailey, Administrator SUBJECT: 2006 Year End Budget Amendment Ordinance (Clean Up) ISSUE In order to meet budget commitments and ensure all funds are within expenditure limits at year end, we must adjust the appropriations to various funds and departments before the end of the year. RECOMMENDATION Approve the 2006 Year End Budget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of$1,031,418. BACKGROUND SUMMARY Attached is an ordinance commonly referred to as the "Clean Up" ordinance. Each year we review the financial issues of departments and funds. Generally, as long as there is enough appropriation authority at the fund level to address any outstanding department issues, the budgets are left unchanged. However, legally, all funds must end the year spending no more than their appropriation authority. If there are any concerns, it is best to appropriate monies to ensure departments are below their appropriation levels. h:\finance\adminsup\02_issuepapers_memos to council or mayor\2006 year end issue paper.doc Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council November 13,2006 Page 2 of 3 *441001 OVERVIEW The following table illustrates the changes we are requesting by fund: Fund 2006 Adjusted 2006 Final No. Fund Description Budget Amendment Budget 000/009 General Fund- Fire Department $14,084,285 $181,341 $14,265,626 004 Community Development Block Grant Fund 262,257 71,577 333,834 101 Parks Fund 11,297,376 62,000 11,359,376 106 Library/Museum Fund 1,809,862 12,067 1,821,929 220 LID Debt Services Fund 67,826 174 68,000 306 Leased City Properties Fund 904,902 42,816 947,718 402 Airport Fund 2,642,600 11,443 2,654,043 502 Insurance Fund 3,736,001 650,000 4,386,001 TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS $1,031,418 All of these costs can be funded with available fund balances and/or received and anticipated additional revenues. Below is the brief explanation of each request. Attachment A of the proposed ordinance provides more detailed information on each of the funds discussed below. General Governmental Fund: Fire Department: The Fire Department expected to receive various grants this year. Fire requests additional appropriation in order to use the grants when they become available. Community Development Block Grant Fund (Fund 004): The Community Development Block Grant Fund increased the grant awards to cover Housing Repair Assistance Program and Multi Service Center Capital Project. At the same time, the budget appropriations need to be increased. Parks Fund (Fund 101): Due to the energy cost increases, the Community Services Department requests additional appropriations to cover these costs. Library/Museum Fund (Fund 106): Budgeted item of Museum temporary employee's salary and benefits was missing when the department code changed from 021 to 024, in the 2006 original budget. Debt Services Fund: LID Debt Service Fund (Fund 220): This fund is closed. The fund balance needs to be transferred to Fund 406. NIS h:\finance\adminsup\02_issuepapers_memos to council or mayor\2006 year end issue paper.doc Randy Corman,Council President Members of the Renton City Council November 13,2006 Page 3 of 3 "erre Capital Project Fund: Leased City Properties Fund (Fund 306): An increase to the appropriation for Fund 306 is requested to cover contractual expenditures. Enterprise Fund: Airport Fund (Fund 402): Additional appropriation is requested to cover repairs to the River Hangars by using the prior year fund balance. Internal Services Fund: Insurance Fund (Fund 502): Human Resources requests an additional increase to appropriations to cover an anticipated settlement. CONCLUSION The primary 2006 budget amendments proposed are use of prior year revenues and additional grants awards to cover additional appropriations and the cost of judgment. MEB/LP/BP/dlf Attachment: Draft Budget Amendment Ordinance and Attachment A. cc: Jay Covington, CAO Marty Wine,Assistant CAO Bonnie Walton,City Clerk Department Administrators `'tire c:\docume-1\bwalton\locals-1\temp\2006 year end issue paper.doc CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR THE 2006 YEAR END BUDGET AMENDMENTS. SECTION L The following funds are hereby amended as follows: 2006 Adjusted 2006 Final Fund No. Fund Description Budget Amendment Budget 000/009 General Fund-Fire Department $14,084,285 $181,341 $14,265,626 Community Development Block 004 Grant Fund 262,257 71,577 333,834 101 Parks Fund 11,297,376 62,000 11,359,376 106 Library/Museum Fund 1,809,862 12,067 1,821,929 220 LID Debt Services Fund 67,826 174 68,000 306 Leased City Properties Fund 904,902 42,816 947,718 402 Airport Fund 2,642,600 _ 11,443 2,654,043 502 Insurance Fund 3,736,001 650,000 4,386,001 TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS $1,031,418 SECTION II. The monies for the budget amendments shown in Section I are derived from available fund balances or increased revenues(see attachment A for more detail.) 'void SECTION III. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five days after publication. 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 1 ORDINANCE NO. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD.1295:11/14/06:ma 'fir+° 2 ORDINANCE NO. Attachment A GENERAL FUND(Fund 000/0091 Fiscal Year 2006 Adjusted Final 2006 Budget 2006 Budget Change Reason REVENUES FIRE DEPARTMENT GRANTS 149,341 149,341 USE OF PRIOR YEAR REVENUES 719,881 751,881 32,000 TOTAL REVENUES 719,881 901,222 181,341 EXPENDITURES Increase expenditures using various grant FIRE APPROPRIATIONS 14,084,285 14,265,626 181,341 monies TOTAL EXPENDITURES 14,084,285 14,265,626 181,341 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND(Fund 0041 Fiscal Year 2006 Adjusted Final 2006 Budget 2006 Budget Change Reason REVENUES CDBG GRANT 262,257 333,834 71,577 CDBG Housing Repair Assistance TOTAL REVENUES 262,257 333,834 71,577 Grant increase and CDBG Multi Service Center Capital EXPENDITURES Project grant. CDBG APPROPRIATIONS 262,257 333,834 71,577 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 262,257 333,834 71,577 PARKS FUND(Fund 1011 Fiscal Year 2006 Adjusted Final 2006 Budget 2006 Budget Change Reason REVENUES REVENUES 11,260,376 11,260,376 USE PRIOR YEAR REVENUE 37,000 99,000 62,000 TOTAL REVENUES 11,297,376 11,359,376 62,000 EXPENDITURES PARKS APPROPRIATIONS 11,297,376 11,359,376 62,000 Energy cost increases. TOTAL EXPENDITURES 11,297,376 11,359,376 62,000 Attachment A 1 ORDINANCE NO. Attachment A Niftwe LIBRARY/MUSEUM FUND(Fund 1061 Fiscal Year 2006 Adjusted Final 2006 Budget 2006 Budget Change Reason REVENUES REVENUE 1,809,862 1,809,862 - USE PRIOR YEAR REVENUE - 12,067 12,067 Budgeted item(Museum temporary TOTAL REVENUES 1,809,862 1,821,929 12,067 employee's salary&benefits) was missing when the department EXPENDITURES code changed from 021 to 024, LIBRARY/MUSEUM APPROPRIATIONS 1,809,862 1,821,929 12,067 in the 2006 original budget. TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,809,862 1,821,929 12,067 LID DEBT SERVICE FUND(Fund 220) Fiscal Year 2006 Adjusted Final 2006 Budget 2006 Budget Change Reason REVENUES USE PRIOR YEAR REVENUE 67,826 68,000 174 Fund 220 is closed.The fund balance TOTAL REVENUES 67,826 68,000 174 is transferred to Fund 406. Irv` EXPENDITURES TRANSFER TO FUND 406 67,826 68,000 174 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 67,826 68,000 174 LEASED CITY PROPERTIES(Fund 306) Fiscal Year 2006 Adjusted Final 2006 Budget 2006 Budget Change Reason REVENUES REVENUE 904,902 904,902 - USE OF PRIOR YEAR REVENUES - 42,816 42,816 TOTAL REVENUES 904,902 947,718 42,816 EXPENDITURES LEASED CITY PROPERTIES 904,902 947,718 42,816 Appropriate to cover the lease TOTAL EXPENDITURES 904,902 947,718 42,816 expenditures. Attachment A 2 ORDINANCE NO. Attachment A AIRPORT FUND(Fund 4021 Fiscal Year 2006 Adjusted Final 2006 Budget 2006 Budget Change Reason REVENUES REVENUE 1,921,817 1,921,817 - USE OF PRIOR YEAR REVENUES 720,783 732,226 11,443 TOTAL REVENUES 2,642,600 2,654,043 11,443 EXPENDITURES AIRPORT APPROPRIATIONS 2,642,600 2,654,043 11,443 More repairs to the River Hangars TOTAL EXPENDITURES 2,642,600 2,654,043 11,443 were needed prior to painting. WASTEWATER UTILITY FUND(Fund 406) Fiscal Year 2006 Adjusted Final 2006 Budget 2006 Budget Change Reason REVENUES REVENUE 3,846,688 3,846,688 - USE PRIOR YEAR REVENUES 44,248 44,248 - TRANSFER IN FROM FUND 220 67,826 68,000 174 Fund 220 is dosed.The fund balance TOTAL REVENUES 3,958,762 3,958,936 174 is transferred to fund 406. EXPENDITURES rt APPROPRIATIONS 3,958,762 3,958,762 - INCREASE ENDING FUND BALANCE - 174 174 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 3,958,762 3,958,936 174 INSURANCE FUND(Fund 5021 Fiscal Year 2006 Adjusted Final 2006 Budget 2006 Budget Change Reason REVENUES REVENUE 3,007,503 3,007,503 USE OF PRIOR YEAR REVENUES 728,498 1,378,498 650,000 TOTAL REVENUES 3,736,001 4,386,001 650,000 EXPENDITURES INSURANCE EXPENDITURES 3,736,001 4,386,001 650,000 Increase appropriation to cover TOTAL EXPENDITURES 3,736,001 4,386,001 650,000 cost of judgment. Attachment A 3 v CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 11/20/2006 Dept/Div/Board.. Hearing Examiner Staff Contact Fred J. Kaufman, ext. 6515 Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat Ordinance File No. LUA-06-104, PP Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation Study Sessions Legal Description and Vicinity Map Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept Council Concur Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... N/A Transfer/Amendment iiimor Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project SUMMARY OF ACTION: The hearing was held on October 3, 2006. The Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation on Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat was published on October 19, 2006. The appeal period ended on November 2, 2006. No appeals were filed. The Examiner recommends approval of the Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat subject to the conditions outlined on page 5 of the Examiner's Report and Recommendation. Conditions placed on this project are to be met at later stages of the platting process. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat with conditions as outlined in the Examiner's Report and Recommendation. Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh October 19, 2006 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON Minutes APPLICANT: John Murphy Monterey Place LLC 13427 NE 20`h Street, Ste. 150 Bellevue, WA 98004 OWNER: Monterey Place LLC 3113 Fairweather Place Hunts Point, WA 98004 Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA 06-104, PP LOCATION: 2008 NE 16th Street SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval for a 2-lot subdivision of a 0.26-acre site intended for the development of single-family residences. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve subject to conditions �1rr► DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on September 26,2006. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining available information on file with the application, field checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the October 3, 2006 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday,October 3, 2006,at approximately 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No. 2: Preliminary Plat Plan application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No.3: Preliminary Road/Utilities/Tree/ Exhibit No. 4: Conceptual Landscape Plan +"' Grading/Drainage Plan Exhibit No. 5: Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit No. 6: Zoning Map Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-06-104, PP October 19, 2006 Page 2 The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Jill Ding, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The project site is located at northwest corner of the intersection of Monterey Court NE and NE 16th Street. The property is zoned R-8 and is designated as Residential Single-Family in the Comprehensive Plan. The site is approximately 0.26 acres in area. When calculating the density, staff reviewed both the individual lot and the entire original short plat and both meet the density requirements. The proposal is to subdivide the site into two lots for single-family residences. The net density results in 7.7 dwelling units per acre(2 units/0.26 net acres) Access for Lot 1 would be via NE 16th Street and Lot 2 via either NE 16th or Monterey Court NE. The proposed plat is consistent with the Land Use and Community Design Elements of the Comprehensive Plan Designation. All lots appear to be in compliance with the required lot width, depth and size standards as well as the required setback requirements for construction of single family residences for the R-8 zoning designation. Compliance with all setback and building standards will be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. The minimum landscape width for sites abutting a non-arterial public street is 5-feet with the provision that if there is additional area, that also would be landscaped. Two trees are required within the front yard areas or landscaped strips for each lot. There appears to be only one tree shown in the front yard of Lot 1,a revised landscape plan would need to be submitted prior to final plat approval. Traffic and Fire Mitigation fees were imposed on this project. There will be no Parks Mitigation fee based on the fact that there will only be two lots. The topography of the site slopes down from the southeast to the northwest at an approximate grade of 7 percent. The existing vegetation, primarily grass, will be removed as part of the development of this plat. Temporary Erosion Control will be required to mitigate for any erosion or off-site sedimentation impacts. Erosion control should be designed in accordance with the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Control Requirements. The site is located within the boundaries of the Renton School District. The proposed plat would potentially result in no additional students. A Preliminary Technical Information Report was submitted with the project application indicating that the existing storm water runoff onto the site infiltrates into the underlying soils. The subject site is located within the City of Renton water and sewer service area. A separate water service connection is required to be provided to each new lot prior to recording of the plat. There is an existing 8-inch sewer main in NE 16t Street, a separate side sewer stub to each new lot will be required prior to the recording of the plat. David Casey, Baima&Holmberg, 100 Front Street S., Issaquah, WA 98027-3817 stated that they concur with the staff report. Regarding the erosion control,they have, subsequent to the preliminary plat application to the City, gone to the site and done some test pits, a 9-foot deep test pit resulted in sand, they did four other test pits NS down to 5 feet, which resulted in sand as well. There is no problem with infiltration or erosion control. Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-06-104, PP October 19,2006 Page 3 The reason for the setbacks on Lot 2 is to retain the option for a builder to have access on either NE 16t or Monterey Court NE. A corner lot typically preserves the option for access when designing the house for that specific lot. Kayren Kittrick,Development Services stated she would prefer the access for Lot 2 to be off Monterey Court, it minimizes the number of driveway cuts at that particular intersection. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 9:24 am. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS &RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant,John Murphy, Monterey Place LLC, filed a request for approval of a Preliminary Plat. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit#1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee(ERC), the City's responsible official, determined that the proposal is exempt from review. 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located at 2008 NE 16th Street. The subject site is located on the northwest corner of the T-intersection of 16th and Monterey Court NE. 6. The subject site was annexed to the City in May 1960 with the adoption of Ordinance 1827. 7. The subject site is zoned R-8 (Single Family; 8 units/acre). 8. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of single family uses,but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 9. The subject site is approximately 0.26 acres or 11,459 square feet in size. The parcel is approximately 95 feet(north to south)deep by approximately 120 feet wide. 10. The subject site is vacant. 11. The site was part of another plat approved less than five years ago and,therefore,even though the applicant proposes dividing the subject site into only two lots, state law requires a full plat. 12. The subject site slopes down from the southeast to the northwest at about a seven(7%) percent grade. There are no sensitive areas on the site.The site is mainly covered with grass. Code now requires trees fir✓ for each new lot and also street trees along the frontage. 13. The area is predominantly developed with single-family uses. Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-06-104, PP October 19,2006 Page 4 14. The applicant proposes dividing the parcel into two lots. Proposed Lot 2 would be a corner lot. Proposed Lot 1 would be west of Lot 2. 15. Both lots could take their access off of NE 16th Street although staff suggested Lot 2 should take access from Monterey. 16. The site is located in the Renton School District, which assigns students on a space available basis. The proposed development would generate approximately one additional school student. 17. Density was calculated for this proposal under two methods. As a two-lot division the density would be 7.7 dwelling units per acre. Looking at the acreage of the previous plat, and adding one additional lot, the density would be 7.6 units per acre. The density under either method complies with code. 18. The development will generate a total of approximately 20 vehicle trips per day or 10 trips due to the one additional lot. 19. The subject site is located in Aquifer Protection Zone 2. 20 Stormwater would be infiltrated into the site since the soil types allow infiltration. 21. The subject site will receive domestic water and sanitary sewer service from the City. 22. The City has adopted a series of mitigation fees to distribute to new development the cost of developing infrastructure such as roads, parking and providing fire services. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed division or, in this case,re-division of the subject site, appears to serve the public use and interest if it offsets the impacts it creates on the City's systems. The development increases the stock of additional lots for housing choices in an area with appropriate infrastructure. 2. The density meets code requirements when looked at as a two-lot division or when reviewing the earlier plat with an additional lot. 3. The development of additional lots will create impacts on roads,parks and emergency services. Therefore, the applicant will have to pay the appropriate fees. It would be unreasonable to treat this as a mere two-lot plat when state law considers this a full Preliminary Plat. While one additional lot will not have immense impact on the parks system there is an impact nonetheless. State law considers this a full plat and considers the entire acreage. The division is really one of the entire prior acreage and, therefore, the applicant shall pay the parks mitigation fee for the additional lot. 4. In conclusion, the plat appears reasonable and can be approved. DECISION: The two-lot Short Plat is approved subject to the following conditions: Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-06-104, PP October 19, 2006 Page 5 1. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to final plat approval to the Development Service Division project manager for review and approval. The revised landscape plan shall identify one additional tree within the front yard or planting strip of Lot 1. 2. A Traffic Mitigation Fee based on$75 per new average daily trip attributed to the project shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. The fee for the proposed plat is estimated to be$717.75 (9.57 total trips x$75.00=$717.75) 3. A Fire Mitigation Fee, based on $488.00 per new single-family lot shall be paid prior to the recording of the plat. The fee is estimated at$488.00 ($488 x 1 =$488.00) 4. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) design pursuant to the erosion and sediment control requirements outlined in the Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual. 5. The applicant shall pay the Parks Mitigation Fee for the additional lot. ORDERED THIS 19th day of October 2006. -711.1a. Now FRED J. KA MAN HEARING E AMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 19th day of October 2006 to the parties of record: Jill Ding Kayren Kittrick David Casey 1055 S Grady Way Development Services Division Baima&Holmberg, Inc. Renton, WA 98055 City of Renton 100 Front Street S Issaquah, WA 98027-3817 John Murphy Monterey Place LLC Monterey Place LLC 3113 Fairweather Place 13427 NE 20th Street, Ste. 150 Hunts Point, WA 98004 Bellevue, WA 98005 TRANSMITTED THIS 19th day of October 2006 to the following: Mayor Kathy Keolker Stan Engler,Fire Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Larry Meckling,Building Official Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Planning Commission Gregg Zimmerman,PBPW Administrator Transportation Division Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Utilities Division Jennifer Henning, Development Services Neil Watts,Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Janet Conklin,Development Services '41.1 King County Journal Monterey Place II Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-06-104, PP October 19, 2006 Page 6 Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100(G) of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,November 2,2006. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen(14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk,accompanying a filing fee of$75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,November 2,2006. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants,the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one)communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. Project Location: 2008 NE 16th Street S6-, .ITE .J'z =i~ " ' ,�. ro , , 4, fir I 1�.} j L f E 5 t $ P t4 1.:.'- , - :-.1-: , a 1111 , M 1111 srI ;� �� ,`� 1 ( ( ( A 1) i '.."r1 111 I I I Pi I 111 I I III III I"I I I 1111111111111111.°111111 --- D 4 . 5 T23N R5E W 1/2 mis,...,,,,...„„...„.....„........._ ,immag...„.................... ..--........_ I • r . . , • ..„, : , 1 /1 , l 1 i ,, ii • • ..„., , • • 1.• ,x) ., .... . ! I I ,/ 4 ,, , I j rile. Ave., E , •, , !! ! ; • , ,.. . ,, , l'!!"..1 ,177 >4 Jond ! Avd7-7-7---T----7-7-7-7— R-8— ! 1 H , 1 1 , ,.,..R1;4: •••••; ‘ L., ,.. ;..„,. : i , , 1•••-•• i \ , IlehItVL{ ave. N ' 1 1 , • , 1 . --` -7—"--t—L-----, •••••• ! • ,....., 1.,.... . ... . . . ft.. ; ; .xj .. . . ,•,• L . !LI ',....,,' S -,..L.,,L.,.1,..............1. ,1 i ! , 0 !tsli f -9 te I 1 51. 1x_ iiiAL4 -1 1 tv Ci.....,...... ' . ..... i ... :.\ ' I CZ) , ; . . • "-:"- ,...... , I ' , , I , '' ' ' , T fill'gre7 .,--4\5.-- ' ' l'. l'A';57 11611Ite'HeY' •Ave-kki ' ,!" I'd° *,. 'd,..1....NE -'7C) '-- --.'''''- __._''''' .'...........,.. .R'i...../8 i , ', s---,--!' ' 7..c/) ,! ,, • ,. , • MO:titei'd' !I '.., '' - A.,) ..,2 r`,... • I OD I.. .1.7),.!.•- C•i)•••,1...,..1_1,..1.,I. ', j ,.!..... J.. I. ! i ...., COI !, ! 1 . ! 1 ! -, '111! ' • ,,,,_LO-- i• "i ', • ( ,!,... , . L./ / bi Nts ice.r•-••"•" • -;••-: i • 1 ! ! ! • !. !ii.:."..-1 IT !!'lz .. Ct.. s. "NE ' , r.(..i.,,Aid.n.t e.i4.0 I,..aj 1. 1.- -1 ... . 1.- .1 Aberdeen Ave NE-;',.. • ''''' ' ;. ',:- ; ',-- '. ci.) • ,,'. . 5,-, . ••el'. N ,* 1-3 „ , ! , to ..... .---r-70.••••!4!.....]...„.„ -...!!!!!!..7„, 1 ! 1.,;;;;,,! ••••.••1, L i _„,_,--1 ! 1 1........ , e.- ,„ 0 I! , , , , \ 1 ,, , 1.• • •,,,,,,-.. 1 , ! -10, il 1 1 i , - , ..,!..zt-1! :......L.....!, , • .. . - z tt I. 1 •!„------Tv.."i-i- 1 li-i AD 1.11"^.1- 1 •••••.., ''......1...' A LI i ' 1 I I I 1 1 ; • r 8 -11/i. . A# --r-Ntl•-••,•-•••1••••••• 7....,..1,...1......,.....1. „„a. '. „ ........1 i.•-' : i icz..i....7.7.--„- I .- rn i . , , , i 1 ..-‘ ,...........i,m,iic.:0" ._,__,,_2,_....1_ ... .. , .... . • rt , , • ,, 1.:1••••• ---,____,..... z.., I .:••• .z.: . F'X'r.-,i-t-T,. ...:..j.•..) ..... .. I .. 1 .i - ! ..1.. .1 ' " ".. • R 1 1 . .. , C-4 ,•.. aas N . , . , • L.,„\• . , ....-..)' 1 ...1),a.,t. n... .....,...,, 1..,..,..,..,,..., !..L. ...,........ ..„4. .!...,. L .i..... .. .s, ,..AvO 'NE ' ! ; ! ! ; , •\,-- ,' , 7_,_ -.2•• I '7:./ . , .;c•-*-..,,cc) i• t.,11 •-•3 ! ------ ___1_,__L_L_, ••••••••1 • , ua .tos!„.-1!..cv 1 !!! 0-3 . xy,- • , . , .,--.(i, i, ! Day.tbra-- , D'Ay.' torii - 1 1E \ 70 !st.-4,‘ ! Ave. : ' T , L'''i ! , , ! , ; N • 44 14 1.1 , ;:,.......:. 0, ... ........... . _. , ! 1 / lAvti !NE —.. ,. .e.,_c4 7,D .......„ Z . •••• 1114,:?1,I!!Fg :-..-.:: , ., , • , . ..1 ,.• , ,, , 1 , . . 'dinb d - ,ive. I\1 ' : ; '--',- , ' 1,.._.% P:1 , . , - VI ! Po 70 ' '.. .. - s.7-1 ril I 1 41. 70 t-,1 ---.--D\ I / ! ! \ CC) to") a) ••••••- cd-- -'0!;;;;;!! ), ....z.... • ...I !. . IL ,•• • .. .., . L-•-..i, . , . . , ; , )) w . Ca ba •...,..t.i. ... .. _c.a. .. ---' 1..._, , c•'. 4i, p...) INP‘• ' L".... _ 73 L , 1 A *1 , Or i i••• • .'-1.,1 41.''• r•' ' ' ' . r'''• -e----Qe.tr..D--- UT Ai R511 Nal t • SG PORTION OF THE NW 1/4, OF THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 5, TWN.23 N., RNG 5 E., WM I I ' KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON a 1 - / = Il •'. I I 3 10' PVT, DRAINAGE 4': 1; • 'I 1 Z "Ii.'••;''. . - _ _.___ .. ESM'T PER SHORT T a I' r. r• a I I II I M �1c "A IxNtt. _ i . of 11 IN ''"~' w,.655 `�,I,'r r,f4,Yy�.r.it \ "-' 1 2 /I .l / I Z r" ''� .,... AN(04M MIL** L** I I �.. i % - l t / 1 rn W'� }i•r '�ti.4.t55ri5„'600k.rnzaPoc * [ 1 `9C9iN� R0 HYDRANT 1 -----------j-----� T— / �P!_I.I I I ."+ SLE N, ML L4Pa• E ! LLa" p. WATERT i . � ,I ;.• : I I I �A R EASEMENT, NMR mg RwNR MN FP 4I PNPA w4wrtemKM._ _ _ -- -- rqq`` � ' 1 � TREE PLANTING DETAIL- B&B TREES IN ALL SOIL TYPES �'id ! l_� ;1' �'/!f1. 51 -H / .'.jAC ( /'` Oe"°°P.w"°aumns2n�""e.o`e MORD n"Qwrweaiwa.nt.WON d ,f I .w IR • I ;.f /' I z =I' i s O ^ I�' � 1 •u1.1- 0,3 �. 4 Iri< _ I,' 611 „E ® �, „)O ^ d DM(011.. - , I as IJ.r �. . �.�i1��.��. ` .• •, / ... __ 1' - -- Z115,413113%1111714 '_'"Liwf�f %11117 ORS *� rn ` ` '.'.I I anm wIw P.rnw.uw ref Neu."°"'1,41744.' �.. � �Ry4[ \ / \ /' N..7,4%.741r.=.17,17,1 N.)M CeCe1N,,wrra I / AIE ill / _ �- {.v .y r r _ . _. -. . .., r _.. , . .... ... ... ...v' 1411/n DONE OMMTRNff 0:1 0•111.10 MwN M tlTMN.1.Fal pMRR MIR y/ �� ST -N516THm . • 1 e i� '. I -..- - ----------- -+\, AJ - g 0+ P.-n'eP =1 ANTINO SCHEDULE ^''^1e^^NI Pw Minx PLANT NAM[ _ MP( OUANSIT ON ` !IOW; COMM4NTS I� S. MT Onit PIND m DI W ,11'. N4w01w fume!Mege lnM/LfeeMm ! 1 1/e'CAL AO'OC Z.:,=5:•:. ` SIDEWALK S, f@ Itfa.E4 M 114 Aew aNneNNA 2 A NelenMee Tm 1 A f 1 1 1—PLANTER �irNWwloN �I� feNPNerni w feulMenl STRIP INliL�r�1U�Pf�,�pw�� _ -• 4..T — _ _ 43) •,P NI I00!Of iM Mn WL-- 1' �`— yrA} 0I.1V.MOMNe IDNVO 13 2 Si Ae In..N CMNmnlw 411.1.6.410 l V 6 yey1fe • L IAL,VNif/110tH 'rMl• Otis ROW Rem _ (Ler.YMlemnm) SCALL I.4 10' 4 POO ICIfTUf ALftAlf> :IAA VFeeM n U w AI N.1. - R PL.1Ati D•O.C.. 4. Tn M srPN Mrr4 M M MUI R M111N0 VIM elft M O.MNNr M MI Nen • dean/Co. W e'PO. 2'OC A•. • t1NnN M TO M M 0812 122 fe01f e0V WO Nt Maatll l�. N,P.Nwn eeM2N1 Coo*Cow NNN� TN! M NR R 10 n A 11u11f MU<Mee M 1.4111101t OO R Nt 11 O deHH1 SL Mo.*MMI (Lee MNnlenen0e) '�` 1•201 CPEEPIR iT. Or*RAN.M U NMN^.•T J S 'AMMO moor M oat 1®^K COMM MOO Yn1CMwM^M OM TO.*MO R toe OwT (— } e' . R PLANTooTED Ar1T 11.SC.,122 len M 4•20.4.p M twRNt MPfIAT f N P ,Nn M Pa efA PN 4 AI to ERN,mor • M IMMO LPC moo TN TM 10181 Pam swam. Na LANDSCAPE PI AN CR lwOIIQ ' NM Mn 1001 462 Oml POPm A 14:13.Z10=11=4, 1^N�pT�NT PgNM!_N1�/00 AR NyTlyffRIWNI,T,E4yl1N N nM I ANORCAP,PLAN POWS. '< TO MCC?Mel PEP LOT. ^'^"" aria Op M Not 11,W OJ MAR M lamTi.WW1 M MA.MM.. Z [RSTINO HYDRANT IOCATIOH TH.4ANCN0 C0.MlNAP ren NNE FLOC OI RR T0.OM OM leCA KW ML FRA A TOL N1. } 2 D 1. RESIDENTIAL LANOSCAPINO RILL COVER THE ENTIRE SITE AFTER RESIDENTIAL S.10DeT GMRRn 11 p I�,1rM „n4M'od,'a aw6,:1^rpT r••74.1,==5 CONSTRUCTION,PLANTING OF RESIDENTIAL LANDSCAPING 82.4 OCC1M 881ER • S.uN0lC.APIR!MM ALONG D ,HYDRANT LOCATION UPON COMPLETION ON MONTEREY PLACE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED. • ME fACK O tIKVAIP I, Nora FRONTAGE AND U71Utt IMPROVEMENTS ••144 LOCATIONS AfAS GVF 1 M1W A R 1NN12Me ROM 0OMO NN OMM R NUO TIODM O . RIM PROPOSED DRIVEWAY LOCATION FOR ACCESS TO EACH LOT '�' a OTREE STAKING DETAIL-TREES 7SMM(3 IN.)CALIPER OR LESS I 1 2 •. I4 R LANDSCAPING DETAIL JOS N0.3f37-COT 4 NN .A! DMD N0.IeTT-OCI! 114(1 1 or 20D 'iaNk.rr EXHIBIT A LOTS 1 AND 2, CITY OF RENTON SHORT PLAT NUMBER LUA 00-113-SUPL, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20020730900007,IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: Submitting Data: For Agenda of: November 20, 2006 Dept/Div/Board.. PB/PW Utility Systems Staff Contact Nenita Ching(x7291) Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Proposed Changes to Water, Wastewater, and Surface Correspondence Water Utility Rates Ordinance X Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Ordinance Information "King County Billing Methodology for Wastewater" agenda bill package and Committee Report Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Committee of the Whole Legal Dept Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated $580,000 (city utilities); $200,000 (K.C. rate adjustment charge) Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Water, Wastewater, and Surface Water Utilities have reviewed(with the assistance of a financial consultant, FCS Group, Inc.)revenues required to pay operating expenses, taxes, and debt obligations, and meet the City's financial policies. The utilities have determined that sufficient revenues may be raised in 2007 by raising Water Utility rates by 5%, Wastewater Utility rates by 5%, and Surface Water Utility rates by 3%. In addition, a King County"rate adjustment charge"of 56 cents per residential customer and 56 cents per 750 cubic feet(ccf) of water use for multi-family, commercial, and industrial accounts is required to collect the amount of funds needed to cover actual wastewater billings by King County. The King County Council has approved an increase in the Wastewater Treatment Rate from $25.60 to $27.95 per residential customer equivalent,per month in 2007. This charge is collected by the City and is the source of revenue for payment of wastewater treatment services provided by the county. Agenda Bill: Proposed Changes to Water, Wastewater and Surface Water Utility Rates For agenda of: 11/20/06 Page 2 of 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve a 5% increase in Water Utility rates, a 5% increase in Wastewater Utility rates, and a 3% increase in Surface Water Utility rates, and a monthly King County rate adjustment charge of 56 cents per residential account and 56 cents per 750 ccf of water use for multi-family, commercial, and industrial accounts; incorporate them into an ordinance; and present the ordinance for first reading. Present the ordinance authorizing the collection of the King County Wastewater Treatment charge for first reading. ''�rrrr H:\File Sys\ADM-PBPW Adminstration\Analyst\UTIL\Rate Ordnce\2007\Agenda Bill Rates.doc\NCtp ti`s O‘f PLANNING/BUILDING/ a , PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT -.4401 • MEMORANDUM DATE: November 13, 2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: t F Kathy Keolker, Mayor FROM: Gregg Zimmerma ,670rninistrator STAFF CONTACT: Nenita Ching, PBPW Principal Administrative & Financial Analyst (ext. 7291) SUBJECT: Proposed Utility Rates for 2007 ISSUE: Should the following increases in utility rates be adopted: 5% for Water Utility, 5% for Wastewater Utility, and 3% for Surface Water Utility? Should a monthly King County Wastewater rate adjustment charge of 56 cents per residential account and 56 cents per 750 cubic feet (ccf) of water use for multi-family, commercial, and industrial accounts be .4000 adopted? Should the new King County Wastewater Treatment charge be adopted? RECOMMENDATION: Approve a 5% increase in Water Utility rates, a 5% increase in Wastewater Utility rates, and a 3% increase in Surface Water Utility rates, and a monthly King County rate adjustment charge of 56 cents per residential account and 56 cents per 750 ccf of water use for multi-family, commercial, and industrial accounts; incorporate them into an ordinance; and present the ordinance for first reading. Present the ordinance authorizing the collection of the King County Wastewater Treatment charge for first reading. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: Annually, the Utility Systems Division determines how much revenues are required to pay for debt payments and expenses for utility maintenance, engineering, administration, billing, taxes, and general governmental services. Based on these expenses, a financial model calculates the rates necessary to sustain operations, meet bond debt service coverage ratio (DSC) requirement, maintain reserves, and pay for some capital improvements. These requirements are stated in the City's financial policies. The DSC is also stated in the City's bond contract. Council/Proposed Utility Rates for 2007 November 13, 2006 Page 2 of 3 The Utility Systems Division hired a financial consultant, FCS Group, Inc., to perform a comprehensive review of the utilities' financial position. FCS Group, Inc. has reviewed revenue requirements for the utilities and has projected the rate increases shown on the following table. Using the City's proposal for 2007 as a base, the consultant projected revenue requirements for 2008-2014. The dollar-stated increases are for a single-family unit using 1,000 cubic feet of water per month. (Actual payments will be higher for more water used.). 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 rates Water $30.46 $1.52 $3.68 $1.96 $2.07 $1.79 $1.86 $1.30 $1.34 (1,000 ccf,3/4"meter) 5% 11.5% 5.5% 5.5% 4.5% 4.5% 3% 3% Wastewater $13.97 $0.70 $2.42 $1.20 $1.28 $0.78 $0.81 $0.74 $0.77 5% 16.5% 7% 7% 4% 4% 3.5% 3.5% Surface Water $5.55 $0.17 $0.28 $0.54 $0.59 $0.64 $0.70 $0.64 $0.68 3% 5% 9% 9% 9% 9% 7.5% 7.5% King County $25.60 $2.35 0 $6.05 $2.21 $2.20 $1.54 $1.60 $1.66 Treatment 9.18% 0% 21.65% 6.5% 6.08% 4% 4% 4% 44"' The estimated aggregate increase for a single-family(using 1,000 ccf of water) is $2.39 for the three City utilities for 2007. The seven-year projection for Wastewater is contingent upon Council approval of a rate adjustment charge of 56 cents per residential account paying the King County Wastewater Treatment Rate. This proposal is being brought forward to Council through a referral from the Utilities Committee. Without this charge, the rate projection for Wastewater is an increase of approximately 12.5% for 2007. As mentioned, the consultant projected rates for 2008-2014 based on the City's proposal for 2007. The consultant's original proposal for single-family was as follows: 2007 2008 Water(1000 ccf) $2.13 $2.28 7% 7% Wastewater(does not include $1.75 $1.96 "rate adjustment charge") 12.5% 12.5% Surface Water $0.39 $0.42 7% 7% "err' C:\DOCUME-I\BWalton\LOCALS- I\Temp\Rate Issue Paper_2007.doc\NCtp • Council/Proposed Utility Rates for 2007 November 13, 2006 Page 3 of 3 The Utilities are looking at ways to raise other revenues to fund capital improvements, and thus, decrease borrowing. Less debt consequently leads to a reduction in annual debt payments, and eventually results in reduced need for future rate increases. The utilities have proposed increases in public works fees, and are preparing a proposal to increase system development charges according to the consultant's analysis. These changes in fees and charges will be recommended in future presentations. Revenue requirement projections are higher than forecasted in prior years for various reasons. First, there have been significant increases in utility maintenance expenses, such as electricity, asphalt prices, materials for repairs, and equipment rental. Second, increases on taxes paid on utility revenues influence rate increases: for instance, the increase in King County Treatment charges results in an $80,000 increase of City utility taxes for the Wastewater Utility. Third, staff increases are being proposed for Water Utility Maintenance (1 FTE) and Surface Water Utility Maintenance (1 FTE) in order to maintain levels of service offered to a growing customer base. Fourth, the City's financial policies regarding such considerations as debt service coverage and fund balance requirements are being followed as closely as revenues allow. Finally, it is assumed that principal payments on a utilities bond to be issued in 2007 will not be deferred, as has been the case with prior bond issuances. (In the past, annual debt payments have been kept level due to deferment of principal payments on bond issues.) This revised approach will help provide bonding capacity in the future. CONCLUSION: Revenues required to cover operating expenses, taxes, and debt payments indicate a need to raise rates for the Water, Wastewater, and Surface Water Utilities in 2007. cc: Lys Horsnby,Utility Systems Director Michael Bailey,Finance Administrator C:\D000ME—I\B Walton\LOCALS-I\Temp\Rate Issue Paper_2007.doc\NCtp CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 2, STORM AND SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE; CHAPTER 4, WATER; AND CHAPTER 5, SEWERS; OF TITLE VIII (HEALTH AND SANITATION) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY INCREASING RATES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section 8-2-2.G.1 of Chapter 2, Storm and Surface Water Drainage, of Title VIII(Health and Sanitation) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: G. Special Rates: Noir,, 1. a. Senior and/or disabled citizens who qualified under RMC 8-4-31C for low-income rates prior to August 1, 1994, are eligible for rates of one dollar nineteen cents ($1.19)per month for a seventy-five percent (75%) rate subsidy, or one dollar sixty five cents ($1.65)for a forty percent(40%)rate subsidy. b. Senior and/or disabled citizens who qualify under RMC 8-4-31C for low- income rates after August 1, 1994, are eligible for rates of one dollar forty seven cents ($1.47)per month for a seventy-five percent (75%)rate subsidy, or three dollars fifty cents($3.50)for a forty percent (40%) subsidy. c. Double occupancy households who qualify under RMC 8-4-31 C for low- income rates after August 1, 1994, with an income between thirty percent (30%) and fifty percent (50%)of the median household income for King County will pay three dollars *lar and twenty eight cents($3.28)per month. 1 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION IL Section 8-2-3.E.1 of Chapter 2, Storm and Surface Water Drainage, of Title VIII(Health and Sanitation)of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: E. Charges For Surface Water Utility: 1. The following schedule is hereby adopted as the monthly charges to be paid to the City for surface water utility services: a. Single-family dwelling $5.72 per unit b. Low intensity, 0.5 acre or less $14.16 per acre c. Medium intensity, 0.5 acre or less $20.49 per acre d. High intensity, 0.5 acre or less $26.42 per acre e. Low intensity, more than 0.5 acre $28.33 per acre f. Medium intensity, more than 0.5 $40.96 per acre -.4001 acre g. High intensity, more than 0.5 acre $52.83 per acre h. Gravel pits $56.96 per acre i. City streets $14.20 per acre SECTION IIL Section 8-4-24.A.1 of Chapter 4, Water, of Title VIII(Health and Sanitation) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. Fire Protection Charge: The private fire protection charge will be three dollars eighty-six cents ($3.86)per month per inch of fire meter size. 2 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION IV. Section 8-4-31.B and C of Chapter 4, Water, of Title VIII (Health and Sanitation) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: B. Metered Rates: 1. The minimum rates for metered water supplied within the City in one month or fractional period thereof are hereby fixed in the following schedule: Size Of Service Total Service Charge 3/4 in. $11.93 1 in. 14.94 1-1/2 in. 19.14 2 in. 33.46 3 in. 99.08 4 in. 143.22 6 in_ 214.86 8 in. 298.43 10 in. 429.72 12 in. 596.86 2. Commodity Rates: Two (2) consumption blocks will be established for residential customers(single-family and duplex customers). The size of the first block will be zero to one thousand (0 to 1,000) cubic feet of water consumed per month. The second block will be all consumption over one thousand(1,000)cubic feet per month. The rates for these two(2)blocks are as follows: torso, 1 to 1,000 cubic feet $2.01 3 ORDINANCE NO. Over 1,000 cubic feet $2.14 All commercial customers (multi-family, commercial and industrial)will pay for consumption at the first block rate of two dollars and one cent ($2.01)per one hundred (100) cubic feet. 3. (Rep. by Ord. 4898, 3-19-2001) C. Senior Citizens And Disabled Persons: The following is hereby established for certain senior citizens and disabled persons who are economically disadvantaged as herein set forth: 1. Low-Income Seniors: A "low-income senior citizen" is defined as a person sixty- two(62)years of age or older who resides in a single-family dwelling that is separately metered for water usage, either as owner, purchaser, or renter, and whose total income, including that of his or her spouse or co-tenant, does not exceed the annual income threshold for low-income rate eligibility. The annual income threshold for eligibility for low-income rate shall be adjusted each calendar year, using the Income Guidelines for King County as provided annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Any household with a disposable income of thirty percent(30%)or less of the median household income for King County will be eligible for a seventy-five percent (75%)rate subsidy. Any household with an annual disposable income between thirty percent(30%) and fifty percent(50%)of the King County median household income is eligible for a forty percent (40%) rate subsidy. For the calendar year 2007 those figures shall be less than sixteen thousand three hundred fifty dollars ($16,350)or less per annum for a seventy five percent (75%)rate subsidy and between sixteen thousand three hundred fifty dollars($16,350)and twenty-seven thousand two hundred fifty dollars($27,250) for a forty percent (40%)rate subsidy for single occupancy, and for double occupancy eighteen thousand seven hundred dollars($18,700)or less for a seventy-five percent (75%)rate subsidy, and 4 ORDINANCE NO. between eighteen thousand seven hundred dollars ($18,700)and thirty-one thousand one hundred fifty dollars ($31,150)for a forty percent (40%)rate subsidy. For households with more than two (2)individuals qualifying under subsection C of this Section, an additional five thousand dollars ($5,000)is added to the income threshold per qualifying individual. 2. Low-Income Disabled Citizen: A "low-income disabled citizen" is defined as: a) a person qualifying for special parking privileges under RCW 46.16.381(1)(a)through(f); b) a blind person as defined in RCW 74.18.020; c) a disabled, handicapped, or incapacitated person as defined under any other existing State or Federal program; or d)a person on home kidney dialysis treatment who resides in a single-family dwelling that is separately metered for water usage, either as owner, purchaser or renter, and whose total income, including that of his or her spouse or co-tenant, does not exceed the annual income threshold for eligibility for low-income rate. err► 3. Qualified Persons: a. Every such person(if double occupancy, then both household members) shall meet either of the above requirements to qualify for senior citizen and disabled rate(s). Every such person (if double occupancy, then both household members), shall file with the Utilities billing section of the City, his or her affidavit, that he/she or they are qualified to be charged the special rate for such utility services herein stated. b. Such statement shall contain such other information as the Utilities billing section may prescribe, including but not limited to address, ownership or interest in the dwelling occupied by such applicant(s), amount, source and nature of all income from any and all sources, together with the applicant's unqualified promise to forthwith notify the City of any circumstances or change in condition which would make the applicant(s) Nape 5 ORDINANCE NO. ineligible to receive said special rate(s). The Utilities billing section may establish rules *4140 and procedures for implementing this Section. 4. Low-Income Rates: a. For those senior citizens and disabled persons who qualified as economically disadvantaged and were on this low-income rate prior to August 1, 1994, the following rates for water service relating to such single-family dwelling in which such eligible person or persons permanently reside are as follows: (1) One dollar forty two cents($1.42) per month for a seventy-five percent(75%)rate subsidy and two dollars fifty five cents ($2.55)for a forty percent (40%) rate subsidy, limited to nine hundred (900) cubic feet of water per month. (2) Any excess shall be charged as provided in subsections A and B of this Section. b. For those senior citizens and disabled persons who qualify as economically disadvantaged, and were on this low-income rate after August 1, 1994, the following rates for water service relating to such single-family dwelling in which such eligible person or persons permanently reside: (1) Three dollars thirteen cents ($3.13)per month for a seventy-five percent (75%)rate subsidy, limited to nine hundred(900)cubic feet of water per month, and seven dollars fifty cents($7.50)per month for a forty percent (40%) rate subsidy, limited to nine hundred(900) cubic feet of water per month. (2) Any excess shall be charged as provided in subsections A and B of this Section, except for those persons who qualify under home kidney dialysis. 6 ORDINANCE NO. These customers are limited to one thousand seven hundred (1,700) cubic feet of water per month before any excess is charged as provided in subsections A and B of this Section. c. For those senior citizens and disabled persons who become eligible according to the criteria in subsections Cl and C2 of this Section after the effective date hereof, the following rates for water service relating to such single-family dwelling in which such eligible person or persons permanently reside: (1) Two dollars eighty five cents ($2.85) per month, limited to nine hundred (900)cubic feet of water per month, and for households with income thirty percent (30%)or less of the median household income for King County; and six dollars eighty one cents($6.81) per month, limited to nine hundred (900) cubic feet of water per month for double occupancy households with income Now between thirty percent(30%) and fifty percent(50%)of the median household income for King County. (2) Any excess shall be charged as provided in subsections A and B of this Section. 5. For those senior citizens, sixty two(62)years of age or older and/or disabled citizens, when such seniors and/or disabled citizens are not otherwise eligible for special rates as low-income seniors and/or disabled citizens, but who qualify for property tax exemption pursuant to RCW 84.36.381(5)(a) and are not residents of the City shall be exempt from the fifty percent (50%)utility surcharge applicable to those customers not residents of the City. To receive this exemption the applicant must provide the information required under subsection C3 of this Section. 7 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION V. Section 8-5-15.A of Chapter 5, Sewers,of Title VIII(Health and Sanitation) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Disposal Rates: The monthly rates and charges for sewage disposal service shall be as follows: 1. Single-Family: Fourteen dollars sixty seven cents($14.67). 2. All Other Users: A base charge of two dollars twenty two cents($2.22)plus one dollar sixty six cents ($1.66)per month for each one hundred (100) cubic feet of water used, but not less than fourteen dollars sixty seven cents($14.67)per month. 3. Charges For Sewer Service Without City Water: In the event that water obtained from sources other than purchased from the City is either discharged or drained into the sewer system, users shall be charged by one of the two (2) following methods: a. For single-family residences, fourteen dollars sixty seven cents($14.67) per month. b. For other than single-family dwellings, the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator shall install a water meter into such private water system at cost to property owners, and the method of billing shall be in compliance with subsection A2 of this Section. 4. (Rep. by Ord. 4898, 3-19-01) SECTION VI. Section 8-5-15.D of Chapter 5, Sewers, of Title VIII(Health and Sanitation) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: 8 ORDINANCE NO. D. Additional Charges: In addition to the foregoing charges specified in this Section, the following rates shall be charged: 1. A charge of twenty seven dollars and ninety-five cents($27.95) per month and a rate adjustment charge of fifty six cents ($0.56)per month payable to King County Wastewater for each single-family dwelling unit. 2. A charge of twenty seven dollars and ninety-five cents ($27.95)per month and a rate adjustment charge of fifty-six cents($0.56)per month payable to King County Wastewater for each seven hundred fifty(750) cubic feet, or any fraction thereof, of water used for all users other than single-family. 3. Any additional charges hereafter imposed by King County Wastewater under the "Industrial Cost Recovery" or"Industrial Waste Surcharge" programs required under the FWPCA(PL 92-500), Section 204, or as same may be amended hereafter, plus fifteen percent (15%)thereof as an additional charge for the City's cost of implementing such programs. 4. Senior and/or disabled citizens who qualified under RMC 8-4-31 C for low- income rates prior to August 1, 1994, are eligible for the following rates: a. Twenty seven dollars and ninety-five cents ($27.95) per month for King County Wastewater, and one dollar twenty-six cents($1.26)per month for City sewer charges for a seventy five percent (75%) rate subsidy and two dollars thirty-nine cents ($2.39)per month for City sewer charges for a forty percent (40%)rate subsidy. b. Senior and/or disabled citizens who qualify under RMC 8-4-31C for low- income rates after August 1, 1994, are eligible for the following rates: (1) Twenty seven dollars and ninety-five cents ($27.95) per month for King County Wastewater and three dollars seventy six cents($3.76) per month 9 ORDINANCE NO. for City sewer charges for a seventy-five percent(75%)rate subsidy, and eight dollars eighty two cents($8.82) per month for City sewer charges for a forty percent (40%)rate subsidy. (2) For double occupancy households, eight dollars twenty three cents ($8.23)per month for households with incomes between thirty percent (30%)and fifty percent (50%)of the median household income for the City. 5. For those senior citizens sixty-two(62)years of age or older and/or disabled citizens, when such seniors and/or disabled citizens are not otherwise eligible for special rates as low-income seniors and/or disabled citizens, but who qualify for property tax exemption pursuant to RCW 84.36.381(5)(a) and are not residents of the City shall be exempt from the fifty percent(50%)utility surcharge applicable to those customers not residents of the City. To receive this exemption the applicant must provide the information required under RMC 8-4- 31C2. -4-31C2. SECTION VII. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and 30 days after publication. 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 10 ORDINANCE NO. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD.1293:10/30/06:ma •41.r 11 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI #: Submitting Data: For Agenda of: September 25, 2006 Dept/DivBoard.. PBPW/Utility Systems Staff Contact Dave Christensen (ext. 7212) Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. King County Billing Methodology for Wastewater Correspondence.. Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Utilities Committee Legal Dept Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated $200,000 '41101 Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The methodology for billing by King County to Renton for wastewater treatment related costs utilizes a formula, per contract, that results in"billings in arrears". The City collects payment for wastewater flows under the current rate in the year conveyed, but King County charges in the next year under a newly adopted rate. This results in the Wastewater Utility currently having a negative balance of$438,727, with an anticipated year-end deficit of$475,486. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Add a new billing category to Renton's utility bills titled "King County Rate Stabilization Account" and charge a$1.00 fee per residential account, $1.50 per commercial/multi-family account, and $2.00 per industrial account per month, in order to collect the amount of funds needed to cover the actual billings by King County. Nord H:\File Sys\WWP-WasteWater\WWP-03-0000 Correspondence-Wastewater\davec\King County Billing Methodology AB Council.doc\DMCtp PLANNING/BUILDING/LANNING/BUILDING/ �ti �♦ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT '11MEMORANDUM DATE: September 12,2006 TO: Randy Corman, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Kathy Keolker, Mayo FROM: Gregg Zimmerm41 STAFF CONTACT: Dave Christensen, Wastewater Utility Supervisor(ext. 7212) SUBJECT: King County Billing Methodology for Wastewater ISSUE: Should the Council adopt a revised billing methodology for collection of King County wastewater treatment charges to include a per account fee to be titled"King County Rate Stabilization Fund" to ensure all costs associated from King County are collected? RECOMMENDATION: *ow Add a new billing category to Renton's utility bills titled"King County Rate Stabilization Account" and charge a$1.00 fee per residential account, $1.50 per commercial/multi- family account, and $2.00 per industrial account per month, in order to collect the amount of funds needed to cover the actual billings by King County. BACKGROUND: King County provides interceptors and treatment facilities to convey and treat wastewater flows for Renton and 34 other component agencies. Each component agency has a contract with King County for the conveyance and treatment of sewage, and each contract has the same language regarding how the county will provide those services, including billing methodology. The methodology for billing by King County to Renton for wastewater treatment related costs utilizes a formula,per contract, that results in"billings in arrears". The City collects payment for wastewater flows under the current rate in the year conveyed,but King County charges in the next year under a newly adopted rate. The current contract is the original contract developed by Metro and has only been amended from time to time to adjust for time extensions and other minor revisions. One section that has remained the same is the billing methodology section. Council/KC Billing Methodology September 12,2006 Page 2 of 3 Metro was formed in 1959, with Renton joining Metro in 1962. At that time,billing was done manually, which resulted in the component agencies having sufficient time to develop their..numbers.and submit them tn.Metro for billing. The methodology uses the _. total number of residential customers as reported at the end of the next to previous quarter plus a rolling average of the four previous quarters for residential, commercial/multi-family, and industrial accounts. The attached table shows how the billing system works and how a rate increase results in a negative collection situation for the City. City staff recently met with King County staff to discuss this issue. In the long term, the City will pursue contract changes that update the billing methodology to be current and ensure that the methodology applies rates based upon the rate under which flows were collected. This may take 2 to 3 years to complete, as it will require a contract change with all 35-component agencies. Some component agencies may not want to revise this section, as this billing methodology can also result in a positive cash flow if they are experiencing rapid growth. The City is experiencing very good growth from the single- family component,but significant decreases within the commercial and industrial sector, resulting in an overall small increase of about 1 to 2 percent annually. This slight increase is not sufficient to offset the county's rate increases averaging more than 5 percent annually. Renton has historically considered the county billing as a"pass-through" cost. However, the county describes the billing as a methodology to determine a relative value of service provided, and does not see it as a"pass-through"of monies collected by the agencies. The City needs to change the way we collect for the county charges to capture our true costs. The Wastewater Utility currently has a negative balance of$438,727, with an anticipated year-end deficit of$475,486 within the King County payment account. Staff has developed four options for correcting the billing issue: Option 1 Implement the proposed county rate increases earlier. The county, by contract,must provide the City with its proposed annual rates by June 30 of the prior year. This 6-month notice would provide the City sufficient time to implement the county's proposed rate increase by October 1 of that year in order to collect one-quarters' worth of the new rate prior to the actual first billing date by the county(January 1 of the next year). This would make up approximately 30 percent of the losses currently occurring and would not address the current shortfall in this account. Option 2 Combine the City rate with the county rate and show it as one rate on our billing. This would allow us to calculate the anticipated true costs of the next calendar year and include it within the total rate. We would then add a statement on our bills that lets the customers know the approximate percentage of the bill that is the county portion versus City portion. This option would collect the full amount needed to offset the current billing methodology. We could also collect for the current shortage. H:\File Sys\WWP-WasteWater\WWP-03-0000 Correspondence-Wastewater\davec\King County Billing Methodology Issue Council.doc\DMCtp Council/KC Billing Methodology September 12,2006 Page 3 of 3 . ,. Option 3 _.. Estahlicl, a revised county rate that includes anticipated cost differences based upon. : . ... . .. .... . . ...... . differential billing methodology. Add note to bill explaining why the City rate for King County is different than the county's published rate. This option would collect the full amount needed to offset the current billing methodology. We could also collect for the current shortage. Option 4 (Preferred) Establish an additional line item on our utility bill that identifies itself as a King County Rate Stabilization Fund and collect$1.00 per month to offset the difficulties we have with the billing methodology. We have over 15,000 accounts for sewer, and at$1.00 per account per month, would allow us to collect over$180,000 annually. This amount would be sufficient to cover our annual cost differential as well as allow us to slowly eliminate the current deficit. Once the deficit is eliminated, we can evaluate either the need to allow for a positive cash flow to offset future rate increases, or reduce the amount to collect only what is needed to cover the future anticipated annual overages. CONCLUSION: With King County in a current expansion mode, including construction of the$1.6 billion Brightwater Treatment Plant, rate increases are anticipated at a rate of approximately 10 percent every two years. These rate increases result in negative balances in our King 4100, County billing account due to the differential in how we collect versus how we are billed. By adding a new line item to our utility bill called out as"King County Rate Stabilization Fund", setting a$1.00 per residential, $1.50 per commercial/multi-family, and$2.00 per industrial account per month the City will be able to raise sufficient funds to offset the differences in methodologies. This will also allow for the elimination of the current deficit within the King County account, with the flexibility to build a reserve to offset future rate increases once the existing deficit is paid. Attachment cc: Lys Hornsby,Utility Systems Director `ern'' H:\File Sys\WWP-WasteWater\WWP-03-0000 Correspondence-Wastewater\davec\King County Billing Methodology Issue Council.doc\DMCtp Objective: To calculate Metro 12/31.12004 03/31(2005 06/30/2005 09/30/200y 12/31/2005 03/31/2006 06/30/2006 09/30/2006 12/31/2006 Customer Court 23.40 25.60 25.60 25.60 25.60 25.60 25.60 25.60 25.60 ingte Family 11,792 11,995 12,172) 12,31:3 12,417 12,574 12,600 12,700 ommercial Equiv.:Units . L. 16,1.70 13;672 `� 1;x,352 18;305 17,408 13,935 otal.Cutomers Charged 27;962' 25,667 2 ; • 4 30;618 29,825 26,509 stimated:bill from Metrodue on: Oct«04 Jan-0 Apr-05 Jul-05 Oct-05 Jan-06 Apr-06 Jul-06 Oct-06 letro Rate 23.40 25.60 25.60 25.60 25.60 25.60 25.60 25.60 25.60 n Single Family 268,772 299,059 301,875 307,072 311; 31.5,213 317,875 321,894 322,560 n Commercial Equiv. Units 375,406 397,677 391,629 394,016 392,710 A. 406,3.4 414,317 416,000 317,747 lusestimated surcharges 7,0E0 7,000 7,000 7,000 otal Est.Metro Bill 644,179 696,736 693,604 70088 704,314 728,632 739,218 744,920 647,333 1,932,536 2,090,208 2,080,512 2,103,264 2,112,941 Prep: N.China x7291,07/26/2006 U:\Nching\Metro\P MetroBiil.xls Fund 416 King County Revenues and Expenditures Jan Feb Mar Acr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Fund Balance (400,854) (366,898) (556,320) (467,030) (629,250) (577,683) (708,188) (673,108) (818,028) (782,948) (830,281) (697,614) (744,947) Revenues 801,936 584,186 860,243 627,224 832,017 659,901 780,000 600,000 780,000 600,000 780,000 600,000 8,505,507 Interest 0 -1,262 -1,793 -1,633 -1,926 -2,041 0 0 0 0 0 0 Expenses 728,567 728,567 728,567 739,226 739,226 739,226 744,920 744,920 744,920 647,333 647,333 647,333 8,580,139 Taxes 39,414 43,779 40,593 48,585 39,297 49,139 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net Surplus/Deficit 33,956 -189,422 89,290 -162,220 51,567 -130,505 35,080 -144,920 35,080 -47,333 132,667 -47,333 -74,632 Cum. Surplus/Deficit 33,956 -155,466 -66,176 -228,396 -176,829 -307,334 -272,254 -417,174 -382,094 -429,427 -296,760 -344,093 Ending Fund Balance (327,485) (511,280) (424,644) (579,033) (536,459)"e s`,0 9j, (673,108) (818,028) (782,948) (830,281) (697,614) (744,947) Metro Pass Through Reveues& Expenditures Jan Feb Mar Apt May Jun Jul Aug $ep Oct Nov Dec Total Fund Balance (400,854) (327,485) (471,866) (340,190) (452,193) (359,402) (438,727) (403,647) (548,567) (513,487) (560,820) (428,153) (475,486) Revenues 801,936 584,186 860,243 627,224 832,017 659,901 780,000 600,000 780,000 600,000 780,000 600,000 8,505,507 Payment to Metro 728,567 728,567 728,567 739,226 739,226 739,226 744,920 744,920 744,920 647,333 647,333 647,333 8,580,139 Net Surplus/Deficit 73,369 -144,381 131,676 -112,003 92,791 -79,325 35,080 -144,920 35,080 -47,333 132,667 -47,333 -74,632 Cum. Surplus/Deficit 73,369 -71,012 60,664 -51,339 41,452 -2,793 -147,713 -112,633 -159,966 -27,2939r4,632 Ending Fund Balance (327,485) (471,866) (340,190) (452,193) (359,40 �� ( 03,647) (548,567) (513,487) (560,820) (428,15 ,486) • UTILITIES COMMITTEE ar COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORT Date November 6, 2006 King County Billing Methodology for Wastewater (September 25, 2006) The Utilities Committee recommends that the issue of establishment of a King County Rate Adjustment Charge to the King County Portion of Renton's utility bill be included in the overall budget process and be included in Utility Rate discussions. For 2007, the proposed Rate Adjustment Charge would be set at fifty-six cents($0.56)per single family residence or fifty-six cents($0.56)per 750 cubic foot of metered usage, or fraction thereof after 750 cubic feet, for all remaining users. 1llik Dan Clawson, Chair # ' NIS' çf ' 1ri Briere r ice Chair e L)(1,1141 (A2 6i/tr- bens W. Law, Member cc: Lys Hornsby,Utility Systems Director Dave Christensen,Wastewater Utility Supervisor /7/clirtjr ,6Q,/ey, C;nn4cc ille4 hisfrak' t.""' 1771.r D DY Date /14‘)"'11°6 UTILITIES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT November 20,2006 Public Works Construction Permit Fees (November 6, 2006) The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the proposed amendments to the public works construction permit fees and incorporate them into an ordinance. The Committee further recommends that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. Dan Clawson, Chair Terri Briere,Vice Chair tcatte2.3 (J. Denis W. Law, Member cc: Lys Hornsby,Utility Systems Director Nenita Ching,PBPW Principal Fin&Adm Analyst Kayren Kittrick,Development Engineering Supervisor H:\File Sys\ADM-PBPW Adminstration\Analyst\UTIUPW Fees\2006 Study\Util Cmte Report.doc\NCtp rev0l/06 bh APPROVED BY 1 CT COUNCIL UTILITIES COMMITTEE Date //-a24-02°°& COMMITTEE REPORT November 20,2006 WRIA 8 & 9 Salmon Habitat Plan 2007-2015 Implementation Interlocal Agreements (November 6, 2006) The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the interlocal agreements between the City and other jurisdictions participating in the implementation of the WRIA 8 and WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plans for the time period of 2007-2015. Dan Clawson, Chair Terri Briere, Vice Chair /L. ), 4ir-- Denis W. Law, Member cc: Lys Hornsby, Utilities Systems Director Ron Straka, Surface Water Utility Supervisor H:\File Sys\SWP-Surface Water Projects\SWP-27-Surface Water Projects(CIP)\27-2760 WRIA 9 Planning\WRIA 9 Forum\2006 WRIA 9 Forum\2007 ILA Approval\WRIA 8&9 2007-2015 ILA Cmte Rpt.doc\RStp rev01/06 bh Ar7FZOVED BY C V COUNCIL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Date /1-a0-,?WDA COMMITTEE REPORT November 20, 2006 2007 Comprehensive Plan Pre-Applications and Requests (November 13, 2006) The Planning and Development Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the request for pre-application review for application 2007-Pre- 01, Alan Kunovsky request for review of land use designation at 326 Park Ave North, and 2007-Pre-02 O'Farrell Properties LLC request for land use designation and multi-family policy review at 188 Hardie Ave Southwest, including four parcels of contiguous property between Rainier Avenue South,Hardie Avenue South and Southwest Victoria Street. The Committee further recommends that these applications be forwarded to the Planning Commission for inclusion in the 2007 work program pending successful completion of an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment by December 15, 2006. Tern ':riere, Chair Dan Clawson, Vice Chair /7,14 . / O'144(CI ._ Marcie Palmer, Member cc: Alex Pietsch Rebecca Lind 2007 Comp Plan Pre-Apps.doc\ Rev 01/06 bh Ar7TOVED BY I CM COUNCIL Date /1-'D- a DD6 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT November 20, 2006 Amendments to Code Regulating Geologically Hazardous Areas (Referred November 6, 2006) The Planning and Development Committee met to discuss proposed revision to the Critical Areas Regulations which would exempt new surface water discharges from private storm systems on steep slopes. Currently, public surface water discharges are allowed to discharge on or near steep slopes in order to improve slope stability. However, private storm water systems are not permitted to discharge, even when such utilities would reduce erosion and improve slope stability. The Planning and Development Committee recommends that the public hearing for the proposed amendments be held by the City Council on Monday, December 4, 2006. Te i Briere, Chair • Dan Clawson, Vice Chair • Marcie Palmer, ember cc: Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Neil Watts,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager planning and dev geologic hazardous areas.doc\ Rev 01/06 bh A777MIED BY `iTY COUNCIL Date 1/40-406 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT November 20, 2006 Amendments for Wireless Regulations (Referred April 5, 2004) 'f I vL'k The Planning and Development Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the code amendments to permit wireless communication facilities within public rights-of-way within residential zones and adopt the ordinance. j(ku Terri Briere, Chir Dan Clawson, Vice Chair A 761AL' / Marcie Palmer, Member cc: Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator Neil Watts,Development Services Director Jennifer Henning,Current Planning Manager planning and dev wireless regs revisions.doc\ Rev 01/06 bh P7inovroay (7 COUNCIL Date _ao-aooL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT November 20, 2006 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Concurrent Re-zoning, and Implementing Zoning Text Amendments (June 5, 2006) The Planning and Development Committee recommends concurrence in the staff and Planning Commission recommendation to approve the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments as shown on Attachment A, 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Matrix and Attachment B, The Report and Recommendations of the Highlands Area Citizen's Zoning Task Force with the following changes from the original recommendations. 1) Application 2006-M-6 Map Amendment for the Highlands Study Area a. The area known as "the tail" on Harrington Ave between NE 9th St. and NE 7th St. to be shown in the Comprehensive Plan as Center Village with Multi- family zoning in order to comply with adopted mapping criteria for Multi- family land use. 2) Report and Recommendation of the Highlands Task Force, Zoning Text Amendments a. Notes and Conditons section of Title IV will include a zoning use note restricting commercial office uses on properties fronting Edmonds Ave. NE Sunset Blvd and NE 12th St. 3) Application 2006 M-3 Rivera a. The zoning use table in the R-14 zone will include a zoning use note restricting signage for commercial uses in the R-14 zone to monument signs. The Committee further recommends that the Development Agreement for Application 2006 M-7 be refererd to the City Attorney for review and approval and that Mayor be authorized to execute the agreement upon approval by the City Attorney. The Committee further recommends that Applications 2006 T-5 and Application 2006 M- 2 be held in Committee until resolution of the pending SEPA appeal on these issues. Terri Briere, hair P&D Report.doc\ Rev 01/06 bh l " , Dan Clawson, Vice Chair 9146“1_,LQ,..* Marcie Palmer,Member cc: /}/ex Piedsc/ Re6etea Lind Larry Warren P&D Report.doc\ Rev 01/06 bh ATrrevcoBV FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT Crif COUNCIL November 20,2006 Date 1l-o70-aOO , APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND PAYROLL VOUCHERS The Finance Committee approves for payment on November 20, 2006, claim vouchers 253809- 254369 and 4 wire transfers, totaling $8,923,702.22 , and 641 direct deposits, payroll vouchers 66410-66587, and 1 wire transfer, totaling $2,015,422.36 . fes/ Don Perss n, Chair Aetujv Denis Law, Vice-Chair Toni Nelson, Membe r711,11rED Sy C07.iNCIL Datl� i�- 070 4006 FINANCE COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT November 20,2006 Authorization to Utilize General Funds (November 6, 2006) The Finance Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the transfer of$35,000 from the general fund to fund 101 to offset increased overtime and labor costs incurred due to weather related crowd control and the extended sockeye season. The Committee further recommends that the budget amendment ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. Don P rsson, Chair J Denis W. Law, Vice Chair C Toni Nelson, Mem: cc: Terry Higashiyama,Community Services Administrator Mike Bailey,Finance/IS Administrator Jerry Rerecich,Recreation Director Zang Pa,I<msor► i}dp/ed //40-2" CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 3YyI A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO ENTER INTO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, ENTITLED "ADDENDUM #27 FOR SHARING OF FIBER OPTIC INSTALLATION PROJECTS", WITH THE CITY OF BELLEVUE, THE CITY OF KIRKLAND, THE CITY OF RENTON, THE LAKE WASHINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON, THE BELLEVUE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND EVERGREEN HOSPITAL, TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE KING COUNTY I-NET AND TO BETTER SERVE ADDITIONAL AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON. WHEREAS, the City of Bellevue, the City of Kirkland, the City of Renton, the Lake Washington School District, the Renton School District, the University of Washington, the Bellevue School District, and Evergreen Hospital (the Participating Agencies) have entered into the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects; and WHEREAS,the Participating Agencies desire to enter into a Fiber Optic Project Agreement for a planned Fiber Optic Project; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton approves the participation in the planned Fiber Optic Project and future Fiber Optic Projects of Bellevue Community College subject to the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects; and WHEREAS,the current Participating Agencies desire to amend the General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects to add Bellevue Community College as a Participating Agency for participation in the planned Fiber Optic Project and future Fiber Optic Projects; 1 RESOLUTION NO. 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 H. The Mayor and City Clerk are authorized to enter into the interlocal agreement entitled "Addendum #27 General Terms and Conditions for Sharing of Fiber Optic Installation Projects" and similar agreements adding additional parties, or extending the agreement, or agreeing to implement administrative actions. 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.1221:11/6/06:ma 2 ,4dop/ed 11-.40-0706 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. F 41 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS AMONG PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS WITH THE GREEN/DUWAMISH AND CENTRAL PUGET SOUND WATERSHED RESOURCE INVENTORY AREA (WRIA 9) AND THE LAKE WASHINGTON/CEDAR/SAMMAMISH WATERSHED RESOURCE INVENTORY AREA(WRIA 8). WHEREAS, RCW 39.34 authorizes cities and counties to enter into interlocal agreements, as necessary, to work together on issues requiring joint action of the parties; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2001, the City of Renton entered into an Interlocal Agreement (ILA)for participation in WRIA 8 and WRIA 9 for the purposes described therein; and WHEREAS, an amendment to the WRIA 9 ILA was authorized on August 20, 2001; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton extended the ILA for WRIA 8 and WRIA 9 through the project year 2006; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton wishes to continue to participate in WRIA 8 and WRIA 9 in order to implement the Salmon Habitat Plans and accomplish other tasks deemed advisable by each WRIA and budgeted by the WRIA and the City of Renton; 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 IL The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute an ILA between the City and the other participating jurisdictions within WRIA 8 (Lake 1 • RESOLUTION NO. Washington/Cedar/Sammamish basins) and an ILA between the City of Renton and other participating jurisdictions within WRIA 9(Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound basins). SECTION III. The Mayor is hereby further authorized to sign the extension to Interlocal Agreements and implement necessary administrative actions consistent with this resolution. 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.1213:10/2/06:ma. 2 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ANNEXING CERTAIN TERRITORY OF THE CITY OF RENTON (HUDSON ANNEXATION; FILE NO. A-05-005) WHEREAS, under the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120 as amended, a petition in writing requesting that certain territory contiguous to the City of Renton, as described below, be annexed to the City of Renton, was presented and filed with the City Clerk on or about January 30, 2006; and WHEREAS, prior to the filing and circulation of said petition for annexation to the City of Renton, the petitioning owners notified the City Council of their intention to commence such proceedings as provided by law, as more particularly specified in RCW 35A.14.120, and upon public hearing thereon, it having been determined and the petitioning owners having agreed to '%rw assume the pre-existing outstanding indebtedness of the City of Renton as it pertains to the territory petitioned to be annexed; and to accept that portion of the City's Comprehensive Plan as it pertains to the territory including the applicable Zoning Code relating thereto; and WHEREAS, the King County Department of Assessments examined and verified the signatures on the petition for annexation and determined signatures represent acreage, as provided by law, in excess of sixty percent (60%) of the area to be annexed; and WHEREAS, the City Council, after due notice and publication, held a public hearing on the 60% Direct Petition and possible future zoning for the 13.69-acre annexation site on June 5, 2006, and at that time accepted the 60% Direct Petition and authorized the sending of the "Notice of Intention" to the Boundary Review Board for King County; and 1 ORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS, the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department of the City of Renton having considered and recommended the annexing of said annexation area to the City of Renton; and WHEREAS, the City Council fixed June 5, 2006, and November 11, 2006, as the time and place for public hearings in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, Renton, Washington, upon the area and future zoning for it, and notice thereof having been given as provided by law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said notices public hearings having been held at the time and place specified in the notices, and the Council having considered all matters in connection with the annexation and further determined that all legal requirements and procedures of the law applicable to the petition method for annexation have been met; and WHEREAS, the King County Boundary Review Board having deemed the "Notice of Nsoli Intention for the 13.69-acre annexation site approved, as set forth in its closing letter issued on September 26, 2006; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton is proposing prezoning the annexation site R-8 and R- 10; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The findings, recitals, and determinations are hereby found to be true and correct in all respects. All requirements of the law in regard to the annexation by petition method, including the provisions of RCW 35A.14.120, 130, 140 and 150, have been met. It is further determined that the petition for annexation to the City of Renton of the property and territory described below is hereby approved and granted; the following described property Nesrie 2 ORDINANCE NO. being contiguous to the City limits of the City of Renton is hereby annexed to the City of Niro Renton, effective May 1, 2007, after the approval, passage, and publication of this Ordinance; and on and after said date of May 1, 2007, the property shall constitute a part of the City of Renton and shall be subject to all its laws and ordinances then and thereafter in force and effect; the property being described as follows: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein [Said property, approximately 13.69 acres, is generally located west, south, and east of the existing City of Renton boundaries defined by a peninsula of land immediately east of108th Avenue SE, and south of SE 168th Street, as shown on Exhibit "A"] and the owners-petitioners of the property shall assume the pre-existing outstanding indebtedness of the City of Renton as prescribed in RCW 35A.14.120 as it pertains to the property, and the property to be subject to the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. SECTION II. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and thirty (30) days after its publication. A certified copy of this Ordinance shall be filed with the King County Council, State of Washington, and as otherwise provided by law. 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 3 ORDINANCE NO. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD.1296:11/14/06:ma 4 EXHIBIT"A" Now, HUDSON ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 20 through 25, inclusive, Block 4, 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 ''mire 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. J "I I E 1 u �� idU ism C=IIF c:Ilkviurifie 0 ) ,i, _____ n CI wit. n Iii [;ic121r2Dis Fie v 0 D -....1# //_ ii, 4b, E:=3 —, D ❑❑ uii `-, o51-1 Itq.D7q,,kik „,„ a ou 5 ELI iv C) fib 1111040 ,,,( AIWIN Inc:114u._ R Lel 1 ' "I• wilhat111.1 i <Q>, 1111 0 4) T ... 1 Eno no c;,,, III ru—i Q M, , 110 ° D C ° ❑ f0 a o 0 1,3 . M., , nIIIII 0 Ell CI Erl? 0 I D7_ Ei DI DED SIL 1 1_11El ❑ o o ■ w i 'rw ' CD I 1 1.111 ,f 0a o Q ,....,,,,,,, . : s'-- -mot_ . „,. ,,T'HAIII-,..1" , -:::.'_ , 0 • ,--,'4'--4-MI:St.„J,L1,-,-er.rattia4=4-t-10-2 .“' ''7;. ':::; 'T-riE-',1•1.7''''•.:•._;.-:;_ 9 0 MU c_i asi.:; !,i v._,;?„,..i, ,,,.,, _.a rm. fiA_Pc° , E-,3 Ei. ::5„,._,-,:,,, -.,,,, . ,_,,,,,,.,,,,.., a„, n E=I li-ea '3 ca , p r t�D ❑ t,, ,,, ( I ❑ 0 88 . �QJJD oIN � o \ — ❑ o i Cr" C3 G� 0 ❑ O ❑ c D cO ❑\u CI g ri c) g gt 0, . e. or: Bram E 172nc St Es, G-9g0 °°, a 4-E; To Proposed Hudson Annexation 0 300 600 Figure 3: Existing Structures Map < :...:.„.•.............•.............•......... 0 Structure • Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning — — — City Limits 1 : 3600 •Ig-1)'+ ? ' Alex Pletsch,Administrator ! -, I Proposed Annex.Area Get Desa • 3 October 2005rio CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF '1'HE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ESTABLISHING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY ANNEXED WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON FROM R-18 (URBAN RESIDENTIAL 18 DU PER ACRE, KING COUNTY ZONING), R-12 (URBAN RESIDENTIAL 12 DU PER ACRE, KING COUNTY ZONING), AND R-8 (URBAN RESIDENTIAL 8 DU PER ACRE, KING COUNTY ZONING) TO R-8 (RESIDENTIAL 8 DU/AC; EIGHT DWELLING UNITS PER NET ACRE, CITY OF RENTON ZONING); (HUDSON ANNEXATION; FILE NO. A-05-005). WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2,Zoning Districts —Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington," as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has not been zoned in the City of Renton; and WHEREAS, property owners within the annexation area petitioned the City of Renton for annexation and concurrent rezoning; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.330 and RCW 35A.14.340, the City held two public hearings to consider zoning for the area, with the first hearing held on June 5, 2006, and the second hearing held on November 20, 2006, and said zoning being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council having considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties having been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; and WHEREAS, said annexation having previously been approved subject to its effectuation on May 1, 2007, annexing the property to the City of Renton, such zoning shall be effective upon the date of annexation; Niew 1 ORDINANCE NO. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby zoned to R-8 as hereinbelow specified. The annual ordinance adopting the maps of the City's Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended to evidence said rezoning and the EDNSP Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to wit: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. [Said property, approximately 5.83 acres, is located in two sections; the smallest, some 2.02 acres, on the south side of SE 168th Street in the easternmost part of the annexation, and the largest, some 3.81 acres, on the west side of 108th Avenue SE, in the northernmost portion of the annexation site.] SECTION IL This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and thirty days after its publication. ,41.04 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 Date of Publication: ORD.1298:11/14/06:ma 2 • EXHIBIT"A" Niiiiy' HUDSON ANNEXATION PREZONE(R-8) LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 22 through 25, inclusive, Block 4, Aker's Farms No. 5, as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington; EXCEPT road(Benson Road S.); TOGETHER WITH the North quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington; EXCEPT the west 767.8 feet thereof and the east 264.00 feet thereof; and EXCEPT road (SE 168th Street). New J1 ' [ , ›- . I ! I : I i .----1 i SE 164ti St C----- s 27tSt =::, 7:7----- -A L,J11 1 : 1 CD 1 ' I ' HI , I \ -- 1 ' I ! I P - / O/ ' IL cr) 1 i .1 \ S I I I 1 :). \ l'. SE 166th i , '- i I I c) 11 < ! I 1 ! I 1......'--. \ LAJ I it --1 cni ' j 1 i I i 1 1 1 i : I ; 1 ! 1 , •---,ii , 1 i 1 i i ( - <If 1 I ' (-/-) i i , ,-• ----- ,,:•• , ., ‘, ,,,,,., : (f) , 1 1 . . ., • 1 ' ! 1 i ' \ (--- >,(1) 0 , \ --- , < ! i < i i 1 , - 1 ; . . , .., , i ' I : S = I 1 L_L41111 i 1 _i 1 i ...4_, . . \ i -4-' 1 (0 ' t r' !I i i r-----7-F- \ \ r i e i 1 cp :i 1 1 ,___J ._\ ! i 1 J \ \! is ri. 1. ii , 1 1 11 I i 1 I - I — . \ \ I\ \ I 1: i1 1 i i1 1 I I F — -1 \ I , U S: I I 172nd St ! -;_-- "172nc '--- i \ N ----- ---:- i .._ _-- - L --- St H L._ _ -- i • ,... ---- i ii-----NN ' / 1 --,_ / \ / ! 1 A L , // . ' SE. 173rd St L. - ,, ) ---__.::::-----------____ : z Proposed Hudson Annexation 0 300 600 R-8 Zoning Essainimmeism 1r Annexation Area * •. Economic Development NetOboMonds&Strategic Planning — — — City Limits 1 : 3600 •ffc MPritn,',"--- . Proposed R-8 Zoning CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ESTABLISHING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY ANNEXED WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON FROM R-18 (URBAN RESIDENTIAL 18 DU PER ACRE, KING COUNTY ZONING), R-12 (URBAN RESIDENTIAL 12 DU PER ACRE, KING COUNTY ZONING), AND R-8 (URBAN RESIDENTIAL 8 DU PER ACRE, KING COUNTY ZONING) TO R-10 (RESIDENTIAL 10 DU/AC; TEN DWELLING UNITS PER NET ACRE, CITY OF RENTON ZONING); (HUDSON ANNEXATION; FILE NO.A-05-005). WHEREAS, under Section 4.2.020 of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts— Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington," as amended, and the maps and reports adopted in conjunction therewith, the property hereinbelow described has not been zoned in the City of Renton; and WHEREAS, property owners within the annexation area petitioned the City of Renton for annexation and concurrent rezoning; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.330 and RCW 35A.14.340, the City held two public hearings to consider zoning for the area, with the first hearing held on June 5, 2006, and the second hearing held on November 20, 2006, and said zoning being in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the City Council having considered all matters relevant thereto, and all parties having been heard appearing in support thereof or in opposition thereto; and WHEREAS, said annexation having previously been approved subject to its effectuation on May 1, 2007, annexing the property to the City of Renton, such zoning shall be effective upon the date of annexation; err 1 ORDINANCE NO. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The following described property in the City of Renton is hereby zoned to R-10 as hereinbelow specified. The annual ordinance adopting the maps of the City's Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended to evidence said rezoning and the EDNSP Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to change the maps of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to evidence said rezoning, to wit: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. [Said property, approximately 6.60 acres, is located in two sections, the smallest, some 1.90 acres, on the western side of 108th Avenue SE, and the largest, some 4.70 acres, on the east side of 108th Avenue SE, both south of SE 168m Street, if extended.] SECTION II. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and thirty days after its publication. 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 Date of Publication: ORD.1297:11/14/06:ma 2 EXHIBIT"A" ✓ HUDSON ANNEXATION PREZONE(R-10) LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 20 and 21, Block 4, Aker's Farms No. 5, as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington; EXCEPT that portion of Lot 21 conveyed to King County by Deed for road (Benson Road S.), recorded under King County Rec. No. 7903140910; TOGETHER WITH the west 767.8 feet of the North quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington; EXCEPT roads (Benson Road S. and SE168`h Street). . , I • - 1 ' DJ '0 1 ; I ›,- 1 • i 1 : I I 1 ' ' I __........J / ---. r----)) I 1 / / SE 164th St IT, , 522Lhst, 11,---71------7,------LTT------ _ ------- 'I I 1 i \ 1 't 3> I/Lb/2 - _____I-Y..._ I •< il11 tii Cr) i UD i I ; 1 I I (I) I 1 < I I I 1 I i' ir) 1 I 1 W 1 i i • 1 1 i i 13,1_„,...,, i I 1 I I 111 1 : 1 s 7 I i,---)I I I 5 Lit L.Li I 1 Li-I I ,i j , i i, _____J i, - J 1 '..,. .. -.-- -... 1 - -- -- ---- , - 1 I < Cl) I (I), . 1 .. . , , \ II I ,,, I 1 _.0 `--1, ! I >. 1 1 1 ., ' :- • '.,-- - I 1 ' I --i----1 I I < 1 < ; • II : 1 t::;........:.;...:„- 1, 1 1 .1 I L-----1 ( '' I-—71-1 I \ L.f--) ri ! \ \ i (--.) ! 1 : i I --,, A \r I , I ii i • • , • 3- I ri . , I • 1 , \ I \\ I i 1 1 1 1 \ \ i ! I I \\ -71111-1 \ \\<, i S- i I 172nc St i, - ! \ ------___-_.J I__ -- i ; I E 172nc St 1 I 1 '-----''',... -----_,.71..- '77------ - e i i-——---N, ———————— 7 / i \ / 1 1....) 1 //1 L, S-:-- 173rc St 1 , ....___ -__..-3 ----\ \I---------_------.7.-----,)\ i _I _ , Proposed Hudson Annexation o 300 600 i R-10 Zoning - -exesinstassgsziositawmassagen - Annexation Area 0 .. Economic Development.Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning — — — City Limits I : 3600 'lid litt . %,Isch,<;" -- -- -. . Proposed R-10 Zoning .Msy 2066 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE 2006 BUDGET TO AUTHORIZE $35,000 FROM INCREASED REVENUES TO OFFSET INCREASED OVERTIME AND LABOR COSTS DUE TO WEATHER RELATED CROWD CONTROL AND THE EXTENDED SOCKEYE SEASON. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Appropriation to the Community Services Fund is hereby increased as follows: Fund 2006 Original Budget 2006 Adjusted Budget Increase Budget 101 $4,220 $35,000 $39,220 Increased overtime and labor costs were funded through the Recreation fir✓ Division Intermittent Salaries&Wages Swimming Pool account. SECTION IL This project will be funded by increased revenues. SECTION III. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage, approval, and five(5) days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2006. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2006. New Kathy Keolker, Mayor 1 ORDINANCE NO. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD.1291:11/01/06:ma Newil 2 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 1, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT, OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY INCREASING PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FEES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Subsections 4-1-180.D.1-4 of Chapter 1, Administration and Enforcement, of Title N(Development Regulations) of Ordinance no. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" are hereby amended to read as follows: 1. WATER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FEES: Type of Water Service and Fee Repairs Water meter tests for 3/4 " $50.00 to 2 " meter Water meter tests for meters Time and materials cost greater than 2 " ($60.00 deposit) Open and close fire Time and materials hydrants for fire flow tests conducted by others Water service disconnection $250.00 (cut at main) Meter resets $95.00 Repair of damage to service $225.00 Water main connections $535.00 Water main cut and cap $1,000.00 Water $65.00 each quality/inspection/purity tests Specialty water tests(lead, Cost of test plus $70.00 copper, etc.) processing fee Water turn ons/offs after $185.00 fir• hours 1 r ORDINANCE NO. Installation of isolation Time and materials valve $2,000.00 deposit New water line chlorination $250.00 plus $0.15 per fee lineal foot for any footage after the first two hundred fifty(250)lineal feet Miscellaneous water Time and materials installation fees 2. WATER METER INSTALLATION FEES —CITY INSTALLED: The following fees are payable at the time of application for water meter installation(s). Water Meter Size Fee 3/4 "meter installed by City $2,260.00(full installation of stub service within City limits and meter) $240.00(meter drop in) 3/4 " meter installed by City $2,430.00(full installation of stub service outside City limits and meter) $240.00(meter drop in) 1 " meter installed by City $2,430.00(full installation of stub service and meter) $250.00(meter drop in) 1-1/2 " meter installed by City $3,600.00(full installation of stub service and meter) $435.00(meter drop in) 2 "meter installed by City $4,030.00(full installation of stub service and meter) $550.00(meter drop in) 3. WATER METER PROCESSING FEES—APPLICANT INSTALLED: For meters larger than two inches (2 "), the applicant must provide materials and installs. The City charges a two hundred twenty dollar($220.00)processing fee at the time of meter application. 4. WASTEWATER AND SURFACE WATER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FEES: Type of New Service Wastewater Permit Fee Surface Water Permit Fee Residential $150.00 each connection $150.00 each connection Commercial $175.00 each connection $175.00 each connection Industrial $200.00 each connection $200.00 each connection Repair of any of the above $50.00 each service $50.00 each connection Cut and Cap/Demolition $120.00 each service $120.00 each service Permit Ground Water Discharge $170.00 N/A (temporary connection to wastewater system for one- time discharge of ;, 2 ORDINANCE NO. contaminated ground water to 50,000 gallons) Ground Water Discharge $170.00+Billed for current N/A (temporary connection to Renton and King County wastewater system for wastewater rate on discharge of contaminated discharged amount(meter ground water over 50,000 provided by property gallons) owner) SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and 30 days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2006. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2006. fir.► Kathy Keolker, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD.1289:10/23/06:ma Noire 3 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTERS 2, 4, AND 11 OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY PERMITTING WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND TO INCORPORATE THREE PRE-EXISTING ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATIONS THAT CLARIFY THE WIRELESS REGULATIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section 4-2-060.P of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"is hereby amended to read as follows: slimy 1 ZONING USE TABLE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS USES: RC R-1 R-4 R-8 RMH R-10 R-14 RM IL IM IH CN CV CA CD CO COR UC- UC- N1 N2 P.WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures H48 AD47 AD47 AD47 H48 H48 AD47 H48 AD47 H48 Macro facility antennas AD46 AD46 AD46 AD46 AD46 AD46 AD46 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 H H Micro facility antennas PPP P P P P PPP P PPP PPPPP Mini facility antennas P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 AD AD R R Minor modifications to existing P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P P wireless communication facilities AD AD Monopole I support structures on H45 H45 H45 H45 H45 H45 H45 AD46 P44 P44 P44 AD46 P44 P44 AD46 P44 AD46 private property Monopole I support structures on AD45 AD45 AD45 AD45,AD45 AD45 AD45 AD45 P44 P44 P44 AD46 P44 P44 AD46 P44 AD46 public right-of-way Monopole II support structures H48 AD47 AD47 AD47 H48 H48 AD47 H48 AD47 H48 Parabolic Antennas—Large H45 H45 H45 H45 H45 H45 H45 AD46 P44 P44 P44 AD46 P44 P44 AD46 P44 AD46 • SECTION II. The subsections on "Wireless Communication Facilities" in Sections 4-2-070.A through S of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts— Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" are hereby amended to read as follows: 4-2-070.A RESOURCE CONSERVATION (RC) Uses allowed in the RC Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas AD#46 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property H#45 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#45 Parabolic Antennas—Large H#45 4-2-070.B RESIDENTIAL-1 DU/AC (R-1) Uses allowed in the R-1 Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas AD#46 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property H#45 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#45 Parabolic antennas-Large H#45 3 ORDINANCE NO. 4-2-070.0 RESIDENTIAL-4 DU/AC (R-4) Uses allowed in the R-4 Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas AD#46 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property H#45 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#45 Parabolic antennas -Large H#45 4-2-070.D RESIDENTIAL-8 DU/AC (R-8) Uses allowed in the R-8 Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas AD#46 Micro facility antennas P Noid Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property H#45 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#45 Parabolic antennas-Large H#45 4-2-070.E RESIDENTIAL MANUFACTURED HOMES (RMH) Uses allowed in the RMH Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas AD#46 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property H#45 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#45 Parabolic antennas-Large H#45 4 ORDINANCE NO. 4-2-070.F RESIDENTIAL-10 DU/AC (R-10) Nrr►, Uses allowed in the R-10 Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas AD#46 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property H#45 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#45 Parabolic antennas-Large H#45 4-2-070.G RESIDENTIAL-14 DU/AC (R-14) Uses allowed in the R-14 Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas AD#46 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Nlistry Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property H#45 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#45 Parabolic antennas-Lame H#45 4-2-070.H RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY(RM) Uses allowed in the RM Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures H#48 Macro facility antennas P#44 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property AD#46 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#45 Monopole II support structures H#48 Parabolic antennas—Lame AD#46 5 ORDINANCE NO. 4-2-070.1 COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD (CN) Uses allowed in the CN Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures H#48 Macro facility antennas P#44 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property AD#46 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#46 Monopole II support structures H#48 Parabolic antennas -Large AD#46 4-2-070.J CENTER VILLAGE(CV) Uses allowed in the CV Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures H#48 Macro facility antennas P#44 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property P#44 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way P#44 Monopole II support structures H#48 Parabolic antennas -Large P#44 6 ORDINANCE NO. 4-2-070.K COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL(CA) Now Uses allowed in the CA Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures AD#47 Macro facility antennas P#44 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property P#44 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way P#44 Monopole II support structures AD#47 Parabolic antennas—Large P#44 4-2-070.L CENTER DOWNTOWN (CD) Uses allowed in the CD Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: Nome WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures H#48 Macro facility antennas P#44 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property AD#46 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#46 Monopole II support structures H#48 Parabolic antennas—Large AD#46 7 ORDINANCE NO. 4-2-070.M COMMERCIAL OFFICE(CO) Uses allowed in the CO Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures AD#47 Macro facility antennas P#44 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property P#44 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way P#44 Monopole II support structures AD#47 Parabolic antennas—Large P#44 4-2-070.N COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL (COR) Uses allowed in the COR Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures H#48 Macro facility antennas P#44 Micro facility antennas p Mini facility antennas p#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property AD#46 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way AD#46 Monopole II support structures H#48 Parabolic antennas—Large AD#46 '44.04 8 ORDINANCE NO. 4-2-070.0 INDUSTRIAL LIGHT(IL) ire Uses allowed in the IL Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures AD#47 Macro facility antennas P#44 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property P#44 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way P#44 Monopole II support structures AD#47 Parabolic antennas—Large P#44 4-2-070.P INDUSTRIAL MEDIUM (IM) Uses allowed in the IM Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures AD#47 Macro facility antennas P#44 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property P#44 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way P#44 Monopole II support structures AD#47 Parabolic antennas -Large P#44 9 ORDINANCE NO. 4-2-070.Q INDUSTRIAL HEAVY(IH) Uses allowed in the IH Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures AD#47 Macro facility antennas P#44 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P#49 Monopole I support structures on private property P#44 Monopole I support structures on public right-of-way P#44 Monopole II support structures AD#47 Parabolic antennas-Large P#44 4-2-070.R URBAN CENTER NORTH 1 (UC-N1) Uses allowed in the UC-N1 Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas H Nord Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas AD-P Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P AD 4-2-070.S URBAN CENTER NORTH 2 (UC-N2) Uses allowed in the UC-N2 Zone are as follows: USES: TYPE: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas H Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas AD-R Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities P AD 10 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION III. Note 45 of Section 4-2-080.A of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: 45. For Monopoles Proposed on Private Property: May be allowed via a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit provided that the site is over one acre in size and the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred feet(100') from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel; otherwise the use is prohibited. For Monopoles Proposed on Public Right of Way: May be allowed via an Administrative Conditional Use Permit and Right of Way Use Permit. SECTION IV. Note 48 of Section 4-2-080.A of Chapter 2, Zoning Districts—Uses and Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: 48. A Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit is required. However, this use is typically pProhibited if located within three hundred feet (300') of an RC, R-1, R- 4, R-8, R-10, or R-14 Zone, unless the Development Services Division determines that all residentially zoned property within three hundred feet(300') of the proposed facility is undevelopable due to critical areas regulations (RMC 4-3-050), in which case the new wireless support structure can be reviewed as : -- ' - • . ... - a Hearing Examiner Ceonditional Uuse Ppermit. law 11 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION V. Section 4-4-140.F of Chapter 4, Property Development Standards, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: F. STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL TYPES OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES: 1. Equipment Shelters or Cabinets: a) Location: Accessory equipment facilities used to house wireless communication equipment and associated cabling should be located within buildings or placed underground when possible. • -- • . . .•• - . . . . • .. . • —• ' - . -. - : • •. :, . . 1 :_•. . . : . •. . . • . However, in those cases where it can be demonstrated by the applicant to the reviewing official that the equipment When4hey cannot be located in buildings or underground, equipment shelters or cabinets shall be fenced, screened and/or landscaped to the satisfaction of the reviewing official. - • . -- . - . . • '. - ! ! : . . b) Landscaping and Screening: Landscaping, for accessory equipment located on private property shall include a minimum fifteen foot (15') sight obscuring landscape buffer around the accessory equipment facility. Accessory equipment facilities located on the roof of any building need not be landscaped but shall be enclosed so as to be shielded from view. Accessory equipment located on public right of way shall be screened and/or landscaped as determined by the reviewing official 12 ORDINANCE NO. through the Conditional Use Permit Process. Accessory equipment facilities may not be Nome enclosed with exposed metal surfaces. c) Size: The applicant must provide documentation to the reviewing official that the size of any accessory equipment is the minimum possible necessary to meet the provider's service needs. 2. Visual Impact: Site location and development shall preserve the pre-existing character of the surrounding buildings and land uses and the zone district to the extent consistent with the function of the communications equipment. Wireless communication towers shall be integrated through location and design to blend in with the existing characteristics of the site to the extent practical. Existing on-site vegetation shall be preserved or improved, and disturbance of the existing topography shall be minimized, unless such disturbance would result in less visual impact of the site to the surrounding area. . . • . • . . . . - - ..' - p . . I I . metal-surfaees7 Nero- 13 ORDINANCE NO. 3 4. Maximum Noise Levels: No equipment shall be operated so as to produce noise in levels above forty five(45) dB as measured from the nearest property line on which the attached wireless communication facility is located. Operation of a back-up power generator in the event of power failure or the testing of a back-up generator between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. are exempt from this standard. No testing of back-up generators shall occur between the hours of 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. 4 5. Fencing: Security fencing, if used, shall be painted or coated with non-reflective color. Fencing shall comply with the requirements listed in RMC 4-4-040, Fences and Hedges. 5 6. Lighting: Towers shall not be artificially lighted, unless required by the FAA or other applicable authority. If lighting is required, the governing authority may review the available lighting alternatives and approve the design that would cause the least disturbance to the surrounding views. Security lighting for the equipment shelters or cabinets and other on-the-ground ancillary equipment is also permitted, as long as it is appropriately down shielded to keep light within the boundaries of the site. 6 7. Advertising Prohibited: No lettering, symbols, images, or trademarks large enough to be legible to occupants of vehicular traffic on any adjacent roadway shall be placed on or affixed to any part of a telecommunications tower, antenna array or antenna, other than as required by FCC regulations regarding tower registration or other applicable law. Antenna arrays may be located on previously approved signs or billboards without alteration of the existing advertising or sign. 7 8. Building Standards: Wireless communication support structures shall be constructed so as to meet or exceed the most recent Electronic Industries 14 ORDINANCE NO. Association/Telecommunications Industries Association (EIA/TIA) 222 Revision F N""' Standard entitled: "Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures"(or equivalent), as it may be updated or amended. Prior to issuance of a building permit the Building Official shall be provided with an engineer's certification that the support structure's design meets or exceeds those standards. A 8 9. Radio Frequency Standards: The applicant shall ensure that the WCF will not cause localized interference with the reception of area television or radio broadcasts. If on review the City finds that the WCF interferes with such reception, and if such interference is not remedied within thirty(30) days, the City may revoke or modify .4'"' the this permit. 9. Special Requirements for Equipment Shelters/Cabinets within the Public Right-of-Way: All equipment and cabinets within public right-of-way are subject to the approval of the Development Services Division and shall be as small and unobtrusive as is practicable. SECTION VI. Section 4-4-140.G of Chapter 4, Property Development Standards, of Title IV(Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: 15 ORDINANCE NO. G. STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF WIRELESS FACILITIES: For definitions of specific types of wireless communication facilities, see RMC 4- 11-230. Development standards for specific types of wireless communication facilities shall be as follows: 16 STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES In addition to individual zone requirements unless otherwise specified below MICRO MINI MACRO FACILITY MONOPOLE I MONOPOLE II LATTICE FACILITY FACILITY TOWERS A Micro Facility shall be located on existing buildings, poles or other existing A Mini Facility may support be located on A Macro Facility may structures. A buildings and be located on Micro Facility structures provided buildings and Location on may locate on that the immediate structures provided Buildings buildings and interior wall or that the immediate NA NA NA interior wall or ceiling structures ceiling adjacent to to the facility is not a provided that the facility is not a designated the interior wall designated residential space. or ceiling residential space. immediately adjacent to the facility is not designated residential space. All wireless All wireless All wireless All wireless All wireless All wireless communication communication communication communication communication communication facilities and facilities and facilities and attached facilities and facilities and facilities and Maximum attached attached wireless wireless attached wireless attached wireless attached wireless Height and wireless communication communication communication communication communication Area communication facilities must facilities must comply facilities must facilities must facilities must facilities must comply with the with the Airport comply with the comply with the comply with the comply with Airport zoning zoning regulations, Airport zoning Airport zoning Airport zoning the Airport regulations. as listed as listed in RMC 4-3- reaulations. as listed reaulations. as listed regulations. as listed 17 ORDINANCE NO. zoning in RMC 4-3-020. 020. in RMC 4-3-020. in RMC 4-3-020. in RMC 4-3-020. regulations, as Mini Facilities shall Macro Facilities shall Monopole I Facility Monopole II Facility Lattice Tower listed in RMC comply with the comply with the Maximum Height: Maximum Height: 35 Pole-II Facility 4-3-020. height limitation height limitation Less than 60 feet for feet higher than the Maximum Height: 35 Micro Facilities specified for all specified for all zones all zones. regular permitted feet higher than the shall comply zones except as except as follows: maximum height for regular permitted with the height follows: Mini Macro Facilities may Macro Facilities are the applicable maximum height for limitation Facilities may exceed the height the largest attached zoning district, or the applicable specified for all exceed the height limitation by 16 feet, communication 150 feet, whichever zoning district, or zones except limitation by 10 feet, or in the case of facilities allowed on is less. 150 feet, whichever a Monopole I as follows: or in the case of existing structures Facility. is less. Micro Facilities existing structures the antennas may may exceed the antennas may extend 16 feet above the height extend 10 feet the existing limitation by 6 above the existing structures. feet, or in the structure. case of existing structures the antennas may extend 6 feet above the existing structure. Placement of an antenna on a nonconforming structure shall not be considered to be an expansion of the nonconforming structure. ORDINANL NO. Antenna Height: Antennas may not exceed more than 15 feet above their monopole, lattice tewer, buildingef other structure. Antennas equal to or less than 15 feet in height or up to 4 Macro Facilities are inches in diameter the largest permitted Macro Facilities are may be a attached wireless the largest permitted component of a communication attached wireless Placement of an Placement of an Monopole I Facility. facilities allowed on communication antenna on a antenna on a a Monopole II facilities allowed on Maximum nonconforming nonconforming extend above the facility. a Lattice Tower. Height and structure shall not structure shall not be wireless Antenna Height: Area See above. be considered to be considered to be an Antenna Height: Antennas maynot net (Continued) an expansion of the expansion of the support structure exceed more than nonconforming nonconforming shall not be exceed more than 15 feet above their structure. structure. calculated as part of 15 feet above their rtin structure, the height of the supporting structure, ppo g +x4onopole, lattice monopole, lattice tower;--bugor other structure. suppect4truetufe, other structure. For example, the maximum-height-ef be installed on the support-structure , aking'the m'T� #} port structure-and 19 ORDINANCE NO. feet plus 15 feet). Antenna/Structure Height: Antenna which extend above the Monopole ll Antenna/Structure wireless Height: Antennas that whish extend support-strusture above the Lattice Antennas that Tower wireless extend above the communications Monopole II wireless support structure communications shall not be support structure calculated as part of shall not be the height of the calculated as part of wireless the height of the communications wireless support structure. Maximum communications F-er a^e Height and See above. See above. See above. See above. support structure. maximum height for Area (Continued) For-exams Lplea attice,Tower shall maximum height for maximum height of shall be 150 feet and the maximum height of antennas support structure whichbe could be 15 feet, installed on the making-the support structure could be 15 feet, height of the support 4;1a-141g-the structure and antennas (165 feet height of the support 150 feet plus 15 structure and feet), antennas (165 feet 150 feet plus 15 feet) ORDINANr. NO. Maximum Antenna Projection Above Support 615 feet. 1045 feet. 161-5 feet. 1645 feet. 1645 feet. 16-1-5 feet. Structure, Monopole, Tower or Building Shall be same color as the Shall be same color Shall be same color existing as the existing as the existing building, pole building, pole or building, Color or support pole or NA NA NA structure on support structure on support structure on which it is which it is proposed which it is proposed proposed to be to be located. to be located. located. See subsection F of See subsection F of See subsection F of this Section, this Section, this Section, Standards. Standards. Standards. RMC 4 4 070, RMC 4 070, RMC 4 4 070, N/A N/A N/A Landscaping. A Landscaping. A Landscaping. A minimum minimum minimum Landscaping See See subsection F of See subsection F of landscaping area of landscaping area of landscaping area of Screening subsection F this Section, 15 feet shall be 15 feet shall be 15 feet shall be of this Section, Standards. Standas- required required required Standards: surrounding the surrounding the surrounding the facility, or equivalent facility, or equivalent facility, or equivalent screening as screening as screening as approved by the approved by the approved by the Reviewing Reviewing Reviewing Official. OfficialAdministrator. Official. Landscaoina shall Landscaoina shall Landscaoina shall 21 ORDINANCE NO. include trees, include trees, include trees, shrubs and ground shrubs and ground shrubs and ground cover. The required cover. The required cover. The required landscaped areas landscaped areas landscaped areas shall include an shall include an shall include an automated irrigation automated irrigation automated irrigation system. system. system. SECTION VI. Subsection B of"Wireless Communication Facilities—Terms Related To"of Definitions W, of Section 4-11-230 of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: B. Antenna: Any system of poles, panels, rods, reflecting discs or similar devices used for the transmission or reception of radio frequency signals. Antennas include the following types: 1. Dish Antenna: see Parabolic Antenna. 2. Omni-Directional Antenna(also known as a "Whip"Antenna): transmits and receives radio frequency signals in a three hundred sixty degree(360°) radial pattern, and which is up to sixteen feet (16') in height and up to four inches (4") in i.r diameter. 3. Directional Antenna(also known as a"Panel"Antenna): transmits and receives radio frequency signals in a specific directional pattern of less than three hundred sixty degrees (360°). 4. Panel Antenna: see Directional Antenna. 5. Parabolic Antenna(also known as a"Dish"Antenna): is a bowl- shaped device for the reception and/or transmission of radio frequency communications signals in a specific directional pattern. 6. Parabolic Antenna, Large: A parabolic antenna greater than 39.37 inches in diameter but not to exceed 200" in diameter. 7. Whip Antenna: see Omni-Directional Antenna. 23 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION VII. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and Ned 30 days after publication. 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 Date of Publication: ORD.1275:7/24/06:ma 24