Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCouncil 04/25/2005 i AGENDA RENTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING April 25, 2005 Monday, 7:30 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL 3. PROCLAMATIONS: a. Days of Remembrance -May 1 to May 8, 2005 b. Native Plant Appreciation Week-May 1 to May 7, 2005 4. SPECIAL PRESENTATION: Renton School District Excellence in Education Awards 5. PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE INITIATOR: Hoquiam Annexation- 10%Notice of Intent to annex petition for 20.49 acres bounded by 140th Ave. SE, 144th Ave. SE, SE 122nd St., and SE 124th St. 6. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 7. 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.) lkorl 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. 8. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further discussion if requested by a Councilmember. a. Approval of Council meeting minutes of April 18, 2005. Council concur. b. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler reappoints Linda Middlebrooks, 510 Seneca Ave. NW,Renton, 98055, and Renne Saling, 17560 SE 136th St.,Renton, 98059,each to the Municipal Arts Commission for a three-year term that expires 12/31/2007. Council concur. c. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler appoints Dawn Murin, 3727 58th Ave. SW, Seattle, 98116, to the Municipal Arts Commission for a three-year term expiring 12/31/2007. Refer to Community Services Committee. d. Administrative,Judicial and Legal Services Department recommends approval of modifications to the organization and process of City boards, commissions, and committees. Refer to Committee of the Whole. e. Development Services Division reports completion of construction and submission of final costs for the Glenn Wharton latecomer agreement for sewer extension to serve property at 14035 SE 122nd St., and requests final approval of the agreement and authorization for the City Clerk to notify affected property owners and commence 20-day appeal period. Refer to Utilities Committee. f. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recommends approval of the multi-family housing property tax exemption agreements with Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre, 104 Burnett Ave. S., and with Parkside at 95 Burnett, 77 and 95 Burnett Ave. S. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. (CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE) g. Finance and Information Services Department requests approval to write-off bad debt in the total amount of$52,524.22. Refer to Finance Committee. h. Hearing Examiner recommends approval, with conditions, of the Elmhurst Preliminary Plat; 64 lots on 9.6 acres located at Bremerton Ave. NE(PP-04-162). Council concur. 9. CORRESPONDENCE Letter and informal petition signed by 27 residents, received from Jennifer Knickerbocker, 318 Garden Ave. N.,Renton, 98055,requesting that that the street name of Garden Ave. N. be changed on the north side of N. 8th St. The letter states that the name change will alleviate traffic problems and confusion as the area is developed. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics marked with an asterisk(*)may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by the Chair if further review is necessary. a. Community Services Committee: Pets at Gene Coulon Beach Park b. Finance Committee: Vouchers; Issaquah School District Impact Fees; Lease Amendment with Vykor for Spaces at 200 Mill Building c. Public Safety Committee: Jail Interlocal Agreements d. Transportation (Aviation)Committee: Maple Valley Hwy/SR-169 Improvements Contract; South Lake Washington Blvd. Roadway Improvements Contract; Aerodyne Aviation Lease Addendum; Airport Development Study e. Utilities'Committee: Central Business District Utility Replacement Project Bid Award; Clean Sweep Renton Program 11. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Ordinances for second and final reading: a. Shoreline and critical areas policy amendments to the Comprehensive Plan (1st reading kitio# 4/18/2005) b. Shoreline Master Program regulations amendments (1st reading 4/18/2005) c. Critical areas regulations amendments (1st reading 4/18/2005) 12. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded information.) 13. AUDIENCE COMMENT 14. ADJOURNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA (Preceding Council Meeting) Council Conference Room 6:30 p.m. Business Plan Revisions kttilire • 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 11:00 AM&9:00 PM,WED.&FRI.AT 9:00 AM&7:00 PM AND SAT. &SUN.AT 1:00 PM&9:00 PM RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting April 25, 2005 Council Chambers Monday, 7:30 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler 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 Pro Tern; DENIS LAW;DAN COUNCILMEMBERS CLAWSON; TONI NELSON; DON PERSSON;MARCIE PALMER. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILWOMAN TERRI BRIERE. CARRIED. CITY STAFF IN KATHY KEOLKER-WHEELER,Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief ATTENDANCE Administrative Officer; ZANETTA FONTES, Assistant City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator;LESLIE BETLACH, Parks Director; ALEX PIETSCH,Economic Development Administrator; DON ERICKSON, Senior Planner; DEREK TODD,Assistant to the CAO; CHIEF GARRY ANDERSON,Police Department. PROCLAMATIONS A proclamation by Mayor Keolker-Wheeler was read declaring the week of Days of Remembrance -May 1 May 1 to May 8, 2005, to be "Days of Remembrance" in the City of Renton in to May 8, 2005 memory of the victims of the Holocaust, and in honor of the survivors, as well as the rescuers and liberators. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PROCLAMATION AS READ. CARRIED. Native Plant Appreciation A proclamation by Mayor Keolker-Wheeler was read declaring the week of Week-May 1 to 7, 2005 May 1 to 7, 2005, to be "Native Plant Appreciation Week" in the City of Renton and encouraging all citizens to learn more about native plants and how to protect them, and to enjoy and appreciate the native flora's value and beauty. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PROCLAMATION AS READ. CARRIED. Dan Stegman,Native Plant Steward with the Washington Native Plant Society, accepted the proclamation with appreciation. Added A proclamation by Mayor Keolker-Wheeler was read declaring the week of Teacher Appreciation Week- May 1 to 7, 2005, to be "Teacher Appreciation Week" in the City of Renton and May 1 to 7, 2005 encouraging all citizens to honor teachers and recognize their invaluable contributions to Renton's youth. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PROCLAMATION AS READ. CARRIED. Greg Taylor, Greater Renton Chamber of Commerce Board Member, accepted the proclamation on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce and the Renton School District. Mr. Taylor invited everyone to the annual Ahead of the Class, Excellence in Education Awards ceremony at the Renton IKEA Performing Arts Center on May 3rd, at which outstanding Renton teachers will be recognized. April 25,2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 146 SPECIAL PRESENTATION Ed Crawford, City of Kent Police Chief and Renton High School alumnus, School District: Renton High explained that the Renton High School Excellence in Education foundation was School Excellence in established in 2001 to create an endowment and provide supplemental Education Awards resources to help meet current and future needs for Renton High School (RHS) programs and students. Mr. Crawford announced that mini-grants,ranging from$200 to$500,for the 2004-2005 school year were awarded to the following programs: Asian Experience Project-Tour of the Wing Luke Museum; Cedar River Watershed Tour; Senior Slide Show Project; Quilts for Kids Project; MESA Computer Project; Drama Program; Garden Accessories Project; and Technology Supplies. Jeff Blount,RHS Teacher,explained that the MESA Computer Project mini- grant will be used to purchase hardware components to build computers. Kathryn Hutchinson, RHS Principal, thanked the foundation for doing so much for the students at RHS. PUBLIC MEETING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Annexation: Hoquiam, 140th accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Keolker-Wheeler opened the Ave SE&SE 122nd St public meeting to consider the 10%Notice of Intent to annex petition for the proposed Hoquiam Annexation consisting of 20.49 acres,including the abutting street right-of-way, bounded by 140th Ave. SE, if extended, on the west; 144th Ave. SE, if extended, on the east; SE 122nd St., if extended, on the north; and SE 124th St. (NE 6th St.)on the south. Don Erickson, Senior Planner, stated that 19 single-family dwellings exist on the site. He described the site's topography,pointing out that variable slopes break to the southwest and southeast from 142nd Ave. SE. He noted that public services are provided by Fire District#25,Water District#90, Renton sewer, and the Renton School District. Mr. Erickson explained that existing zoning under King County is R-4(four dwelling units per gross acre), and the City's Comprehensive Plan designates the area as Residential Single Family for which R-8 (eight dwellings units per net acre)zoning is proposed. Continuing,Mr.Erickson reported that the Transportation Division indicates that NE 6th St. needs to be widened, improved,and extended through the annexation site. He noted that developers will most likely pay for the improvements. Mr. Erickson further reported that the Utilities Division indicates that the Honey Creek/May Creek and Maplewood Creek basins are subject to flooding and erosion, and surface water runoff controls would be required at the time of development. Additionally, he reported that the Parks Department estimates a one-time future parks development and acquisition cost of$77,452. Mr. Erickson reviewed the fiscal impact of the proposed annexation, indicating a deficit of$1,867 at current development and a surplus of$9,294 at full development. Pointing out that the proposed annexation is generally consistent with City policies and Boundary Review Board criteria,Mr. Erickson concluded that the best interests and general welfare of Renton are served, particularly if this annexation facilitates annexation of the larger unincorporated area to the east. Public comment was invited. There being none, it was MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC MEETING. CARRIED. April 25,2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 147 MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ACCEPT THE HOQUTAM ANNEXATION 10% NOTICE OF INTENT PETITION, AUTHORIZF CIRCULATION OF THE 60% PETITION TO ANNEX STIPULATING THAT PROPERTY OWNERS SUPPORT ZONING CONSISTENT WITH RENTON'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION, AND PROPERTY OWNERS ASSUME A PROPORTIONAL SHARE OF THE CITY'S EXISTING BONDED INDEBTEDNESS. CARRIED. 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 2005 and beyond. Items noted included: * In the "Best of Renton 2005 Contest" published in the April 20th edition of the Renton Reporter, Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park was listed as the best reason to visit Renton. • The final 2005 City of Renton Budget can now be found on the City's website at www.ci.renton.wa.us. The 2005 Budget is also available for review at Renton public libraries, and the City Clerk's Office. AJLS: Jay Covington as King Mayor Keolker-Wheeler announced that Mr. Covington was selected as the County Municipal League's 2005 "Public Official of the Year" by the Municipal League of King County. "Public Official of the Year" She explained that the league's civic awards showcase the efforts of individuals who inspire, support,and lead to improve local government. The Mayor congratulated Mr. Covington, saying that everyone is really proud of him. EDNSP: Planting Project, NE Alex Pietsch,Economic Development Administrator, reported on the Mayor's 4th St Corridor Planting Day held on April 23rd to beautify the Renton gateway along the NE 4th St. Corridor in recognition of Arbor Day and Earth Day. He stated that over 325 volunteers showed great community spirit by participating in the planting project, and he displayed before, during, and after photographs of the area. Mr. Pietsch pointed out that the event was coordinated and funded through the City of Renton Neighborhood Matching Grant Program, and was also funded by donations from businesses. Mr. Pietsch reported that after removing rocks, weeds, and debris; adding topsoil and mulch; and planting trees, summer-flowering bulbs, and dry-climate wildflower seeds; volunteers were rewarded with a celebration picnic. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler expressed her pleasure with the success of the event, and thanked everyone who participated. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of April 18, 2005. Council concur. April 18, 2005 Appointment: Municipal Arts Mayor Keolker-Wheeler reappointed Linda Middlebrooks, 510 Seneca Ave. Commission NW,Renton, 98055, and Renne Saling, 17560 SE 136th St., Renton, 98059, each to the Municipal Arts Commission for a three-year term that expires 12/31/2007. Council concur. Appointment: Municipal Arts Mayor Keolker-Wheeler appointed Dawn Murin, 3727 58th Ave. SW, Seattle, Commission 98116, to the Municipal Arts Commission for a three-year term expiring 12/31/2007. Refer to Community Services Committee. ,�r■rrrr April 25,2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 148 Board/Commission: Administrative,Judicial and Legal Services Department recommended approval Organization &Process of modifications to the organization and process of City boards, commissions, Modifications and committees. Refer to Committee of the Whole. Latecomer Agreement: Development Services Division reported completion of construction and Wharton, Sewer Extension (SE submission of final costs for the Glenn Wharton latecomer agreement for sewer 122nd St),LA-04-001 extension to serve property at 14035 SE 122nd St., and requested final approval of the agreement and authorization for the City Clerk to notify affected property owners and commence 20-day appeal period. Refer to Utilities Committee. EDNSP: Multi-Family Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Housing Property Tax recommended approval of the multi-family housing property tax exemption Exemption,Merrill Gardens agreements with Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre, 104 Burnett Ave. S., and and Parkside with Parkside at 95 Burnett, 77 and 95 Burnett Ave. S. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Finance: Bad Debt Write Off Finance and Information Services Department requested approval to write off bad debt in the total amount of$52,524.22. Refer to Finance Committee. Plat:Elmhurst,Bremerton Ave Hearing Examiner recommended approval,with conditions, of the Elmhurst NE, PP-04-162 Preliminary Plat; 64 lots on 9.6 acres located at 201, 251, and 257 Bremerton Ave. NE(PP-04-162). Council concur. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Letter and informal petition signed by 27 residents received from Jennifer Citizen Comment: Knickerbocker,318 Garden Ave. N.,Renton, 98055, requesting that the street Knickerbocker et al-Garden name of Garden Ave. N.be changed on the north side of N. 8th St. The letter Ave N Street Name Change stated that the name change will alleviate traffic problems and confusion as the area is further developed. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE TRANSPORTATION(AVIATION) COMMITTEE.* Pointing out that the street runs through an area that is the subject of a potential development, Councilman Corman requested that the Administration ask for the developer's opinion on the requested street name change. *MOTION CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Utilities Committee Chair Corman presented a report recommending Utilities Committee concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the implementation of a Utility: Clean Sweep Renton portion of the Clean Sweep Renton program. The Committee recommended Program appropriating funds from the Solid Waste Utility fund balance in 2005, for the implementation of the Reuse It! Renton event,projected to cost$6,325, and for the Neighborhood Association Cleanup event,projected to cost$39,450. The Committee further recommended that the one-time Neighbor-to-Neighbor Curbside Cleanup event,projected to cost$299,225, and the associated public education and outreach campaign, projected to cost$55,000,be referred to the Committee of the Whole.* Councilman Corman indicated that the Committee desires to have further discussion regarding the curbside cleanup event costs with the Committee of the Whole,but does not want to stop the other Clean Sweep Renton events from moving forward. April 25,2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 149 *MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler noted that the money is already in the Solid Waste Utility fund and is slated for solid waste events. CAG: 05-031, Central Utilities Committee Chair Corman presented a report regarding the Central Business District Utility Business District Utility Replacement Project bid award (CAG-05-031). The Replacement, Americon Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to transfer funds totaling$100,000 from Wastewater Account 45395 (Sewer Main Extension -Sunset Phase II)to Account 45405, and funds totaling$120,000 from Water Account 55170(Water Main Rehabilitation)to Account 55290 to cover the additional costs of the project. The Committee also recommended that the Central Business District Utility Replacement Project be awarded to Americon, Inc. dba TAB Enterprises in the amount of$709,109.50. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval Finance: Vouchers of Claim Vouchers 236561 -237060 and three wire transfers totaling $1,856,304.61; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 56807 -57030, one wire transfer, and 569 direct deposits totaling$1,847,627.31. MOVED BY PERSSON,SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Transportation(Aviation) Transportation (Aviation)Committee Chair Palmer presented a report regarding Committee the Maple Valley Hwy. (SR-169)Improvements Project(CAG-01-071). The CAG: 01-071, Maple Valley Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve Hwy HOV,Perteet the supplemental agreement with Perteet Engineering, Inc. to move the gas Engineering facility location and underground certain electrical facilities to improve aesthetics of the entrance to the access road in the amount of$38,650. The Committee further recommended that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the supplemental agreement. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. CAG: 04-013,North Renton Transportation(Aviation) Committee Chair Palmer presented a report regarding Infrastructure Improvements, the South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements Project(CAG-04-013). W&H Pacific The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the supplemental agreement with W&H Pacific in the amount of $927,329.59 to complete the final design and contract plans and specifications for the needed roadway and stormwater, and water and sewer utilities to support the development of Lakeshore Landing. The Committee further recommended that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the supplemental agreement. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Public Safety Committee Public Safety Committee Chair Law presented a report regarding interagency Police: Jail Booking Fees,Jail jail bookings and fees. The Committee recommended concurrence in the staff Booking Interlocal recommendation to accept jail bookings from other municipalities on a space- Agreements available basis, at a daily rate of$70. The Committee further recommended that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the interlocal agreements. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. April 25,2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 150 Community Services Majority Report: Community Services Committee Chair Nelson presented a Committee Majority Report majority report regarding pet strolling at Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park. Community Services: The Committee majority recommended concurrence in the Board of Park Allowing Pets in Gene Coulon Commissioner's and staff recommendation to not change the current park rules Park and regulations stipulating that dogs are not allowed at parks with swimming beaches. The majority feels the presence of pets at heavily used parks such as Gene Coulon Park could be disturbing to some patrons. In addition, it could be difficult to enforce park rules and keep the park environment clean and healthy, as not all pet owners comply with park rules to clean up after their pets. Fire Station#15,located at 1404 N. 30th St., will be used on an experimental basis as an off-leash dog park facility. Dogs will continue to be allowed in the remaining 43 park and open space areas as well as on all trail systems January through December. Several of the sites provide access to the Cedar River where dogs are allowed in the water. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE MAJORITY COMMITTEE REPORT.* Councilwoman Nelson stated that at the Community Services Committee meeting, all seven citizens present indicated their preference for not allowing dogs at Gene Coulon Park. Ms. Nelson also stated her preference that dogs should not be allowed in the park due to health reasons. Councilwoman Palmer recommended allowing leashed dogs at Gene Coulon Park during certain months and in the area north of the northern-most restroom, which is away from the swimming beaches. She explained that these types of restrictions have been successful at Newcastle Beach Park. Community Services Minority Report: Community Services Committee Vice Chair Palmer Committee Minority Report presented a minority report regarding pet strolling at Gene Coulon Memorial Community Services: Beach Park. The Committee minority recommended that the Park Rules and Allowing Pets in Gene Coulon Regulations be modified to allow for the designation and accommodation of pet Park strolling at parks with swimming beaches. Pets will be allowed in parks with swimming beaches during the months of October through April, so long as the pet is under the owner's control and on a leash no longer than eight feet in length. At Gene Coulon Park,pets will be allowed to use the area north of the northern-most restroom facility. In all instances,pets will not be allowed in the sandy beach area or in the water due to health concerns. It will be the responsibility of the pet owner to pick up and dispose of pet debris in order to maintain the park in a clean and healthy condition. Fire Station#15, located at 1404 N. 30th St., will be used on an experimental basis as an off-leash dog park facility. Dogs will continue to be allowed in the remaining 43 park and open space areas as well as on all trail systems January through December. Several of these sites provide access to the Cedar River where dogs are allowed in the water. Councilman Clawson stated that while the modifications to the park rules sound reasonable, in practice they would be difficult to follow. He expressed his support for keeping Gene Coulon Park dog free, and for the off-leash dog park facility proposed on N. 30th St. April 25,2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 151 Councilman Law favored the minority report, saying that the park is used less during the off-season months and it is worthwhile putting the proposed rule modifications to the test. He stated that people should not be punished for those who violate the rules and do not clean up after their dogs. Councilman Persson stressed that people must understand that the proposed off- leash dog area at Fire Station#15 is temporary and that the site will eventually be used as a fire station. Councilwoman Nelson pointed out that the proposed off-leash dog site is experimental,and if it does work out, the Parks Department will look into putting similar small off-leash dog parks elsewhere. Councilman Corman suggested that the proposed off-leash dog park be referred to as temporary, and that signage be installed identifying the site as a temporary dog park and a future fire station. Councilwoman Palmer noted that both Committee reports propose the off-leash dog park at Fire Station#15, and she agreed with the signage suggestion. *MOTION CARRIED TO ADOPT THE MAJORITY COMMITTEE REPORT. (Mayor Keolker-Wheeler voted "aye" to break the tie vote.) RESOLUTIONS AND The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading and ORDINANCES adoption: Ordinance#5135 An ordinance was read adopting the shoreline and critical areas policy Planning: Critical Areas & amendments to the City's 1995 Comprehensive Plan, maps, and data in Shoreline, Comprehensive conjunction therewith. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, Plan Amendments COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5136 An ordinance was read amending Section 1-3-2.C.1.e(2)of Chapter 3, Planning: Critical Areas, Remedies and Penalties, of Title I(Administrative); and Chapter 3, Shoreline Management Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts; Chapter 8, Permits -General Program Regulations and Appeals; Chapter 9,Permits -Specific; Chapter 10,Legal Non-Conforming Structures, Uses, and Lots; and Chapter 11,Definitions; of Title IV (Development Regulations)of City Code to amend Shoreline Master Program regulations. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#5137 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 3,Environmental Regulations and Planning: Critical Areas Overlay Districts; Chapter 4, Citywide Property Development Standards; Regulations Chapter 8, Permits -General and Appeals; Chapter 9, Permits -Specific; Chapter 10,Legal Nonconforming Structures,Uses, and Lots; and Chapter 11, Definitions; of Title IV (Development Regulations) of City Code to amend critical areas regulations. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Councilman Corman suggested the placement of the City of Renton logo on a Community Services: Henry water slide at the Henry Moses Aquatic Center. He explained that when Moses Aquatic Center, City photographs of the water slides appear in advertisements, they then can be Logo on Water Slide identified as belonging to the City of Renton. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler stated that the Administration will investigate the matter. April 25,2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 152 School District: Kennydale Councilwoman Palmer invited people to bring their Kennydale community and Elementary School Kennydale Elementary School memories and memorabilia to the "Celebrating Kennydale Through the Decades" event on April 27th at Kennydale Elementary School. She noted that the elementary school will be demolished this summer to make way for a new school building. School District: Ahead of the Councilman Clawson encouraged everyone to attend the Ahead of the Class Class Awards Award program on May 3rd at the Renton IKEA Performing Arts Center. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:51 p.m. YQ&it ..d• CJa.a47''' Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann April 25,2005 RENTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING CALENDAR • Office of the City Clerk COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS SCHEDULED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 25, 2005 COMMITTEE/CHAIRMAN DATE/TIME AGENDA COUNCIL WORKSHOP WED., 5/11 Financial Policies, Priorities, and the 8:OOam-5:OOpm City's Financial Condition *Renton Technical College, Room H102, 3000 NE 4th St.* COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MON., 5/02 Emerging Issues; (Briere) 6:00 p.m. Clean Sweep Renton Program; City's Boards and Commissions; Business Plan Revisions *Council Conference Room* COMMUNITY SERVICES (Nelson) FINANCE MON., 5/02 Lease Amendment with Vykor for Spaces (Persson) 5:30 p.m. at 200 Mill Building PLANNING &DEVELOPMENT (Clawson) PUBLIC SAFETY MON., 5/02 CANCEII.FD (Law) TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION) (Palmer) UTILITIES (Corman) 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. ,• „\ CITY OF MENTON . x'NalMayor f' Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Proc2on'wttCoii, W her'ea k, the Holocaust was the state-sponsored, systematic persecution and annihilation of European Jewry by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945; and W herect4; the history of the Holocaust offers an opportunity to reflect on the moral responsibilities of individuals, societies, and governments; and W herecca; we, the people of the City of Renton, should always remember the terrible events of the Holocaust and remain vigilant against hatred, persecution, and tyranny; and Wherecu we, the people of the City of Renton, should actively rededicate ourselves to the principles of individual freedom in a just society; and Wherteaa; the Days of Remembrance have been set aside for the people of the City of Renton to remember the victims of the Holocaust as well as to reflect on the need for respect of all peoples; and Wherecw, pursuant to an Act of Congress (Public Law 96-388, October 7, 1980), the United States Holocaust Memorial Council designates the Days of Remembrance of the Victims of the Holocaust to be Sunday, May 1 through Sunday, May 8, 2005, including the international Day of Remembrance known as Yom Hashoah, May 6, 2005; NO-w, Therefore; I, Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor of the City of Renton, do hereby proclaim the week of Sunday, May 1, through Sunday, May 8, 2005, as the D ay k of R,eAnombra/nceJ in memory of the victims of the Holocaust, and in honor of the survivors, as well as the rescuers and liberators, and further proclaim that we, as citizens of the City of Renton, should strive to overcome intolerance and indifference through learning and remembrance. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of Renton to be affixed this 25h day of April, 2005. g„,-6‘, , a.„,„_ Ka bker-Wheeler Mayor of the City of Renton, Washington 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055-(425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 R E N T O N r AHEAD OF THE CURVE 4.1 This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer CITY OF RENTON Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler ProcZa'n'wtton' Whereat, native plant species are an important part of Washington's heritage, providing important aesthetic, economic, and ecological contributions that make the State of Washington a special place to live; and Wher'ea4; Washington enjoys an amazing diversity of over 3,000 native plant species, from rain forest plants on the Olympic Penninsula to the desert species in Eastern Washington; and Whereat; preserving native plant ecosystems is critical for the protection of birds, fish, and other wildlife, as well as of our water quality; and Whereauk, over 360 of our native plant species are listed as rare by the Washington State Natural Heritage Program; and W heire.ct invasive species present a great threat to sustaining Washington's native plant ecosystems and biodiversity; and Wher'ea4; Governor Christine Gregiore has proclaimed the week of May 1-7 to be Native Plant Appreciation Week, and across the state public and private groups are celebrating the Sire beauty and value of native plants in both natural settings and gardens; Now, Therefore/, I, Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor of the City of Renton, do hereby proclaim the week of May 1-7,2005,to be Natvve' PLa v tAppm ' o-w W eek in the City of Renton, and I encourage all our citizens to learn more about our native plants and how to protect them, and to enjoy and appreciate our native flora's value and beauty. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of Renton to be affixed this 25th day of April, 2005. 66--ekel /dAkze Kathy K••lker-Wheeler Mayor of the City of Renton, Washington >> 'err+ 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055-(425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 RENTON r AHEAD OF THE CURVE �'� This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer f` CITY OF RENTON = Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler 1)(/(led 1//2-6/21)t).5 odcwor W hefrea'; Renton's dedicated and professional teachers make a positive difference in the lives of Renton's youth and, as a result of their continuing efforts, are a credit to our district and to our community; and W hefreao; the City of Renton would like to formally recognize all Renton teachers; and Whefrea4; it is fitting and proper that all members of the Renton community join us in honoring teachers in recognition of the vital contributions each of them makes to the lives of our community's children; and W hearecw, Teacher Appreciation Week is a time to recognize those individuals who are helping to shape the future of the youth in our community; Now, Thefrev'e; I, Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor of the City of Renton, do hereby proclaim the week of May 1 —7, 2005 to be rppw Weems ru�- in the City of Renton, and encourage all citizens to honor teachers and recognize their invaluable contributions to Renton's youth. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of Renton to be affixed this 25th day of April, 2005. Kathy K olker-Wheeler Mayor of the City of Renton, Washington 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055-(425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE 0 This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer . ()peel al ?re se,id ouft REX TON HIGH SCHOOL tat :1 I Certificate ofAward Shannon Wekh Is hereby awarded a Mini-Grant for the 2004 —2005 school year for the Asian Experience Project--a tour of the Wing Luke Museum in the amount of$500. Thank you for your dedication and efforts to build on Renton High School's tradition, instill pride in our school and promote excellence for our students. • . , ., '44,e'4,14 •1`k-,fi i�,tk , , ,„ . , . .. .,. Aria, r ficl \ HIGH SCHOOL .„„ _ • 4 L Cer4flcate ofAward Brian Wood Is hereby awarded a Mini-Grant for the 2004 —2005 school year for the Cedar River Watershed Tour in the amount of$500. Thank you for your dedication and efforts to build on Renton High School's tradition, instill pride in our school and promote excellence for our students. • ,p, I tt t,t''.1 i 'Lw IN{`7.,'s.�?A'f. "IT R�,+ `Rr6'4 ,:d. .e.Y'f9'L 4'�i.^"fs! r 9>YT fir" u'' ?•"Pja'��.v n�M i Ya ,31.,�uei..';r��, "u4"." �f, m�rsX, t t J y:�?4...�'.�',., ;a�,z'; '.w`:A,�,• 5 a,P"n y tisire yh ,h,e'�"•,.. 4 . ?'', '; ,yE�a i s� 1 +� r a r u r .r ,,� ,,�" a„ X��a sh "?�' ,'� Nr�'�; t."�.�:,.��°?�,w'�� .;� g��:�;� �` ..e:�'r.'��"..az �..,��`'1'��,� ,,,�. ; .�.,. ,.9Y" <� Y��';a �= <., _ -�IjP .t". na.-246- wrA 11: ENTON, HIGH SCHOOL , ,„8 4 L 4 Cert(ficate ofAward JeffBlount Is hereby awarded a Mini-Grant for the 2004 — 2005 school year for the Senior Slide Show Project in the amount of$250. Thank you for your dedication and efforts to build on Renton High School's tradition, instill pride in our school and promote excellence for our students. \:170116444.111-HI 101 IP E to dr,1 . _ yy" a _. �a+, ,�6 :5, �r uri x•• �-., .,.:< tier . "+� n 'r,�..�fiw.�'..... "r`,�,�.��'X 5 ,�•s'a"{�a'�,i� .�r %�. �^!,7.� ";,;u .. }$s,iti,. c.�� ..,C ik" x f.n ':..' ' . +.,xs .. , ,, ,,,,, , � °:&eR�aR Ii t• ms, ,4 ...._ eat 0grk 11: JENTON HIGH SCHOOL via -*: -.:,-:::_;._:,...,--_-._-'1.z.:04,44 — -- - _ _„ ___ ,_ , _ _ ____ Cert(ficate ofAward Rawna Hamann Is hereby awarded a Mini-Grant for the 2004 —2005 school year for the Quilts for Kids Projects in the amount of$200. Thank you for your dedication and efforts to build on Renton High School's tradition, instill pride in our school and promote excellence for our students. i • Pto44.4.1 1,:111C,riirc H Hirci f:h tit eti liliE.4\ToN. HIGH SCHOOL :ASF] a , ; I , lt 1/4 Cer4flcate o Award JeffBlount Is hereby awarded a Mini-Grant for the 2004 —2005 school year for MESA Computer Project in the amount of$500. Thank you for your dedication and efforts to build on Renton High School's tradition, instill pride in our school and promote excellence for our students. 1 1VALUSfewi. .r..�r ,,,q ,;•;Pi P"�p'Nvggw.redk`ksYaMlaregwm't'A:.wayn .;.+,ryn,, -a , ,, ..�,.,w-„sv ,. ,. ., ,. , .. RE\--ro\-- HIGH SCHOOL 146 1 I ) 1 I s 1 ' Certificate ofAward Ginger Montape Is hereby awarded a Mini-Grant for the 2004 —2005 school year for the Drama Program in the amount of$250. Thank you for your dedication and efforts to build on Renton High School's tradition, instill pride in our school and promote excellence for our students. • 0,1;(1 .. 'r Ae Rr t. R5 lq I ii- E\To.\.._ HIGH SCHOOL ,,„.._ J.., , . 1 , .1 66 , \1 I t: g - t 1 +p, it � , \ .7 �..«^2._,:, ..�......>... -.. .. _ .. .. - _.. -_„ ..._ _.., .. __. .......... .. . ....._ _ _ .... Cert(flcate ofAward : „ , ,.„ :;„,, Bob Wilson Is hereby awarded a Mini-Grant for the 2004—2005 school year for the Garden Accessories Project in the amount of$250. Thank you for your dedication and efforts to build on Renton High School's tradition, instill pride in our school and promote excellence for our students. • #',;:: ,j (. ,:xi 1'°as:^n`.`"va."5 q�,'?A�p,'^'°;.*is v. ,M...•,;, y� ,.,=,g ✓:,, +�,., .w'�, yg�.rrr�onrmr9n. ,,.;.°v�wm.wx^�v�rc,hr,^.t r„m�..0«ro .,,. .. . ........ ....,., ..w��.ww.«wa,K<,.�.,.w,...,W� >W ....., .44„RWe r"'��. .� "a`°' lc*ie, x a�., 5rk,4M�,4" .44A@x°�`+` "FV'$. I4V04> I.4:sa "a4. W' ::"'",,,,-e" sst .., G^! ," r ..'" '' tt. . IGH SCHOOL P Yas n_ i. _ , Itai - - ... S _ _ _ , \ 1 _ *,t�� fib . ) 1 ii la , ii ,-,,,,_—_, 1 i \1/4. : 21 1i u w i ' Certflcate ofAward Jo Dell Haag Is hereby awarded a Mini-Grant for the 2004 —2005 school year for Technology Supplies in the amount of$300. Thank you for your dedication and efforts to build on Renton High School's tradition, instill pride in our school and promote excellence for our students. • 6(11dtemill .Irl i i'ien, -41-'&0',':.'' r k i..+i :, . I. .r 0, •'4,,Q,'4. .1,,,,,, w .4., a40.4, o* .,,,,..",N.., .'..4;�'.:",,o, t:.r..-",. t,+d't ',s, ^..r r f tam*»a .,.�.A.. .-, , : :. ,,,N., � Y O U 7. h \ I� �.11 . Nrvo HOQUTAM ANNEXATION PUBLIC MEETING COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ANNEXATION WITH R-8 ZONING April 25,2005 The City is in receipt of a 10%Notice of Intention to Commence Annexation Petition from property owners in the proposed annexation area. This petition has signatures representing 60% of the area's 20.49-acres. The subject site is within the City's Potential Annexation Area and is designated Residential Single Family(RS) on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. It is bordered by the City limits on its southern and western boundaries and lies generally between 140th Avenue SE, if extended, on the west and 144th Avenue SE, if extended, on the east. It is bordered by SE 122nd Street, if extended, on the north, and SE 124th Street on the south(see back side of this notice). Council is being asked to consider whether it wants to accept the 10% Notice of Intent petition for the annexation as currently proposed,whether it wants to amend the proposed boundaries, or whether it wants to reject this annexation at this time. This site currently has King County's R-4 zoning and there are twenty single-family detached dwellings on it. Proposed prezoning is R-8 (8 units per net acre). This zoning is approximately the same density as the County's R-4 zone since the latter can be easily bonused up to 6 units per gross acre, which is only slightly less than Renton's 8 units per net acre allow in the R-8 zone. On a typical 20-acre site the difference would only be eight units (128 units under Renton's R-8 zoning versus 120 units under the County's R-4 zoning,with bonuses). Renton's zoning deletes critical areas and streets from a site's gross acreage whereas the County's zoning does not. Also, the County's zoning allows both attached and detached units. With the City's proposed R-8 zoning,the 20.49-acre site could accommodate approximately 125 single-family detached dwelling units at full development. Under state law, direct petitions to annex are initiated by property owners representing at least 10%of the annexation area's assessed value. Council is required to hold a public meeting with the proponents within 60 days of its submittal to decide whether it will accept, reject or geographically modify the proposed annexation. Reviewing departments of the City consider this annexation to be a reasonable extension of their respective service areas and raised no major obstacles to annexation. If the Council decides to accept this proposed annexation, it will typically: 1. Authorize the circulation of a 60%Direct Petition to Annex,based upon assessed value; 2. Decide whether to require the simultaneous adoption of zoning upon annexation, ,,, consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map; and, 3. Decide whether to require property owners within the annexation area to assume their fair share of the City's existing indebtedness. Council Hearing Handout 8-02-04.doc\ own I III ma A EA�RI �` i'1Ua11 Sri" —11,:. EA � ri �. r i1 i %- :�; ■1i11�111111111 IE �Ifeii C ' X :• ■F lilllltllll .� ►jfe� ■■1■i,_- i3�., r3t,��►�� nlrllrll�a . +� f11lIIIli •t�� ilPa1� - — slid - f unnol� ��t L �iJir�iii'lfii> St . IIIIi1I' ,�111�w I �s ■n!r on go — �r h Ilii, --- E �� . MT—mr,iP•IE fa t 1imiiiti1111111. : so .m. lkilan .!Ilii ME 1 'VA 7 111 111111114u- MIMI MB 111 NF$th St ill Mui■gait. item,rritiif i1,, 4 ` '.. ri 1 1 ,_ i I iillimmi orm "A.� I, ham' 1111.Al —, BlIZIERI 111 Iii ; iill11►h* o, V ill: Ia . 1It11111 ,1 srsfiil�gt1 .C¢ESE aimelE0v, i--- '''''f:-., -.7::'1--:- . ':', i<', iw s .. • 1liF... rlrl/.1 r 1 irpiripa lis ql� i111111 �� 'sry'.V MN 11-'.1 Ela 0. rum 111111 •:.' Uiii U p IMMII IIiI! AIRIIEAI1 �P•'1S�1r � l. :Ipminow 1� C, i6G:! atY III . `112; IIIk!! i��n.iill ��l�ll �>N a lfrilt DI:IP I. FP 1 � _ r �. ii _ J . 1111: w.1111i iii�lli "I'll 111intr,..,ausi.tiria� sdaft.a1 ii. 11 i i iiii�� rad . E111! „ illi6,' W rig. 1•Ile:;�, iilll .. ■i.x mal WI ow '., ': ' ,."-1. , . ti 0 //- _kg ° t -milli- 4-Ii '4 � =iv mkt ‘il--- 4401.7 rim tin ' ..i i ' ' . 'cl +� AAS . - ... -a, 11111,11 iii` . --'''se 19 vt al ♦ ■ Ili ".7, irli!�i��val .��rma '�r. ' '_ �tl�1>! did, — 0 i ■s i1 unalspo, ;s I 41' x, liiiilllP ��11►� 4In"1lif1 ' +f d,, #_ gpf-, Proposed Hoquiam Annexation o soa 1600 Figure 1:Viariiby Map sr>1!� --�-- Ciyi�ms 1 : 9600 ,..0.0-., a ok.mt:Nos ah*uxhoodc&Sa otesie� ( AearrotoAdainirtratee „ 1 Marek good 40.4 Council Hearing Handout 8-02-04.doc1 Hoquiam . nnexation Annexation Public Meetins April 25.2+11)5 \' Q ..„...,. ....„,..._r- , mo ' . T `'�.�.�r ,,, Wedgewood _ Querin ,K ! Lane . 9.4 x. e . i • 38.9 ac. r ge � � asm • P k 1.-'%ithin Renton's Potential-lnnt xation arca •- _ , ._r ,, • Location- but.both sides of Hoyuiam Ase S1., Park Terrace �a f j 3 plewood between'.1C 1'4'^'\E 6'^Street and 1 12?^''Street I. 7 ac. nib•a .1 Mai East 1 T. �tjjT? S"i i 2611 ac. eta iii • Ciie-+211.49 acres,including abutting street RON% A: 0 Lindberg Va 1 F € • 10.6x. !tp■� rc _, • I ses-19 existing single-famih dvsellinm •.� ry I 1N .. di ofr,t, _ ±r;. • Boundaries-site abut.Renton on its southern and Mosier II ma r '� ssestern boundaries. Aearbx annexation.include "r"4 31 A x. l a�. . sr a �y��'e y -� �' t Park terrace to the northwest and the Johnson 1gr.�1 ' Annexation to the north,approved in 21914 S ;Maplewood • l`l"**' 1 Addition /Maplewood 4 ,_. : _`i:�1_i_ 60.5 as—A lementary 1 _ - ,' I ,:i atii-w Conditions - . 11'i[t' E l tti�e� COt1C�1tton Structures will=• a :fes _: _ , , i _ C a at a is �: y y Illi - SE »"~1E 6,- S' ■ 1 rJ"eptly 19 single- — -- ' _ •5 tar-1 y detached .1 ^ Fr,' A �o •Located sc nth of h � ha sex on site 0 NaNeI J Ii ! } SE 122-'Street LR . �x,ti�i -F--- f A • Most ikeiyfuture 1 ,.+ ■ •Loa d be s e", '�7 ■` development on . ; 10Ave SE on the a � :r� larger under- ____a roes}and 14 Ave g —— — r 1 111* r y ! developed parcels 19 I �. SE on the east f III ► SSS /, -ti extended ,�� r It ■�. 1 Ile t eR r! _ / z 1E1 icinit( .1ap '-.- .� ,t '=r Structures Map _, ,i .-� 1 , (NI ... . ... , -',J'Il ri 11.711-1111 1 ..., v..,,..: . ,f• .„ ......, .,- . t-.I) :-.,- •' ., ._ , ,i ;• .., h- • ,/, ,. ,... '',' t 7 1 , ' • • ." •. . - ..., --- _,,,.. __• . , " g . . , • ,'"" • t.,-,n . nt 1 •-••• ',"'-' ',1 II,,11116rXim • S.; - I I". • ."4••• , -J ,__ - 4 • ) '' ‘........ ,,.....) ariarMill. i .....„ . • . .. ,, ...- C., A...-. ,..., ,— r- . .. 4 ' ..... ...... .....) ,-- = ••,'L rr.' =-,' '':' , r•!, = , 4 . .z - „,-., ---- •%.., . - `..:i) , _ - = 7.:_.--, 1 '';' 41 • ' ;J' r: .- +.- s '--r F. ,A , .-0 — , .. - .,_ _ .- - .. — .-., .,-, ' - „„, -,..c_77. ,..: .... 4 ,7 ^.) 'A =_•_ -• i = tr...:,,, r".,•••••• -_. - , •••-•• 2 — c N. . . •,,: • • • .....,.t.....: .....,...,. ..,.., ... ,IFL, • ",/. 1 1 .i' ' , • [ - ,—.-_•__ . 1 '.., . , . _. . .. / 7 r. .: I '' ' ' , 121 1 • %. '' • ' '' _ --.) 7:i I' .' -- ' Jo.' ' ' '-'''--- ;.... ,. , .; ,-, ...,, , , • '. W. - '''' ' r-I-1:1- . .., ... n _ 1 .1,, [ .., •• , • / - ' _ !,1 -- -- • t- , • , Ik 1 - ti i a ii6= - ' , — ° . • rI ' -." i - . , ,•,,••74,,,,.•,4: /. 'C. .--. I ,_i f ' .- ' -,..... ,_ , \ ''''S• z - • . : ' - • - i r-• . - :-.._H- lc.,,, . •'.4: i \ , .,-: c •-: 7-' Ci' Th' a) -. - , "•jj 7 -'z'1E ',.., -'; 7 .--,'" -, •a" (ll C 45 (1., , .s, 1) ; p 0 .& ,_13 ...1" ...., ,,..., , ' - ' 1 F-. , -77 ,hr, L. • ..- :- .r ' s. — .-- ,- .:-•: - , •— 't a. 't c_. a . _ 2 ,-, -• ,c.-? 1) .-- — ,, .,,..,..:: ,,..• , . .. ,, .". ... ....E. ..., Li- ,T,.2 u- ,,-,i 2 ,-:, . •: .. e Renton Comp Plan Designation Issues Raised by City Staff and Proposed Zoning • Transportation noted NE 6' Street ik an important 111111 neighborhood access street that needs to be Asidened. ,,•.4., IN n; Improved and extended through the annexation site Renton(`omp Plan Land ��1, • Surface ACater notes that site a -ins into Honey Lse Map Resrdrntialgh o RLD Creek Mas Creel and Alapleidod Creek basins,both Single-Esimil) V t� ■i r - N at vs filch are subject to erose,nl and flooding and require Likels Renton/oiling =0' urthee NA ater runoff controls at time of development. -R-8 (8 du net acrd �g,�it and • iaar�= • Parks notes a general detjctcncv in nmrosed parks in site INIUM_ E the area and a onetime cost.attributable to the Renton Comprehensise flan annexation.of S7'.452 Rele\ant Cite Annexation Policies • roc, LI -3- ?r ri,Ir,,rprinr,m:rr<�r,./0Fiscal Impact _Analysis a'11i.eaT1o11 to Ilio(1/1 ol fi'eYNo/1 1/:11,0 /hr'I11e ,c' ,171';'..d,,v, ,I oh iiic h,,:oi,li-io/,;I ilii(7n- • General Fund cost and rev ettue implications • Polies 1 f_.37 Prnuin 010/1,/01/11,Ir :Assumes potential al' 12,1 slnele-ttmily homes at full del elopment based upon City's R x Lone .Assumes ten existing dv+elhngs remaining on site v,tip as erage assessed value of S25s.4.50 • Policy I_F-40 .Su/y!,,r7;lr1naecui,ul,/liar Irur/,l -Assumes 121 nesv homes'a ith an as erase mp/tii 0ir11112mi 1u7/11ru,110r In rrn1,,,l,,hrnr;, assessed value of S;5i).i)NI) 17111/ii/1', '1/111/'N/h//i ,1 mi..*,,r 1,i li1('r(1 F1111Ah('r. (,/1(7l Ie.l'p/of hit'1 I Fiscal Impact .Analysis as Proposed Conclusion • Generally consistent vs ith relev ant Citc annexation Current Full policies and policies for single-t.mily re/ones Des elopment Des elopment • Generally consistent ss;th Boundary Res ie\\ Board Res enues S23.611 S 1,9,665 enteric- realonahle boandane- Costs S25.4S6 SI 70,374 annesanon t,,cane: creation and preser,anon of f„�:.aa.,rcice areas.etc Surplus' (S1.876) 59,294 • Minor projected revenue surplus at full des elopment Deficit — a ould take apprm:rmatel,,<I,can to rerocer cosi for tuturc park acqursii on and ;I•,^^tint 3 . d- 4 C. Z C Ly 7 -, 75 '••- - Win _ r.; "` ^ , ! 3 -1/ iG G _ L-- 7 C = C G. 1= rij cis C✓ N V G..-r L C J .. rU ,- C''� t11 ll C: U , ✓. 'fes `! -j F.4 1,g iiIp1*iIw illtinii, . .j 7 r,--" C L J J�� C ' .rG.. J j ' FJ J J f _ L CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: April 25, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council FROM: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, 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: COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT • In the Best of Renton 2005 Contest published in the April 20th edition of the Renton Reporter, Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park was listed as The Best Reason to Visit Renton. • This week, 200 children will audition for the Missoula Children's Theater performance of Hansel and Gretel. Performances will be held on Saturday, April 30th, at 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., at Carco Theatre. Tickets are available at the Renton Community Center and are $10 for adults and$6 for children under 12. • The First Annual Community Garage Sale will take place this Saturday, April 30th, from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. at the Renton Community Center. Admission is free. • The Renton Youth Symphony Orchestra's Spring Concert will be held Sunday, May 151, at 3:00 p.m., at Carco Theatre. Tickets are available at the Renton Community Center and are $7 for adults and $5 for students and seniors. • The Summer Recreation brochure will be mailed to Renton community households by the end of this week. Registration begins on Tuesday, May 3rd, for Renton residents and Thursday,May 5th, for non-residents. Classes can also be found via cyber sign-up on the City's website, www.ci.renton.wa.us, a fast, convenient, and efficient service allowing residents to view or sign up for classes twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. For more details, call 425-430-6700 or visit the Renton Community Center, 1715 Maple Valley Highway. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,NEIGHBORHOODS, &STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT • LEGISLATIVE SUMMARY The 2005 Legislative Session ended yesterday and Renton will receive significant state investments. The Transportation Budget includes$972 million for projects in the I-405 Corridor. Specifically,$360 million has been earmarked for Renton, including construction of an additional lane in each direction from West Valley Highway to SR167, a new interchange at Talbot Road, an expanded interchange at NE 44th,two new lanes in each direction from 44th north to 112t in Bellevue, and a new lane southbound on SR167 from I-405 to S 43`d Street. However,an additional one billion-plus dollars will be needed to complete the I-405 master plan that includes two new lanes of travel in each direction all the way through Renton to I-90, new interchanges at SW Lind and N 8th Street, and a completely rebuilt I-405/SR167 interchange. In the future, the Puget Sound Region will be asked to fund this and other projects through the Regional Transportation Improvement District. • The City also received$5 million in the Capital Budget to help with the redevelopment of former Boeing property in the South Lake Washington neighborhood. These funds will help offset the estimated $17 million cost of new roads and utilities in this area. In addition, the Freight Mobility Budget includes $4 million for our SW 27th/Strander Boulevard project. Administrative Report April 25,2005 Page 2 • Other important legislation was passed to correct a problem in the way Driving While License Suspended criminal charges are adjudicated and to reform the condominium law to make it easier for builders to construct owner-occupied housing, as well as other issues that were supported by the City. Legislation was not enacted regarding Sales Tax Streamlining, which would have redirected sales tax revenue and could have been detrimental to the City. • In all, the 2005 Legislative Session was very good to Renton. The Administration sincerely thanks all nine City legislators--Senators Margarita Prentice,Adam Kline, and Brian Weinstein,and Representatives Zack Hudgins, Bob Hasegawa, Sharon Tomiko-Santos,Eric Pettigrew, Judy Clibborn, and Fred Jarrett—who were very responsive to the City's requests and fought hard in our best interests. Renton citizens are encouraged to contact their representatives and senators to express appreciation for their hard work and support. FINANCE AND I.S. DEPARTMENT • The 2005 City of Renton budget can now be found on the City's website, www.ci.renton.wa.us. Citizens can view the entire budget, including the Budget at a Glance, Operating Budget,Performance Indicators,Debt Service, and Capital Improvement Program,Budget by Fund, and Budget Detail. The 2005 Budget is also available for review at the Renton Public Library, the Highlands Library, and the City Clerk's Office. 4clrninistra nve fie-yo,, Mayor ' s Planting Day NE 4th Street Corridor Clean-Up Beautification Benefits • Project in response to complaints about the appearance of major corridor • New green space, lined with trees and flowers • Provide stewardship opportunities for area residents with goal of helping with future phases • Another effort to keep Renton clean 0l •':' : .:::::i...••••••••:::''•:'.4:••i''''.4'..-r';:‘,'''''''',' ‘:1..:,:1.:.„-.t.::...:1,2....tc,4'.„-,,,..,,,,,..,,,,,,,,*:.,::,„..,.:4:4::,4;;„:.7,.,,,:i.,...,,.„,,.14::•:,1:,.:..:.1.:,N:5:s.A,•,,,,•:?1,,1.,::.:„„.,:.:,1•.,•,v • { S ,,'-,;5y:D,.,,,1,.,..,4„,,tR.•,,f„..:,:,,•','N‘z,',,,,,i:,-,.-,,,.,•,,.','.t,,.,,,,,16,,'',!:•:\„';,::.4,.,-.1,,..s,.,7,,t.4i, t e. SSL x3 rLi .. ,.'l 4 yy yy �• ` ate: 'b y sYrh y 4x°mak c x 1L.. •?'� � .FEW �t . r . �� • • . ,.‘ . . . i, ., . • : . ,:m.... ., • • c- I f 4f ., ,,,,,,,,.........„T! . .., illi . 41/4., . 'fi r� yyfy . ...... . , . .... „ . .. . .. 5 � ' ' prt • •:' • . ....,,,.. . ,.. t ....:4,,,,,a41!;,....,,..,) ,:14,,...,,,,,,,,,..,.. ,,.... ,• . ........ :.:....„46,,tr.i.c.:„;::„„,;„1:1,zo:::,,,,,,,,•...;:i,-,,.,,,, . _ ,., 1=16. •:• •••• ?.. .4 .i,,,,.,,i,.4„.4A14.-4.., ii.4,,,,,.,.. W �4AR y � �� f v c.i,,,,.„.• ......... . C`` , , yE' F st+t Z .::' \ f ., NE., N BEFORE I, 1 ,..... „...„ , ,", .... ... . , .... :c1„,.?:,::, .,!,,,,,:f.,..,„:„.,...,,,„,,, ,„.1 ,,,, °y ,„ j. Z" t (} .Ffd; .t1 1 . .1 w _. -. "-".."" ' ; . '1 ;1' . . , t,,, f‘k..... • �. 1 is � E p ' ABT ik44ti . N. ,:. .,,..c'et..,:1%. ...z-f . ' . ' '' -- - ...P--.- ' .'' **r"' .: '. ' :'. '* '- * -+' ''' .: ' *- * -. L a ro, i's % ' ;r :i Q y ; Ac NE 4TH STREET BEFORE . 1 il , . 1 .. .. ...,. . ,.. ty .. , . :: ... . .. .. .. ,.,. .,,,..,. i ,f t • , .. . ,,,,,,' — - - , _. ,... : V I fii• 4 1I i a s «» �� x ) fin y( + .may. M•'SW f 3 -yam' r w4 i; sA w•, •• " S.:row , jilifi ..,:..aiiiiiier_ if ..., --,._,,Irov.':,,,-..;.,..•,„: e ,d) 1.,,,,:,,,..,..„. .,, :,...:..,..' .. --. . .......-.-Y,-.... ek, 7rill l�t yy , , , mimpr, ... , 4 . . . . , , i . . 1. .. ' I .,' ' -, 00„„ i w f`� i I �,' Yak•"{,yv.� tir I - 7 ,4 1 3 3 ;; � � T k�x kyr + 4 .•. :...)..: : 1 ' s . ;.. ,, ' -4i .,‘;' ,4 \- ,,'''.;,.,;.,.-47A.- :fie - if ' �Y ,rte. `� • 9 is ; a -.-',1.16� `> <<> /' ,..:::.'''''''''' •....:•••':,:*„-::•till.fliS;Zgil.:1,'';',:+:;;"T ''''''. ' 4. — ,.... —' . '-'. ....%!:::*.:',..''' ice.%., e.;'-',•••• - `t- f 'h s n s we... » + Event Day Saturday, April 23 z''•• • . .. .•..- . -"-... ,-'./ •-,,,, .... - 'X ' ' 'i ,,,*1,,'.'::7. ,.. . • - • •, . , 's V; 4,4, :r.., ,.. -<' ...,,,..... , t . . l'''). Y:. + A..% 11.41T11110. 1.1.4,?, '1.. .47 l''. . - ,=.. , ....<.•..... <.....:....''.:,. . . ....,,,,...s....;‘,..- ,...... ... 3...<, .'. I . '. ' Jett' ' ' < ,'''''' .5' • :. i••.,--4-.1'auk* .. - ,. .0,,,!:;,,,c` . : '....., 44 - .1 ,„i,. ..4 ‘• ', -'4'111rfrr :.-''''''''' - ;..••••,..' • '',.' • t/4 - -,-1.4--' • ,-4 •,, o--.-- .'i:,',4,,, '• ••;' -'71'''''*?!•i;:"AA;- ' * '4 ,:, ''''-'-- .--4..;.: ':''''-;',.. ; ' -." .t.!-- -4;*,,'; ..,!. '':* * **,;&A,A,.. .4it , ' ' .,, ,• =, ' ::''' • `., . Aitir (10, ...4.'",...„,,,,,,,,,....„,... , . ,, •),,,' ,I,'.,' ' '.1.:.`:, ' 16' %.,';...: ..f.,'' '' ;1,-1'*_4%:.Z,1......•,.. ,,• ' -.•, - -, , ' - ,'- '•'•.'#, ••:\.' ,t' ' ''.=.4.'t.-, • v-, A•:4**Z.r!l<='Fi'k'''•'',...t:*,-*-.'-,„'3,'-*':'.t..'.t'c*•i<z*.,1,.•AN.'1.w,1 r4 '. .'-.,•'+.:'=-..`' *‘.. .•,`.' •, -..:::.':.,,:**--.,,.;•..,,,..'..—. ‘'''- r< ) „;N!,.'.A.:-.,i-..,,1.'•:•1.,-1 1,..<:.'.;+,..,••4/,,„.7:1,-•,.,•:;-,1.,''..r,-. 4,':t•.-'i.,',-,g1j —:'.'kt',,'..,•, t ,! 4F ,6..i;•,.A:1-.,1'',.61'.,.)._7'`‘; '-'J''F,;3';'t!;,‘. ..‘,.i" < *, ,, ,ky<kl,.; '..., ',,,,,:‘,'„,•‘',.',.e, 1.t.''-. • - , ". :,---,"..‘ . k. ' /001111k ,„.., '' I ; -.:% •!:',.: .":...- i''. ‘,:ki:.;,:i*,-,:-,,,., .,•.„--,.',,, ,, 4%; - - . ' • --'..„-:- --" *..,1,- .. ., .d.- .- " , it. ', -`, li .-,,.1- 'tt,..., ,,, ,,?=,,,,, ,‘,-.,. ..'• : ; ,. . ., - .;.•• - --;.' ‘• --,- 0,4*—k . ••z- .,646,....- , tA,..• ,.= ' '..." , ;••-.i,•"1,-14,,,,,,,,,I ,-;•,- • ,:: ,,„ , .:\.,4:k.'• ....;:liii.,.."..:.:10-,:'":::::' :— NI :::_,• . 4.4.,:<-,-,PP,,,,k.,,,,, ‘), — v '''•.: •" ; !•,'. T..:t . • 1 ., -,....`=, < A—.,44.',4*1,4:1,,kikkkit.4:`' ,; . v . •.,. • . _,:—... - ,,,'' 'Eft ,..' ' '`•,' !,,1" '... 4'\" .t,;',4,..4-:'T•, ,;„,<.',;:,-,4#:.0.;•:,,f,' . , 4 ••.• • ... ...;, ),--",- =.•,,,,,,...4 .—. - •.,,,c,„..7. , , :?..,,,=„•,- ...,•:....., e,•'•-•,•.•e.'''1,,,-:., , ,, '.I 4 .+...,‘'; ',: i ,.,,I . ,i.... , .,.:•, ,t,,,,,,::.-v,,,,,,?,i,„,.,,,,,,,..,,.,7,Nt:,:`-' ... ...--....-- .. ...../,,,. • .i. ,,,, i ‘,1,, .+.4...,,,..- , ,,A.,,,....?1',,4,.,„,,,:',,;,,,,,,,,,,tiI,,,,,, ,i,„4,4,,,, ii, '' ''''' . ••:: , -- i,, i- -4. ''' i•!7-5• e ,:';‘,..*'-i;'ii.',..;,'•-• :::?,?iA1';',A,',\7' '` ..,• '. „. ... - ".- .',4-ii:4 $, 'r. ,,;t< . ,..••i,:,•,,.t•Y,..: ,,:', ,14- t,,',07 ,, , «,n,. ,• . .t . ' ,444 Al.'!o: • i•-4...s744.4',s-,..::4,44%,-.=', •,.., ,', • './. .4,-,,,,f,.. , ''' :,*--.:,.'=„.46.,,44:„Il.r,t,•4*141 ‘<ir,l,i,P:V.'; ', .'4 ',,,, , 1. , i - 1'4, ' :' . <',,,'::.* •,:k<f,7,1,:!*.i",,;',:°.::. ;,, ,,,,,, . < 1 III Vir ' .1tf'A. •,::::.• .:ilizl:.4,,•01%:i.,';‘,,;44,• -, 11:'' '4"• t''''''':' . . ... , . i - . • ,*',,i,!!."' ' '*: .'''''4:;" ;71, ‘:•11-1:ii‘..A' - •'t'it''.•.`:-%,;, / -Si:: .1 :i'' ' "! ,fitt,;:•..:1•T ,.`.1,',..,,,,Z,' • '-'' ;;:,:c4:•,14,::,i)4,='!‘,-;,,,,, - • • '• ,. • ' PZ'' fs, ' . ,„/,' '''... <,.... -.- •'f.,,,7.1 1. '' ; ...,. .t•'f' 'fr:.,1 ,--,0---- '• .---.7.ff,r , ,,-..-..-, ''i** 1 I-*«'''' **•),'*,*,/,ul:, ' , - . '*4 "A'* * ',-°).,'''tc:',, ,,' ',''' *S.#,L,,,;;',4',U,.°VI ,'' A r *''', "-^''' . — .;g...r, ';'...•:tr.• • :, ,:"...•'' ,t'• ::'' t•-ii'...n't,,,.,A: „,,... , ,‘,.., _ ' ,. 1, 4 :, ,Itifii4.-*: '.,i- -,:,' ,,*4 ::',...:%' •'.4''''4.-:''' • • 1'', ,,AIL* t 4, , s• -<'''.<t,,,,,*41, - :i.,,,4',%.?..;- < .„,• t,:c,..'•'',,<: "<:-!k).%. ''''' ,;yik t '---' ,4„. i .', A-,,,i''„*,t ;;,:::.4:4',44;1!**1'-‘ !I"' ? 1.,!..f.s'l i.t,;11.r..1.',,‘::• :.Z! 11 A., e ' , • ,, ••••'.. k''''i A‘k, 4 ..,$6,1.4* .. '-' '*''' '4%**,,#' s gill ' 11, .,... *- * ** 'At' ':,''.' '..."... '2 i%t;.4:,,,e,w-740:41.,,' ..., •_;z1.-„,-, :..3',t,i,„„, s,,,.1.4.,,N,„ '' ,,10,,,N il.- ':-:•344 ' LI i<tt,:Skiii 7.1‘''''1,:,.,.'''' ,`,1,.., ,'..,17C't. '';k41,,,'''' '=,',.,?,:::: t,...-' ,i;,/z AA. IA. 1 i :—.=•-r ,,• ( !..,' ,.,,',,,,,,,i,,,,,;-,,,;4::::::,44:',47:,,,,,,,‘,.0,,,,-. zi,,,>5.=,:i:_a,,,,..iv..,,,,,,,,..,,',..11...:1-,,,,,,,,,„„i,,,$:.;44,.‘g:;-::::.1--;),,7, :::::4,1:::,.:4 ,,,,`,,,, 4..„,„1.v",_, k '7., , •' . .••.t.p..,-,ik,,..,;::;,. , .z,,,” 2,4,',;:. . „1,,;:i1,•;..z,,,??,,,,,„.. •-4 •2,•%-,-,,,. ‘:,,,5',., 41 - 0 . , , ', `4",,. .r. .:.-s. , .,:tr, ., .i.,. 1...<,.: .,,,,,...•%0-ft,-,W,.‘•ffi.1,•-•I,-•-„*., ' 4:4, ‘• ''''.1,..., :',1",,IY.., - . otlf. •"'- V-.:' ,.-•,,' Alowt,'• 'i: "t.., . •• -, -, 0 ,,,v : '•`-01;.*.Z.i!.. ,'''':•4itf:;44..4 k'iA' ..t'''''''''' , + * -..;'' ' 1'.'' .'''''''',Nit!':-..?, :-. .,.. R,,,,;...,.... s.,), --,,,,. , .-,,,, •—• .„ ,4,,... 40.4 ,4.,i'',.:;.'.,......:,,,,-,,,,!,, ,.-.. .,,, , .-, ,ii47,.•,,,,,,,,,,„IA,,,,,,•,,--,,,,,,,,,,,,,:,ti,. ,:4 . 2,i.-,4,,„--,..,,,,,,,i.:::,,..‘ ,,,: of i tzia),..,,,t4;i:,v,-.,, •:::%.4..,,,,,,...,,„,„4: , , .T.:,;. „. . . ,,,,.. ,,,,...,,,-,,,t47,.•,,,, ,', ers,,, ,.4,,t•„1";.0,1, ..;,1,=f1).,#=;,...t,;•;:•;*.T.,..7-''..."*,'4;i.e., 1 , ,.<.,. ,, ...,:',•<,<,7:4.'''•*,' ;2- 4'-.' ',''4 Ili,4'''1,44'1,''.5,;;'4*,::;;'*,',f444,,;12:t41*:,:?"•'''''''':;.°47A .*''''''"*.''''* tilt ,, ,,„.• `* .•*" # t . * 'Y) le:‘,`4,,,,,.**:,'''. ' ',' ,, ,' ': •. ' '.•* * *'''.4 * * - *.* *. * - —- * ' ''*'' rr */* :,..,4 ;', ,:,i;,,,,,,.;.1.0,1*.':,T;i-,,,,1„.,1:%t•-• -.,•v:.„,,,,,,,,,,,:t7,_texs,:,..„.....,,.. : ; 1 , ,......,.•:,...„. ... III ..... . -• ,. ‘ , , . _ti y ^a aSi , 3 .iM ` to ; : �en. "� • �:. `� ' • .., .s mw3 'j9 ...... ......S�Y �wuv..na� 4 _ ,4. ' Wr kms, -.' 4:4 '01.44 T..i1R1�1R.: a' r 1`. . • }:, _ - � i •max^ ' ,,„k,,..;'�;.. ,a..�.waw-�.: ;t', t, b.,,,4411, ... 4 t.r° '; t . ... ,......; ,,--,c,.....,-,....-.... =,,,,, ,,,.=,.,4i,s. ., ,,', . .::1,.. . ..,.„...,4,• .... 4 •,,e,. ' <,........•:','..kf'''`.. *41111';':41N..4.4**. ...,.,, ... . \ft., .::..!i1,447:,,,::,,',.';,..• ... , ...,,,,, 41,,,. t•' ,..‘„,„4„ .• ,*••• • ',','kf="""•i.,.,: •••-•' •••."1..!='; ',:i".'3' F 3 4 = A # K Ma I . ' ''' .' ''''' '',' '''4 .4 k `}p^2 . . i i. Y� 8 , • 3 ie Y1Y Y w' !,�' - � i1y 4� i a .e a 4• gr3u ri. g ., . . F •r^ ? NE 4th Street Beautification • Over 325 volunteers - Hazen High School Senior Class Project - Surrounding Neighborhoods - Service Clubs: Kiwanis Club of Renton, Rotary Club of Renton - Churches - Boy and Girl Scout Troops - Citizen volunteers - City staff and elected officials •......„„ ...., --------",..-.. .-...:4,,,,g,,,:-4,,,,,,,•,-:•44vttiimq.,!.i.:2,iii„.41140', ' • -- .1iii . -• ,-.4 • ..1!..t.liiki.:!,'Itiiii.,4110k..2-'k.ii,?,•ZI,--,n.3,11:t'i]‘z,,,,,,,,,:t.:-.7:..--„,-11,",----..--T:•:•,,. ...-----:-•:::lai.i.„::::,-:,.!..!itIlliw,!!,,:„E,:!-:•?;-ii0iiiig-gii,'.., ,„...-44.•44,;!-„,.....:•,...,::? 1 . - ,.'1' — •.. 1,:..-•,,,:..,..i‘.:.,"•.....'•::::!•'':4,•':%1!.!1,i..E-.,:"i:*•;!;::::.,:giiilgii1;..].itt:„.„ '''Utliiitiqiiiiii•EFANEF.:!,::;;I]g.:;i1J.,!.-,.::.:::.•$it!gii!„,•,„•.:,z7i::•!t!'i'!.4:!.grt,:•:-.:.:ii.]..1.1.filti::.V..1..,.:•4 •..t.'7ivt-•-••-•«, ..-- . • s',A. •-••.. '•+,..•.:;"•s..1.,•1.,;;: -. ,-.- i- „ „. --At,, 4.,..,-,• ,••,:,--,--4,,,-tri:,-:::.-:•,. .,,,,,e-'s:----,-„Aw]Ni,i,•!:•]*-K,E5,.:',.,... -:.-,,,•,,,,,,x.,:i,,,i,,,,,,,,,t,-,-.,•,:„,-.•••e-,:,..: ,••••;,,,-.--„--„--,„--..„,., ....-,,,,,,,,,,,,,-,-,:::,,,rik;!,,,N,..Q ,,,,,t--,..,...-.k..„:::,ii.7....44, - t - • • .,. • it-,,,4,-•:-.:::•,,,,,..-.A.4-0,..,,••::,:::,:-.0m0,•F''..---.1,-Aegi„„, Ilvg!'„„':'--„'„'''''''.-:•-:!--------------...,.:„, '...,,,-,......„,„,,,,,,,',...z,e-we.,.!.,:". r.!,"•'",;,,,,,e.o•s!,:' 41 . ;.,- '.-..'-, ----..---s-'N'-: ...- - • -.' . .- .--,-,,.-.,.•-r4'.-::•;',,c:,:-,,:*:`s.•:-.:-.:„•-:':::';:rt':::,;:::1::%,,e:::,i4lig:No:,,,•,.. -1:.::':tj,'":!,-"..-:,::::•:::::•,,,,-„,,•'-'-':,":•••••!,..,--:-•-•,•,--e.:'-:::,;-:-:--„,.:„."---,---,--•ia,..,;,,,,.,::,•:,eiki •:elet-:•;.T.,,:,..,4 ,f ,,,, -, ,- -;•'. .:.v..-,I',.:3:*.',.'''',1,,4'1,]'7.•'-'.,:-...,,,tt4,41:''',ViV•••:,,•-•::!!'a., 'lkiS-,:ii,,,,E:&:.:,-,-..f.:.,..::•,,•-,,,,-'.••••-;'..--.„','„%":-.,.2 -,-,-,-,••7:.:.::•,!:',:"!,!ii!':•,•'MitgOilitgAi' / '-.'•••4-.'''''''l'IllItsl•-'..,1:itsi:'!::6'"'.--••::::17,;:i;42•!:14:1i!Fir-4!i'. ---,::: ''',',„:::--14!•'''''';'-'•:'::::'•':.'',..."' i.7!':•-•:git'!:;:%•:,,,:il-ii!:''!'„.:!,,O,&t...,4,gi..':,',:;.!4. -i,:;:...;'„',' •,..-' -'-'"••::-• ''''',, ' - • -'---'-c'"'-'!"'-•44,100,•:1•101::-'''':''-'i•I''''i"1-:.'"•-:";'"..''.•1":'*'::.'"'"N"' -'"I''':::':''''''il--A-:''''''''''''''':- *. ''. .' .11;:,,,,st.••'.1 ..' ' : - h,,j#i.,..Z:„.,,t.„„•,,r;:•.!i:Eq-,!,,•,,.,,;,-',t;:.!.:,•,i:ii.:i.:•,. ,.,i:::•.:E..,.:!;!,,.:..:.•:::,,:,.:.:,s:I.:,.;,!..':,:,.:,F:.!::•::.-,:..:i!,i-,,;I•:,.i•:,iI:;;:;,:.'E,,:::;.,.::.,;!.::.i.•i.;•..i,s!:,,:.,,t,,;;-:,i.:;,i;i;,i.,,]i,:;,':ii.:':i!],!.,,.,:'.!,,.,.,!•:!,:,i:•:,ili,,i-:,,;.:i.ii.,.,.].i,:..'.-,i.l*ii:;i.,,,w..,.i,,::,,.i:t!.„::,:,i..-i,.,:,;.i':,...i,iE.,!':.,.:l'.,.i,:..':•.,.4,',i::,4.-...Iti,:i'-•:::,:,i:.i::.',;,,;:•,.':::.':..,::.:E.!!,,:','::'•:,i:i;.:,t'!,.::::..!:,,:;!',':::1.:.!.''...,:'!-I•i:,_.,.,A...::ii.l'•i'.,:' riArt,4,,‘,„$;-'-'•••••4*,,;•••;-',-:.:1:1:-:,:,'S,N.$. -;... .. '''•-*,:::.:41;•:;:'.--:;::Niiii::E,--''A''-"VVEiiitSgi',A4Vkli`Ililgt. '''''.,;• '',,'''..-"-...".4: '.--...-... C (;.:':'., ..••-'-',-- 1 ,o,,,,v. t,,,, ,:::•......, • . ••••.,..SZAilligiri.I.141740%44DARiP4. '';".AEKtO•ii!!ii :.;!:•." gligOkilltitit*44,--i ' '''''""'" r-'-' -r:'-'--"4-,'A';'"VfAiie''''N",',1,',0--,-.'-': '"•41.,1:"":::"'"Y •=••:',"UNriti•.••40t4'4.1.. k.KAANt t."4:-ZitAttAiL4.!**fiiiiiiiktkia--. ,r rAirtAlggi;.. Iisr!;:l'i.";9:!•A;•;:ikg% •-11,-.F.", 'r'' •'- 4-0'•r'''- Jr- 7:"•••r-r 2 2..:::'* -- • - ir-"-Epr'•* "r-'7''''14-'44."-11;A-,31...',1StiefikikeZtVIT.13!""I.1"-,:k: ''.4441.1,;:!:;-.-EgfilOpir.;"[•.7.1.-0.411„; .-..---• ;I.'.'•• - - -„.,'44 • . 1.4- ,z----t• . ,----,-:--•*--'',..'•'%.'•-•34-t-:-"?.•-g:kteAtke,:t`m,••;:',---- •::':'•'i,";:E--,.,. ::,-"4.:•-•',-,AEAlrlf,,,k,leigo,,,:;,,,!,,,!,;.: ik,---•'' .'-,e '. 1,-e-,,er-..,,,,,:""iitimiUgg-4,,,t',:,',„,:.::iigki;!:-..t4, --,er,:•:1,I.":414,e40-iiiiisirinti. • .:::, .,,,,,,... :•••,-, - - --,3!•,',•-:,:e.-::e• "....,:r---'-"aitry.:,,,,-.-,: tazi,.-.:I,;•:,,,,•1,: •••---.-,----.,,,,;,,,gem•,„.: , :,:.%•%!!!Eggiawg.::iii:,,,:i,,,I.:-,-z. :':,..-',1,4',,l',..,,,,-;:-:§-4.P%--•'-i.'4,- .,.-,-„•,-f:-,, , ••-',.Eit';',..•i,p-7sA,,,,,,-',..•,:,,•••;2i.!!0--,:, '•'IlligittNiVitE!„!M:r.-;',.;':]'•• :::,,,,"2,Ei•;-.1,, •''''-•',-',,-.;',','''::',:',42•:::!:•'•,•:.:]]E-,,EEifg,,iit. ,ft,..,,.- : ••.. ^---- -..---. .-/P, ''. "1.154.k„t`,1,•''''''tENA‘le:'1"7,17.17:-:•"------l-::::::.H.':';'.-:::'---isE:!::!:: ::"I'''''':-::::,.- , ...,.. . • •• -,.. ,.^ •.„. -. . . - , .. .--.:ill;',':! li::•:*•E'2 A-..:74,.•:;,i,•••:I4:-:Nk$1:12;!!„„::,.•-,„:4y„;;;;Ei,:, 6%;:::•tliii,:„ 'P.; • ' '''''•-*- '' 4'5, -•••.,,A• a .. • ;•'•••••••4:iiiistr„1,-,.,:-:::;:. :::i. ."-,,.... -"!...!. .!:•1.F.5!!!?:',:,.,,':-::;,,•, ]-•:.,•,-••,_:::-_::::::,,•:,],••!.:.;,.•,-,NIE4.-4illi!,r,i:,-,.. ''''":i,:s•ri,:,•--:,::,411:4;:i. li., '.:',„t•'...,-",,t-i..8.1.„,•:-_,ii,;i:N;-:,. .,::,.-,„,,,,,if.:.:: ' ::-----J.:.":•,J1:,:,;:ii,:,.„.;:!...,,,71.:!.!!!!!!!5.!,.,.:.„:„... Iwitia, .1!1.,.- r....-::,. - •-•... •:„:.', .. .„,.... •, ..-.. , ,.... -• .4e... - .,::.,:,, .,.,:„.;,..„,„...„...„:,..._,:::„..... ,•••••:•••• , . ....„.. • , . .., . . .. .. .,., •• .,-,4,...-..,---, A •'! t--. ':''.'4. t,--"-st*"..,.."--,•.,,,---.,„:..]:::.,...,V.t::-.444,-.•--„,.,:-:,...."....,A,Ail... :,;-:.4•-.:• ••.....••,,,,,,r. --.••:.11,- --"Ik'iP,'•;-:"A":''''.1"=531:5'.--.'-.;`-'!."4:';:ft":r.:;:s.:--:-""""""A]:"V"4,-4',."--',.' 04'`-"•%01114,..--Zr,,,..:„.,...:;:•::-,----r-.aZ4i4,• ••••'•••[-r-'f:',::,-.i.;„4„„....„.--:::::.. >-- r . .-,..4----&- i .„•' --• . . . "-• ' ,.,•'•!E'-r,. :• .., '-':.:,,...4: 2;I:'-'--':'r;A-;i';it-i:;A'1!14'Lr::Htiit#ir:!?':;'-„?1464't77.'•"'i":'":''';.1.;•'.;.!'r ''--. ‘; -.:'--.'--",:-....!:4°•-•- •'7;•;"-•":',.•1'"t,,Nr" ';49,41„,4%.'4WA„ :•::.21:iti::,,,•••••:E;".$7-L- ., ; .,...- -r:',.,:!:-„„ r.,-„:1••>',",r--:r r•-1,:Ar-::::•'•....i.:•,:4:::!•AlliNA.AA'Ar":":,"ngliiiiltAilii..4"11.1.QA.42:4 ',.-• •-•. - !. • . • .If'-1,•:71-.4•,r ':;,ht•T"."*ii'4':!Elii,1":--•'''.••''•••,::•":_:-.:Ifi41-41:3-;;;;;•-. .•E.!-':•-::7••!.:11;511!tlifkON . ..., , ,":::.1;4,!•44iit;;W:iirtr.;i40.;;•' '''''..-:--'„::-:••-:::•••:'..-••••-;•••:"-•:.•:• • .;''*•4",";:,..4.,`•;i!' - - '•J'''':„Irr-••••• , .-.• , r..-.,. •-. •' : :::•-i'•r'A'•r':; -f-; :.itigt.4-1: ..:-F1,1 ::-,1-Ili'lii:::t,i4: -,'"-.:.i]lF,,-...f.',..,...:-..- 1.$ .....f::,11.444,,,,,„....,--,itti4.,,,, ...---.'•',-:. ',.-:,7,-,`-- .:, e , , ......,—(,4--------------'-- •••-- -, --,--- - - ,. . ,,,...,,..„.., . . -,.... --;,•,,•.-,:,', , :••=,,,!,':&i: In :-p ..,,,,...,-: -:.,--E-:::--:1,-.--,,,,--,..:;:--:,•,,;::•••E:::p., !'•'::11 ...„. .-. ., •,•:,, 0; , . .. s,: ...,: .•••ze,:-., -"",:- .,,,,,,"-•,:...,-,•,..-.-7.--, . • ..... , __•....„...,.,,,,„.,,:,.,. ...., •..., .•,-.:( , '- :--.• .,4 -,- -Ni;,:"---,4 ::.. -- •'-" ' • 1. 1 '.:!''' ' ..,!:: .""•:,;:; :lAte..:' fi''''..'"--;',•!':•:: 0 r.... .-•..1' ::4t-ii!::!:-;1:-,-;•.:11‘..i `--'"s.i.•..,.:-. '.-:0'i.;54.15IIR t.i.I -t,,,;;•,.„,.:,-,-;.:-- ,:. , .--, .;;-...,..,.•,.,,.- - .-.. •J . ,, !,,;:,!:;'..,2,W.'•:!•,;•';,"•_;,?•i•c;',A0g•--;-,2,„ •••-•11, .-';'-,r.•ai.daiiatitil"Sgr": ;Va.!' '-'''.' *.-.46!'''•. :..J.- .-rti:1'''',--,.'-: ','••'-r1.6144-iii"4"!i 1.-A --,2-:-','----:..:':.;•.:-.*.;;'•„.•,••-..'.'"---:• -- - •- ' -''',.$t!j.:•)-'r'A'; '' •,."!•!),If'''S:s.;":••Vg..#0k::"-A,A..-:-,•-rrW4tthr_digrAll-1> 1:•-: - 2-'--:•':•-•:. ''.':'-';-:-:---"---:.•:-'...,-'•. -2.-- .----:•"..;"; -•-;H---t" e .....- --- •• -:•:•E".% ,: .'''.].'''''.•••••!%-i r.''';'''.. ‘-j'A----r'i 2‘.4,-',.•';:„''.„-,54-Ht. '.::!..t.tt ..itit.,P:i.4 •, .- ,,.., '";,I'-.1,.1'.'''• '4.4.:. '4 1.%,•.•Ok ;',.t. ‘A.• .....-^:";-•.,"‘: ..,,,•;',,,'"'„,.,,-,,;,irk,; .Xi:•,, ::.:401.)*tik.:-.-,„,-..,,„:.•.:, •;A:.:ik:A,6 • ':.;-,::i.,*( '''• -,-:.'- ..' '•-• '- - ...'..''f•-: - _ .... ,›-..--, ..••. •.•.• -. 41 --'-" ' - ..,"11'• ----.,,,,,,,-,--g -4• .,,,,,,,--,--:::,!.-•,,,,,,,,F,•-•,:•'1,41t•4 ALWA,i,;:-1'•-4,';,:,,,,.,0;,i:,XWZ,t, ,.- ,..„... .,. . • .- ...„. ,,,,,..-., ,....7 ... , ,,,.,.,,A„',;,.,,, t#,.:,f,,-4..„,..',i:,.•..4*-,'*,,i0.0.:-.:,..:,','5.4:.,z(c.P:---1,-.,- '',',...:!!- - ..., ... --. kiti*.::..,P.•*,';:::,.,Itilli,[-:- ...''',.'''',A.,',..,'.:.:•:' ,'„; l'"::::.,,,.; . . • ' . . ''.444-:-'„r 1.,i.,••::':-;-,4;,4,„.14;,‘: ' ''',,,,,,14,,4t.r.t.:.-,:1,=...;..1,‘::::V!,., . , . .. ,- ''4'...:•,..-• '• -:--• - ..' .,. , „ , . :. , ,,,•• „: •.- . • . ., ,, !,...•A S 16:4:.104.4-14:'1-?"'''' ',':';-.:'''rli-.:AE., ',f,'--'!:!: - - '1,,Eri. .— ••,, '. ,;,' • ,...,.,. .‘ . -4 ‘I:..'..':4--,'.;.''':`.:-.,!i.-6:."':•V1143,.0L i.:,':V„;,,,„,':'-44110244:15:',7.',',' ':.y,-,...11,i•::::::.,::,:tikift AC.• .'%,4::',..'..„-...!..'.'i ."-„'•:',"'„.-,4'„',!:,t,,.. • . :, ..- - - — -. -.•,,,,,,,,,,;-It4t,4%..'.,4.!:::••,,..i.R,:!SIZA;;::44,.••-;4.-•.k• .'i•,.,.4 -. . . .. . . ...... ...„,,,,,T.., ...t..,;•:. , . . , - • - v''...-,4,rif.1 -::',.'::,,,Aith, :-V.4-'-•-li -';:-"i',141,:-.',.,1=414,,,-:-: , .•il'gli...-';:::.1414i.Eitla: !. -.-i.:'''::•11'';';:11..,t:- : :-4t:f.i.tS:li%!,...;:.':.,:c::::,,aRitg.1,-',:itt. , :, ..? - -,•---.:',-.:.,'-.• • 1- , .--• :. --;-:-'!. '-. '. -, ---— :X"''.4,,,;„„,,,„ ..:-..:.40..:-./---::- ':.:,'•:..„....-:',„.„, . ' • V4.'-''.'11'.'-'0,-'..:2t.i.;•4`412, ....•,'.; ''-1.41,,i4 ... ---- -, , .,..•,,,.:::•.. ...-•.-.-••"-,,,-- -,--.-. ...,E,, k • . -1,:tak..,4:4,:klAi•ririi14. ":-. ''''-• 11.,.., '''' . ir..-:: . ' ; ' .• - ; • - - ' I. ':•'- '41#0itit-"-,4..,:..- -,r, „-'-'''', ...". ;-.1 , . 1: •rtiitAllirslir's....',',";-11:h.,_ :. - rr 1.., '::•••'';' • ...:-:.,i -, . - - . , .• "e--,!::i•4A1.,i1:•••,:.H.-T.:2-1, 1.-. . i:::•:•••,..„,„0„.2,1% .. •.,- . .. .,...-------,:.,• • •--- ..... „„...„„„.„--.• ..... -: _. „.„,....- . , "• '• 11,4 .... •,,„...„,,.... • ,, „, ,..,-.-. ..: ••:.:.. ••,•••....„„„„• . . . ,Nt •.,;••,i„. f . . .. . . , . . - • • , , ... ..,,, , , , , •,, ...,..::::,,-- ,.q:t..4;:rplf.'. - ' • , .i... • - . . .... ' .• -- - . ...... .,.....", „„0 ':--;1: •' " •.., , • .. . .. • . ., ,- , , . '•••'' '. •• , ..-..,. -- - - •..,,,,,,'''•••.• -••'•-•-,,,,'....,,,.......'''.'''' ,- . ,., ,-'.,•,. 4-.i , . - !.,,, .......,„,..,... .. . .. ,,..„., ,.. ....... .,..." ..:••••., ,. f!..... .,, • . t'''' .:' -‘;--!..--'--'..-':V- i'-''''''•'••' .-------- '* ••---:4 -./----''''-' - - ,4'''.•'-,..1 --''''•••T '4, •.`• • .ii;i • „...„•.,..,:,..„.......,.....,,. ,.„..,. , , ;:„: : ,_._ •.•............„„. .... ,..,..:,,,..:,....... . ,„:„,,.....•... .... ..„_,,,,,•:.„--,..:...__ ..,.. -..,,„,,,,,........„:„..„.„.,.:,,,..„,..,::,..,,,,.•..,:„..,..":.. : . .. ..... „. ,:„..,„, _ . ... .„,:.,...., •,„-f.g." "--r- ' • '2. ........,- • ...., . . ',If. •.. ‘; *';'•1.-:•,:!`...„.'el' .....' r .'i: '_'-•„,';',', ..., - - ..;•• - - '„-----"' „„ •,,„,.,,,,,,,, , ... ,,,,, ,, ;10 • ......,..,,,,.„.„ ,. ... .... ,.- -,..! t.,;:•-!....• ..,,,.L ...:••,....4",:,--—-" '•-:'"'..-7 ..'.-:i....!'.i...,-,.f..;-"....-."'-.... ."-7t."..------,--'.;',--,, •":-, '. . ,...-- .. - '`iik• '-r-";••••:Y..i.:1:; ---; it-•k",'.!-:--,-.r.• "-'-%.:?-';.:-,---'-•-•..!:,.:•':-,.''.".-••=----'::-:.- • '`-'.2'..•.•'-•:•;---- ' • :.•••., ... ,,,.„,,,, Q., .., •14:4..,„:,41it......i. r•••.• -...--.y.,...,.,...,:• - •.,...„, --., •,,,.• :•,-,,,, . .. • •• - • ......., , . -,-- ... ,,i,-,-'...-..`--"-"- 7: ' ''i •t!':':.7.7 i'':'''''......i....1;."'*'4'..11',*7::A**,..,4'.•*:''*:',',;.,,,.'..•...17,7'*-:::",..,'+‘,";;.''.:"'"i''.'.•':.''''''''''''+' '. ''',i If,. ,,. ,.,,, .* ..,,....' ".:.i...'"'''''''''''''''.4':.*:"'.::'.7. .....04,.ir'*77...4':7:"... ''''l''''''''''{'r' ' ' ''''.'' ' ."'*''''''.. .r." ?;'''''''' .17.1 ..'..;'?..: ;4,::.:.•.•' ". ...;.1.!:: ' . ';';',..i,. • C'.^:•"".**4`..":"...."<':'....''i'7,'":".:..*:::::-''.',$:::'''"41-'":"..44.44'47'.:.:.:74).f;.•..'"'' .. *. ..:*...r.. ...:i',''''.:''''...••':.. ,-,.,„:"*".. .' ::......`....' '''''''.1 '.. .: . '....C.Y9'..:..•'''.„.,4f.-.. .,4,tt.ot..:17/4,•.,:•.....,:, '. ...- , ;‘i•';':.'''' '''...'. 'r: 177* ,*1F'-,'.,....•s,..';..I,..........-7.''.4.--.''-.t.7..-S','*' 1'',.'','.'+,'.-..:'.,'.1.,.',":*...-'.'.'.."-;.,..';...-.....,.,...!;.:'...S.....,..:t'..'.'..-,:,::,...-";.'.r;,,.'t":P''...'.'-""t.'.•,'1.?.,'.,1'......;:.,.,''.:,-1.-.,.:-..'4.i:,-.'r-'..''..'..',:''i'.'.,....,,!',-,-:-,,.,,`'.,'...,...:',.:;.'..:"4,'.;,.-'..--'..1,f-,',.'.;0.,S.'„"?,'....,;.-...„.::...--.4,;.0'.''&,-',,'...:'.;:..-',.-.',-.:."-i..”.0.'g:''-?..•',.,.''''.--•',.•...'.';4,,1,-.:'.-,,,.""'".-..•,-...'..'.'.••.,..-4•°.,•;4.•.,..."'.*'..,i-°,-',i-.:1-.;...'.;•;,..0-,4..',.'...-.:'..'':...,'.."-.:"'-.0•.-',,'..'.,'...:;;'':-,:'..,-;::....-,....'"....,..'i.-'.-;.l.j,-"t.,-..,.:-:..•...".:..i.,0'sl:'.P:..•7...'4'.-...,....',.,',-.,'%e"'Y..,.'...-,,.''1:.'"..'•.f--:.'-.„."..-.1.'.:-.-i.,—„:.":,7-A•.-.:..'-7.,t:;,..-A:.-`.-...'.,4-''*,,..;,:''-.,','..$-';,..:.,..:t.:-:',-.,,.'.'!-f".':.-,..!.'i.'-.-.:.A-e..-'-I-.\'"t :.."*''.-...,rP-i'.44.'\.'%..—...1.i4-2.-.t-.'"-*!,:.!,:.'.-.-4"4.;'..0.i,-..1..,.:1;:.,-,..',.,.,.:..r5..i''.',..'t''",..'.-.:.,'.i*:,i::.,;..',.''.i':•.s.,...-''---,'t,'-t-:..t,!...:.--,...,.i..e•—..'...i.•i' .,..1...4c:-,•--.-.',-:--.-..•.,V•--..':.*.,1..'*.: . 7 4 , -. :- - .',. •'.:...*-^,-:...‘-.'t',.-„.,'.--..?'..•.6..e..'•"(i.t.r‘'t'''.,''..,'..,•.,.....v.',.. „"'ri 1',-•".,..,,....%.!......:.*::'-:...7.'.....-,-"'....'»:.•:'7,•...''.,-'..•'...':'','-"-,'.„:*:.'-'''-...,'-"....---*-,'.....-4''-,.-- '4..-'-4.N..:-,,..,-.?..•.,1.'r,-..f.1«..;o".ii-...2-,.,.zt-7-'"""''t•-.,.•-..''...:r,-,.'.f,,-•...;N,-,''I...':'.,c:c't.:':;..,:!'r.i.•:.:••:.„".»t.4W.%.,:.-,,o...,7,-..k.o,,,,!oi.,•.l:......'ii-,'•p,'. ,4...•,,.::,i;•.•''-ft1.-'.I..,-..',t.' -,,...-r.”;..-..:'i'.'':.','•i.''-.•.,,.,-..--.w-/.'.-:--"•4.,,.,".. ..:'.,,,''.X...4•,,.,-:-'-.:,t.'...-,,1!:"::.„:-..',-:•:-.•r:.-..:;,*.,....,:r:%..:*'•.".'*'-7''."16''.1.i:..1.:,1".,`.4!..'.„.1.':..•..-.*‘.4.1•..,-'..,.:/:."•..,':'.:...".1.:...,4'...'''7',.'''.f'.,'.„!'..-;:-'1.1*•k,1..O'''-:a.'•,”.''..0.'4-.`,.7''.-,',.-:....,f.,,,...,-.(.'i.*-0''-..-„'4.:-•:.-' .:1.t.*.•-"..'-:'.-.4'',...,.1.,.•-''•'-•'',-'.',,'..::.'.‘.':..-.:,.:4.'."'.',-,.;;'..•-•,.:;.t1.;.'•'i'/.'•,.'.-..',.',0*,'•*''.,•i\ ,* , ,..-'',•-..:'. .-.,:.',.,-.,..,..,',:..,.•..'' '.,.''-*:-'-.:•-:..•...."',,,..-•..:',t.' ..,.,. 4''7f..-,•.'.:-_,'"4''-'4-l.•.1 1-'-:*:>,14_..(:f,.4,;,..,",.1,,.-:;>.'.,,-..:..-,...:.*...-,.--..i..-.e...:+.•-",-..::.-•'c.,.4.'..... ':.i.....:•.'•*.,.n.;-**';...1%i4,.i';3-'':...'--ti.:.•"t..:.:-.o''':'':'-.i'.•;..',„':,,:'.',,.'..,:....,'..4.: .•:.-4.:'' ,.,:;'...,•”'..,;..,..,:,..•A•'.:..:,.'g , , . i7 - ' a'.; 717171 l4.;El.iz ,: 71 7177171 . * - - , ,' i ,. . -,: k ,. '; - " ''. . . .. - ; „ , , [71:1 ' Ai' . ,, . ( -r . ; Ad 7 . ' 1 . ' ' - - , '6t 4 o >' , ,' ' :• , - - . . ',44 , , .7, ,f • " ' ' ,' ' 71 4 ' ' . . .,t 41 , ' 1 = , . : , .-71 -'-" 4 '-r- .. .. 1 .4. • :." ,-,,4%.. - ,,..';..1 . 1 .,..1,..'7. ,'2":"*"'I.::•ttit,;':,..,.1.! `''''''''''''''' '''. '"*1'''''' . . ... '..,...,...`,..7.-..s.,`.:::•,::7-..'',..,..--',.:*.`,...*.'',.. . i . '-,.. • ,,•,,t 4,..,',.7v.,..„.„,.':.,t'.,,.,f..,.A,,„.',-:,.'',.,•.,..,...,..,'.,t''..,,'.::„. •.,;;N.1,;y,!l''l.....;.,:;..o. : .. , .:.::._-::. _,.........-.,..:_;,'..'•:”,4.,.,T-','..., :'.,..-.%.'...-:‘;'‘r-.. '...,.:'',.';.,,....„ .',f4.,.,.::•:.'.,..........-,:.',,.1;-*.,,-:''t'‘:,•.,;w',,...+.,'.4,7....''..'..:,;'7,',!''''.'.;..-.,:.':,.„ .,...„2:...•.,..,.‘.•......,.,, :,.....;..'..:.,.,......;.. , -..: * ,,.: . ,' , , ,• -....•.,,,..,.-,. * . 7* 4 1.• 57, , = • ' -. ' . f,.- , ' * ''. *7' . - ,T- : . ,.-',.•...',-, . ,,_,._ , .......,„ .; ....i: 7 , ..- . . ... .„ 7 .. . . . .. . .. . ,. •., 44 „.' • ...„ \,,, k`3N s�v z,'7;�tc xco .,, \ 1' p ..?, ....,, 4 , 4-. ., . . .,.. , .. ... ., : ..., , � • ' / - - „[ 4-si;;.4' .-: *','e',--. . si .:: . : , '-,•7, .:. - • . .,...... .. f. a s -..._ ,_ ., 8 ' w f • x hnsz 4. F i • :. NE 4th Street Beautification • Generous Sponsors - Neighborhood matching-grant funds - Clear Channel Communications - Edlund Associates Landscape Architecture - Windermere Real Estate/Marcie Maxwell - Comcast, Inc. - Tully's - McLendon ' s Hardware - Sam 's Club '.. ',.-''',.'- ‘ ,*'...?'"'"' ' '•: ' '''' ' '" A "" "eper ` •,d�� _, t•."+. .a • • P +�, 4 -� ✓„�.r.w<. z^rE� ,.y:... sr.. • x�„>,� r .. _"... .. - • _u« �• vLw.t<�ax F`v4'%a,, nr r., # / P • ,. } .. �� " ask="<^,''^ e4 ' , V. tf j 1E •iP 1. ,, R• 'y`_ ;y^ p 4 �j X l''' 1 '' '''' 4`V'' i qiisto ' ; f• ;,''*.i*46. .44. '>:+.-• ''e.e , s,::. � ,;'�:.+f '�:.fii," ",s.: 3'a•''"4F'"i'wW. vx ., "' • ` t s " w t ;:k h ` di lif aet.,, • • 44 r • iii • r3. ` i � I f , x"y_ . _ r h '..A { ` ti;: . • 3:<; £4," #a:' _ , � F3 . . . f %" t k. '',,,;.(.40,,,,r4;!': „C.:(44...' ".9>ya .�i^ .'eststY .'!s .- F �fay, p' Ixz <, , .'w ' V a, y y•:•:•.;:,-i--..4,*,'rai`� ,'I'. ;rwaL �e �' . ., v .�s . � ' t s:s •, At.. 02rff � + •.+ .n. ., iyAi1iiII , rl. ' ,. rte . 3. •wf., .W ►iFk i ..r , ti I .;,„' rr 3k ms .' Y"ltKY4, � tea tii, i`' . • • ith Ais. * ' .• 14. ..'.:,,,.''',...,i.•'\,',,,, .-4...1 t,' , .,..,:,.,,, n. •'..-....' ; . -.....,it''...,..,. .„..:..., .',,........ 2.'.....,.,,.. .,..''''' ...4•• '''''i1. 0Al-li..ll,...',...:1:<•• i•••.,...:::„..:,,.,,',?.;t..,!:':. v 5' -. • .- 4..:. :p1 .'•j' .". *+ ,-*;•4•'• . ,,,‘'.'".$ „. , ... ,,-,,. 11111"kik;.,•:' ... • s„...,,,..,.. , . .:1',..',. ,...:.:i..i. '' '' ' . 006,.. ..z:„. .;.-,. !..,:,... i... ;,,,.rr•-• -,, .„ .., - I- . -. ' . .,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-, ,,,,..,..,. ,,,,,, ,, : - - .., ,,,,., ,. ,, ,,:„.,,„.,.,,,_:,,,,, -..,„,.. ...1..„.„..,:::: :.,.. ,....,. . ,... . . . . ., ,,,., ,,,, ,.... , - ,,,„...... ,-. ,.', ,-.‘'i.,4,','-)..:..•''''''4...'''..)'•'•: ..' ''''''''.. ,,l'''1• *-:41‘"!.. t•'•:vt;..,:::.....• • „ • • • , .. ' `.'..•'tk,Vilg.,''';•.''',-,:',.''.g!.,ik,.‘.. . ..''''..-Y:. ....ii.ig`.'` ''' ' 4''''''. . '. '-'..'''' " ..:',,,;''''''''''..' '.'4*.'''''''..4 ........• , .f." . r3. - , - ...:.:::......i.,...:..c.,,,,,ty,,:‘,-.„,,,i.• ....4 .„i.....1,‘.. ;,..„ -',1, - .. ,•,..,,.-.'..',. . - .:-,,,,,-,..-.tit,.- ., , .......,!. . -,i' ..-.::•--1-,--:... ,- ., .,...:-;.-'..-,,-.,,............ ,.., .-,--,::',-.;‘,„..,...,,,, ..,.....••71' •...,•1,.,-,; . s, ‘. ...,.-....„. ,....1:,,„.,.....,.."..40,..„,•,,,,,,,,,,,,.. -.,i:N.N. .• 't•:',:'..",, '''''..:'':.'''''''''''''''''..,'.,.. t''''';‘,'''''f:!. "4: .,•° .,",•:.4-....-tt,.•%'..j',:.:.;-:,......,1••:. ...,',*. :‘,'.•. ::..,.-"z.....:....:....• . . + :'.'.....-•,'..1.,i/I, ''41.1 .• ,'. ...4,4 7 ' ,:',.7,,, i,.':.:•...,-.:.'.•:,,:'.'s,;:,;.•,',•::::-'::.. , , '-'40,. A ,. . ,,i!,,..,t-....4„.-....„:.;,•....:,....5,,:•::,$4i,... ..1- . -...„.......;:•..,.T.,,,,•:.„- -• ,- ,.i. . , - ... ... ••••t.,:l..11...••••:i.:.•,.,.....:!..:....,:....,,,illi. •-,............... ......1. , - .• ,,,.,...1,,,,....i.i.i.,:•:,..,......,..,....t7,1• ....,...+,-,•,:i4;.„ .....••••-. . 4...,.. . ,.. .:4...„: .. . iftatiosi,. ;;...‘.,,.1, ,,•44t'';'-'..;.'!, . ,,,,,„ .........;,,....i......,.4.-,:!::i.,,,,,,.:„,.,,t. 1.,;:' .., ..'..‘ .. .,.-: - ,,.. . .i'..,..... .,..--._1,,,...*,...', ....i.......:.....,..,.. . ....:, i:.i,..4*:'........ ... 5S1 . I ..::.!:;...*•',.....'..,...;',!';:,ti:,.1 '. .....,..7:„..../ .. . ,. . ..-i,ttt• ' • ..„.,., :, . . .:., .1, ..: .:!.,..v•.' .., ... ''''.. ::.'..-,,,,,,:,,,,/"..,:.: . . . . 4 .`'ii - 'i..• ' ' ' ''''' • /1 v.'? .''. . '. Ai,''. ''' .. .'::4:-''''''Vtt • ' , tt .... ,. ,r ., : '!.. . 448t1. SW' '.: 1 . '' ,,' :''''''‘'':•:,,,,,fploi:,,,,4,,,,,,,: it'......--,- ' :.= .... .: . .. ,r ...,.. . . ...'.., . , ...,..,.,,,' , • , ....... . . . ..'',P,t'47::!'t,,',Ii•-;7-:.:7-7"', .7.7.77.7+'• -- -:.-,. • .. I:: ‘,...,, , , ,•, • ..„.... 4.„,,• , 4 4 : .A. 1.-,,-ii.::::;'-','..:*!i:oku,.;.''''*7-* :....,,.. ,, . . .. . ...,....., . .,-..,,,,,.,-... .+. ,,,.....10 .... ...:..:r‘,4111 - ...";1;?' ...i47-=;.... ' i'It'''.‘ 't .'ik4t'' '• ' ',:t.:0-*,":!..•:',.:,,•,z.infi ,, -" ,;.,,,i.,,,,,7.ii; ••••,-..::!•,.... ..........:.,.... . -,, ...-::-• ::4-..tt. • . : ;•.)'.; itik.„11 . '..-„,,, i,-' .. ' ' .'..;,.=.,.. .---...4 ( „it . .,-,': ......7' ii,... .:. .,,,•,--'''. _,:-.. ',--. i-'i , ,, - ,,,, '.,..,..,t. ,„.,„;,..•.,...,...-._ -.- ,..,..7, ..7,...,...„ ''.. ,,,, .4:. '.,"..--.. .. . ,•.`.- -1., , 4, S' "f:(7`..' '.it..' ••11V..';'*. . - ` "...... •.j"•' ''''...?'''' '''• •'+'`''' . 4 ' 4v-,..'7.i'''' - . -..,.):...':,:::',..t,t•::*.;:- .: ..,,IN,:‘.. :?.*:::-..... ' , ;„..,,i,..!...4i.t . ..1,..',"...'''', ,,, ' '' . '''4 ti': • 1:fe.,"/-71tt''‘ ....:.`'.g1'.':'.''.1'1.' "fi`4''.'..'.1.;'.:.:4W ..'1.;..-•..t.'''' ;)1`'', ' :t's .411*\N...N.I;oietta„ . ..4 . ''''''*'''•-• .• '1:::!..'`...•':.: 1 '..'k'...•*•:..thk.4\t4,, ,ti.•• .''':'.''1.1;, -.....i.:.•: .11.4,.* 44,,,.:,‘ ''. • 1 ..i 1'; g' • . . '^e.e.:. ,'?''• • „ ...' ,.‘;::/7110‘..-- '4',.1..4,.:,,,,.`4t411,ts ,.. . ''..i''';•..- ',,, ''':.:•.....:' - 'ii::&...‘‘.,:.,‘ ' ,. .,*, ' s4 .t.,1,1;.'4'4. , '..., • ..... \,..---!tp,,,, .•A ' .., .!....?, .„., ,,,,,,''''' ''' ' . •;',.fi e,A s'' . ' 44° 1:'''''' ''''.1:*'.* . ' ''''''. .''.. ''' 5.''''''••,. ,,::.7,.:t! , 14,1111111611 . ',.. ... . ........,....,47f'..„-:,.....•'..,i,',„,%:::::::14:....-—.. . '.,53•.,:,, , .. , .,,,„,4.'-• '''''.;" ''''- ' , 'sttill'' "" ., -,• .... .:.. '' .... . ....•••••,„,,,, •.?,-t ..... b ......'' 1 ,;„,;.\''',; s - • . , ', - ••„: '..-.•,- . , • . , . . . . 1^ , ...t: ''''s'.-.•-.....1',..' ' ‘- .,, ., . ,. , . .. - Ali , . , ..c ,., ,, . ,. ,. .,... .. . , ,,.N,...., , : ,..,:.,, .:. *, ... .- „....,.. ...„.,• , , . ,...: , ,,... . . ...:, . . • Celebration Picnic NE 4th Street Corridor Clean-Up 4.. • ti , 4 7 '''',.,,,i.,:.1'...S. i i-. li... •A',.w ' i , • , r a .t ,. . .- 1\ �" . . .2. z r' s ... ' 1 l'. ✓ er >.,,. ,af W5 D : . a : Y r 4 i .,.. • r ... z F x' E � , , ai x .Vii„ ,.. i *F.' Media Coverage • Cable Channel 21 - for CityView segment in May • Hazen High School video program • Puget Sound Access - Channel 77 • Saturday, April 23rd King County Journal article y5Y fi w .. a4 • a c • ' , • � �r div �`' �., .• 49 �� Y Y� ii: /0111F • IIK IF; _ • ' S .7' '; :�s,� mar. ''� y c, . '� ".� '',!,1,°'-''''''''' °•e ai ,•• a.."y .'4 vk� sJ +" sK .4fter'4'.— ' � s� ,�.� ,:�° ar �;"_£: ' ,r�t 'mss; ..� y w rYw.,e a' his. •:. p " y�•"� � .a ' �y ;�$ :,. �� i�'.,�:"� �� .ice,• ,, _ Special Thanks • EDNSP staff • Supporting team members - PBPW (The Shops) : made it happen - Police and Fire Dept. : traffic calming and tree watering . - Community Services: helped with Clear Channel donation . CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Auk 'Kt I Submitting Data: For Agenda of: April 25, 2005 Dept/Div/Board.. AJLS Department Staff Contact Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Reappointments to Municipal Arts Commission Correspondence.. Linda Middlebrooks Ordinance Renne Saling Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Recommendation from Dennis Culp,Administrator Study Sessions Community Services Department Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Council Concur Legal Dept Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Mayor Keolker-Wheeler reappoints the following to the Municipal Arts Commission: Linda Middlebrooks, for a three-year term that expires on 12/31/07. Ms. Middlebrooks' address is: 510 Seneca Ave NW, Renton, WA 98055; Phone 425-271-4010. Renne Saling, for a three-year term that expires on 12/31/07. Ms. Saling's address is: 17560 SE 136th St, Renton, WA 98059; Phone 425-271-4134. The other members of the Municipal Arts Commission are: Gifford Visick, Jeremy Chambers, Jerri Everett,Edythe Gandy, Michael O'Halloran, Eleanor L. Simpson,Nancy Hoben,and two vacancies(separate agenda bill prepared to fill one of these vacancies). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Concur in the reappointments of Linda Middlebrooks and Renee Saling to the Municipal Arts Commission. MEMORANDUM ss CITY OF RENTON COMMUNITY SERVICES 0 Committed to Enriching Lives 0 TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor FROM: Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator SUBJECT: Recommendation of Reappointments to Renton Municipal Arts Commission DATE: April 19, 2005 City code allows for twelve members on the Municipal Arts Commission, requiring at least four members be Renton residents. Currently, there are nine members on the arts commission, including Ms. Middlebrooks and Ms. Saling. Six members are Renton residents. Two members have served for 2 years, and one member has served in each of the following categories of length: 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, and 14 years. Staff concurs with the members of the Renton Municipal Arts Commission and would like to recommend the reappointments of Renne Saling and Linda Middlebrooks to the arts commission. Renne Saling has served on the Renton Municipal Arts Commission since 2000, acting as vice-chair for 2003, 2004, and 2005. She has been especially instrumental in procuring local artists for art exhibits at Carco Theatre. Renne also tracks the commission's expenditures, ensuring prudent use of their funds. Renne's term expired December 31, 2004. Linda Middlebrooks has served on the Renton Municipal Arts Commission since 2004. Although she is a newcomer, Linda has participated in many projects and activities, including: cleaning the fountain by Old City Hall, Renton River Days Kids Day and RMAC booths, "Art is the Heart of Renton"teen art show, and Renton Annual Art Show purchase. Linda's term expired December 31,2004. Ms. Saling and Ms. Middlebrooks have each expressed a desire to continue to serve on the Renton Municipal Arts Commission. cc: Peter Renner,Facilities Director Stare 2005-097aa CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: ✓ . 1 Submitting Data: For Agenda of: April 25, 2005 Dept/Div/Board.. AJLS/Mayor's Office Staff Contact Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Municipal Arts Commission Appointment Correspondence.. Dawn Murin Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business *Recommendation from Dennis Culp, Administrator, Study Sessions Community Services Department Information *Community Service Application Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Community Services Committee Legal Dept Finance Dept Other IFiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment kkoorAmount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project SUMMARY OF ACTION: Mayor Keolker-Wheeler appoints the following to the Municipal Arts Commission: Dawn Murin for a three-year term expiring on December 31,2007, replacing Doug Kyes. Ms. Murin's address is: 3727 58th Ave SW, Seattle, WA 98116, Telephone: 425-254-2276 The other members of the Municipal Arts Commission are: Gifford Visick, Jeremy Chambers, Linda Middlebrooks,Renne Saling,Jerri Everett, Edythe Gandy, Michael J. O'Halloran, Eleanor L. Simpson,Nancy Hoben, and one vacancy. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Confirm the appointment of Dawn Murin to the Municipal Arts Commission. Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh MEMORANDUM CITY OF RENTON COMMUNITY SERVICES 0 Committed to Enriching Lives 0 TO: Kathy Koelker-Wheeler, Mayor FROM: Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator .1 miw`).N SUBJECT: Recommendation for New Appointment to Renton Municipal Arts Commission DATE: April 19, 2005 City code allows for twelve members on the Municipal Arts Commission, requiring at least four members be Renton residents. Currently,there are nine members on the arts commission, leaving three vacancies. Six members are Renton residents. Two members have served for 2 years, and one member has served in each of the following categories of length: 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, and 14 years. Staff concurs with the members of the Renton Municipal Arts Commission and would like to recommend the appointment of Dawn Murin to the arts commission. Dawn Murin submitted an Application for Community Service in October 2004. She has attended four meetings of the Renton Municipal Arts Commission (December 1, 2004, January 5, 2005, March 2, 2005, and April 6, 2005). Dawn was interviewed after the January 5 meeting by a panel of commission members. The panel unanimously recommended Dawn Murin's appointment to the commission. Dawn would be filling Diana Hagen's term,which expired December 31, 2004. Dawn is a professional art director with more than 10 years experience. Her people management skills and outstanding technical skills would add greatly to the quality and presentation of City art projects. Dawn's ability to communicate with young people, especially junior and senior high school students, would enhance the relationship between the arts commission and Renton School District art programs and teachers. Dawn Murin would be an excellent addition to the Renton Municipal Arts Commission. Her skills, abilities and experience would compliment the existing members' areas of expertise. cc: Peter Renner,Facilities Director 2005-096aa CITY OF RENTON APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE ou are interested in participating in local government by membership on any of the following City boards, commissions, or committees, please complete this application and return it to: RECEIVED t e / tX'i / /` �exCtV?d e t� Office of the Mayor /F City of Renton OCT 1 8 2004 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 MAYORSOFFICE Check the boards/commissions/committees in which you are interested: ❑ AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE* ❑ LIBRARY BOARD ❑ BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT* ,14 MUNICIPAL ARTS COMMISSION* LI BOARD OF ETHICS* LI PARK BOARD* ❑ TRANSIT ADVISORY BOARD LI PLANNING COMMISSION* LI CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION* LI SENIOR CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE* ❑ HOUSING AUTHORITY* ❑ SISTER CITY COMMITTEE-CUAUTLA ❑ HUMAN RIGHTS&AFFAIRS COMMISSION* ❑ SISTER CITY COMMITTEE-NISHIWAKI LI HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE* *Special membership requirements apply. Visit www.cirenton.wa.us or call 425-430-6500 for details. Your application will be given every consideration as vacancies occur. MR. ❑ MS.pl NAME DQ(dUZ MOriDATE /0//3/0 111 )DRESS 3 . /4ve S,(,()t Seed-4-U_ ZIP CODE qgI (P fir►% PHONE: DAY 614 A5t NIGHTI!e7 6" -?3q - EMAIL ISI.puirin(ittbard5 ' RENTON RESIDENT? if' O HOW LONG? CITY OF FORMER RESIDENCE GMIS ay / (,(9(066145W., EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND Orf&i itdIft% t , / 66,6)/dit,,!LL OCCUPATION 4rT`apt wits EMPLOYER 0/\J?{ Q ( eara OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND SC.a�� , ,qQ.-a-0;R" 12)JQ-4-('S-,�� I /4"4( bi�.e_akt u Q COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES(organizations/clubs/service groups,etc-)G(4 /nj`r`7ll/L SIS:(. rottet jt{b v dieD44I Qc aiu epaid 6161 gegepttio14--, .kit A ) V i G t.t m f rbop/ . REASON FOR APPLYING FOR THIS BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE . At A / � ' L' I�I__"tile./ t e4144114t4,11444 OltieiM,L. 1/496/A4116),,e491-eokviiiptA4-,(1-3 04.-j CAN ATTEND DAY MEETINGS? Y-PA- CAN ATTEND NIGHT MEETINGS? VL-e..4/ Applications will be kept on file for one year. If you have questions about serving on a board, •. commission,or committee,please feel free to contact the Mayor's Office at 425-430-6500_ r i CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI #: ?• G1. SUBMITTING DATA: FOR AGENDA OF: April 25,2005 Dept/DivBoard....AJLS/Mayor's Office Staff Contact Jay Covington AGENDA STATUS: Consent X SUBJECT: Public Hearing Modifications to the Organization and Process of Correspondence... City Boards, Commissions, and Committees Ordinance Resolution Old Business EXHIBITS: New Business Issue Paper Study Session Other RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1 APPROVALS: Refer to Committee of the Whole I Legal Dept Finance Dept I Other I FISCAL IMPACT: `` E� xpenditure Required....$ 0.00 Transfer/Amendment.... ✓'Amount Budgeted N/A Revenue Generated SUMMARY OF ACTION: The-Mayor currently appoints members—either outright or with the approval of the City Council—of twelve boards, commissions, or committees identified in our Renton Municipal Code, and another twelve not contained in the Code. The total membership of all these advisory boards, commissions, and committees is 172. Thus, Renton is currently the recipient of a significant cross section of views and opinions from its citizens on important matters. The Administration reviewed the various advisory boards, commissions, and committees in an effort to avoid duplication of effort,encourage more diverse representation, and improve the City's recruitment and selection process. The recommendations will result in the elimination of three advisory boards and one advisory committee. These changes will also result in the elimination of two internal staff boards to improve efficiency in our operations. Recommendations that modify the functions of several boards and commissions are also outlined. Finally,this report includes suggestions for creating more outreach, consistency, and effectiveness in our recruitment and selection process. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Concur in the Mayor's recommendation to eliminate three advisory boards and one advisory committee;provide for student representation on each board,commission, and committee; improve the City's recruitment and selection procedures; and make additional changes to improve efficiency in city operations. llimoti thorize staff to amend the Renton Municipal Code to implement these changes. '40.00.` ("(Y (--)set CITY OF RENTON • � + MEMORANDUM IPZ.Nrc0 DATE: April 18, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council FROM: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor STAFF CONTACT: Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Recommended Changes to City Boards, Commissions, and Committees Issue: Should the City Council make changes to the City's various advisory boards, commissions, and committees, in an effort to improve their efficiency and representation of Renton's diversity? Recommendation: Concur in the Mayor's recommendations to eliminate three advisory boards and one advisory committee; provide for student representation on each board, commission, and committee; improve our recruitment and selection procedures; and make additional changes to improve efficiency in city operations. Authorize staff to amend the Renton Municipal Code to implement these changes. Background: As part of my election campaign and first State of the City address, I promised to review all of the City's advisory boards, commissions, and committees to: - avoid duplication of effort where possible, - encourage more representation from Renton's diverse population, - put a student on each board, commission, and/or committee, where possible, and - make our selection and recruitment process consistent, understandable, and streamlined. It has taken a number of months to compile information, and to review the respective functions of each advisory body. The Mayor currently appoints members—either outright or with the approval of the City 'koo,,,,,. Council—of twelve boards, commissions, or committees identified in our Renton Municipal Code, and another twelve not contained in the Code. The total membership of all these advisory City Boards.Commissions and Committees April 18.2005 Page 2 of 7 *44119boards, commissions, and committees is 172. Thus, Renton is currently the recipient of a significant cross section of views and opinions from its citizens on important matters. The following recommendations will result in the elimination of three advisory boards and one advisory committee. While this reduces slightly the total number of advisory positions available, some of these committees were not functioning, and I believe these changes will provide more meaningful opportunities for service. I also recommend we eliminate two internal staff boards to improve efficiency in our operations. In addition, I recommend we modify the functions of several boards and commissions, as outlined below. Finally, this report includes suggestions for creating more outreach, consistency, and effectiveness in our recruitment and selection process. Following then, are specific recommendations for each of the various advisory boards, commissions, and committees: Advisory Board, Commission, and/or Committee Recommendations Eliminate Board of Ethics: This body has had no meaningful work to do throughout its existence. There is no State or Federal requirement for it to exist. Its original function was to act as an investigative body for any alleged violation of ethics laws or policies, and transmit those `r•� findings to the City Clerk, City Attorney, Mayor, and the public official involved. Currently,this function is more appropriately addressed through State and Federal "whistleblower" laws and procedures, and other policies and procedures to which the City adheres. I am aware of only one issue ever brought before this Board since 1990, and that issue was determined to be inappropriate for the Board, as it was an internal employee grievance, which was addressed under our labor contract and internal procedures. It is important that the City properly and fully investigate any ethical complaint brought against its employees. That duty would best be conducted by someone trained to do so in accordance with applicable labor laws. Eliminate Board of Adjustments: The Board of Adjustments is scheduled to meet once a month, but usually meets only four or five times a year, due to lack of issues for it to consider. Most of the requests to the Board are for variances, such as fence heights, sign requirements, and residential driveway slopes. Often the issues can be quite technical in nature, and—while membership on the Board is intended to include individuals experienced in construction—there have been instances where potential conflict of interest or lack of understanding of legal ramifications of decisions could potentially place the City at risk. Staff believes the land use variances,building code appeals, and other issues currently directed to this Board should more appropriately be addressed by the Director of Development Services. The appeal process to the Hearing Examiner would remain in place. Niase Eliminate Transportation Advisory Committee: This Committee was originally set up to annually review our Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), and to make recommendations City Boards,Commissions and Committees April 18,2005 Page 3 of 7 Nom"' on the use of the transportation portion of our per capita business license fee. The Committee membership includes legislative representatives, key business leaders, and other citizens interested in following our TIP. However, for a number of years, it has been difficult to get more than a handful of members to attend, due to their busy schedules, relative satisfaction with how we are prioritizing and leveraging our transportation dollars, and lack of real issues to consider. Those individuals still interested in providing their views could present them at our annual public hearing on the TIP. Expand and Rename Human Rights and Affairs Commission into the Renton Advisory Commission on Diversity; and Eliminate the Unfair Housing Practices Board: Currently,this Commission has the most diverse makeup of any of our advisory boards, commissions, and committees. Its current function is to advise, investigate, mediate, and/or hold meetings on community-wide issues relating to intergroup tensions or discrimination. The Commission advises and recommends to the Mayor and City Council ways and means of discouraging discrimination. Their charge is to also prepare and disseminate educational and informational materials related to prejudice and discrimination. It would seem logical to expand this Commission's function to include ideas and proposals to involve, include, and celebrate Renton's diverse cultural and ethnic citizenry. As is currently its practice, this Commission would also be the body to hear complaints regarding unfair housing practices. So, it is no longer necessary to include in our code a separate Unfair Housing Practices Board and, therefore, it can be eliminated as a separate board. Win° This Commission currently consists of seven members. My recommendation would be to expand it to nine members, in recognition of its increased scope and the desire for more representation on this new commission. The Commission is currently staffed by our Human Resources and Risk Management Department. I would recommend this assignment remain, although some additional staff resources will likely be necessary. Expand function of Renton Youth Council to provide student candidates to serve as voting members of each City advisory board, commission, and committee: In my State of the City address last year, I expressed a desire to include the perspectives and insight of students on our advisory bodies. My recommendation is to amend our code in those sections dealing with our various advisory boards, commissions, and committees to allow a voting student member. The requirement for membership would be a young man or woman between the ages of 16-21 who is enrolled as a student in the Renton School District, Issaquah School District, Renton Technical College, or another of our area colleges or universities. To the extent a board, commission, or committee performed functions that obligate the City, students between the ages of 16-18 would be non-voting members. Otherwise, all students would participate with full authority and responsibility. We would task the Renton Youth Council with the responsibility of outreach and recruitment of candidates for your consideration. The Youth Council would develop whatever additional criteria they believe necessary to qualify candidates for your consideration. Redefine the Library Board by codifying its existence in the RMC under authority of RCW 35A.27.010: The Law for Optional Municipal Code Cities (RCW 35A.27.010) states, "Every code city may exercise the powers relating to the acquisition, development, improvement and City Boards,Commissions and Committees April 18,2005 Page 4 of 7 '4410' operation of libraries. . " As Renton is an optional code city, this statute has precedence over RCW 27.12.190, which is referenced in our code and places much more control with the Library Board. There is currently no reference in our municipal code pertaining to the Library Board. By drafting a chapter under authority of RCW 35A.27.010, we can clarify the roles and responsibilities of the Library Board to be more consistent with the Mayor/Council form of government. Modify Planning Commission duties to no longer include zoning text amendment review and recommendations: The Commission's strength lies in providing its perspective on long-range planning decisions such as our Comprehensive Plan and sub-area plans, and to efforts like the Boeing Redevelopment Plan. It serves as a sounding board for staff to introduce draft concepts and test impacts of policy decisions. It is more difficult for the Commission to provide effective input on specific code language, especially when changes have been recommended as a result of Mayoral or City Council review. The technical skills needed to address variance requests, appeals, and other matters currently in the Board of Adjustments and Board of Public Works, are best handled by professionals with experience and training. Staff recommends, and I concur, that the structure of the Planning Commission remain as is,but that the duty of making recommendations on zoning text amendments be eliminated. By removing this duty, the Commission's standing meetings would only need to be monthly (rather than the current bi- weekly meetings), or even bi-monthly. More frequent meetings could always be called if the workload required it. Administrative Board Recommendations The following changes to internal administrative boards, commissions, and committees will be implemented as part of my overall effort to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our processes, and these changes are presented here for your information. Eliminate Board of Public Works: The Board of Public Works is a three-employee administrative board that meets regularly to consider technical requests to defer plat improvements, electrical undergrounding, noise variances, and other such items. The Board may also make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council on contracts and franchises, although it never has to my knowledge. Department Administrators appoint members to this board. Staff recommends, and I concur, the elimination of this Board and the creation of a more efficient decision-making process. The Planning/Building/Public Works Department would have primary responsibility for decisions and recommendations, but would seek input when appropriate from other departments in a method similar to existing SEPA reviews. The current appeals process to the Hearing Examiner and/or Council would be left in place. Eliminate Emergency Services Organization: This organization is included in State law to provide the authorization we need to perform emergency services. For years, the responsibility for providing these services has been delegated administratively to the Fire Chief and the Emergency Operations Center(now known as Emergency Communications Center). There has been no citizen advisory function. Given the technical nature of this function, I do not see any purpose in establishing one. Unless there is a requirement under the RCW to specifically list this organization in our code, my recommendation is to eliminate it. Obviously, we will still be City Boards,Commissions and Committees April 18,2005 Page 5 of 7 ‘Imis." responsible for it under State law, and we will continue to fulfill that responsibility administratively. Modify the Environmental Review Committee: This committee was established internally— there is no reference in the RMC. Its purpose is to review proposed projects for compliance to existing environmental requirements and the City's economic development objectives. It also provides a forum for department administrators to discuss and make threshold determinations on more complex land use projects. Three of my department administrators are currently "members"of the committee: the Fire Chief, the Community Services Administrator, and the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator. The City Attorney also regularly attends and provides counsel, as does my Economic Development,Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Administrator. This committee meets regularly (usually two to three times a month). While this committee does take up time it provides a needed forum to discuss various department perspectives, which in turn leads to better decisions. My recommendation is to continue to allow the committee to function, change the "voting membership"to include the Economic Development,Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Administrator—for a total of four votes (the City Attorney would continue to provide advice and counsel when needed), and encourage the use of consent agendas and other mechanisms that will allow the committee to use its time on items that require determinations at the department administrator level. V Recommended Recruitment and Selection Process The information in this section is also provided for the Council's information. While it is administrative in nature, and doesn't require direction or approval from the City Council, it helps provide a clearer picture of our efforts to achieve greater involvement and diversity in our advisory boards, commissions, and committees. Currently,the City's website lists a number of our advisory boards, commissions, and committees (for purposes of this section, I'll refer to these as BCCs), and specific information about each one. A downloadable "Community Service Application" is available on the website. Also, the website notes that an application can also be obtained through the Mayor's Office. A key first step will be to confirm that all applicable advisory BCCs are placed on the website with appropriate information. Vacancies will be advertised through press releases, CitySource, Cable Channel 21, Neighborhood News, and on the City's website,and announced at City Council meetings in the Administrative Report. As our Advisory Commission on Diversity begins to function, it will be able to provide additional recommended avenues of outreach. On the application, the applicant will provide pertinent information and indicate the BCCs in which they're interested. The application will be returned to the Mayor's Office. City Boards,Commissions and Committees April 18,2005 Page 6 of 7 '"liow As is currently done, upon receipt of application in the Mayor's Office, an acknowledgement letter will be prepared for the Mayor's signature. The letter thanks the applicant for their interest, notes specifics as to eligibility based on residency or other requirements for those BCCs selected, advises that the application will be forwarded to appropriate staff for consideration when a vacancy occurs, and that the application will be kept on file for one year. A copy of this letter, along with a copy of the application, is then distributed to department staff supporting the specific BCCs in which the applicant has expressed interest. A copy of the letter and application is filed in the Mayor's BCC notebooks in each of the appropriate sections (if the applicant has expressed an interest in more than one BCC). The notebook contains two sections for each BCC: the first includes the up-to-date member list/term information; pertinent code/state authorization, creation, and appointment process information; and letters of appointment. The second section contains the pending applications and letters of acknowledgement kept on file for one year and referenced when a vacancy occurs. Staff will endeavor to determine whether a vacancy in a BCC is likely to occur(current member not interested in reappointment, member moving from area, or staff does not believe reappointment of the member is appropriate due to poor performance, etc.) and will notify the Mayor's office for advertisement. A monthly report will track this information. When a vacancy does occur, the support staff of the specific BCC reviews all the applications on file and conducts interviews of qualified candidates. At least two members of the BCC support staff will Nov participate in the interviews. The purpose of the interview will be to determine the qualifications of candidates and whether they will be a contributing member of the BCC. Staff will also give weight to the need to diversify BCC membership where possible and appropriate. Staff will provide a recommendation for the Mayor's consideration. Once the selection is made, a memo from the department administrator(whose staff supports the particular BCC) recommending (re)appointment(s) is sent to the Mayor for consideration, along with the reasons for selection and a listing of the other applicants interviewed. If the Mayor approves the recommendation, the Mayor's Executive Secretary will prepare the appropriate letter of appointment or an agenda bill, depending on the appointment criteria set for that BCC. If it is a reappointment and requires Council confirmation, an agenda bill is prepared for Council concurrence, along with the required committee report. If it is a new appointment and requires Council confirmation, an agenda bill is prepared for referral to Committee. The Mayor's Executive Secretary coordinates this preparation. She also coordinates appropriate staff attendance at the scheduled committee meeting, and with the appointee regarding attendance at the scheduled committee meeting and Council meeting. After Council confirmation, the City Clerk sends a letter of official appointment to the appointee (a copy of this letter is placed in the specific section of the BCC notebook). If it requires a letter of appointment and does not require Council confirmation (i.e., Housing Authority, Human Services Advisory Committee, LEOFF Board, Senior Citizens Advisory Committee, etc.)then a '441.r. letter of appointment is prepared by the Executive Secretary, signed by the Mayor, mailed to the appointee, distributed to appropriate staff, and filed in the specific BCC notebook section. City Boards,Commissions and Committees April 18,2005 Page 7 of 7 lwrow To assist in tracking applicants and the status of appointments, an electronic spreadsheet/database has been developed. The spreadsheet lists all applicants and appointees, along with all other pertinent information on the application so that it can be reviewed and sorted as needed. The spreadsheet also contains sortable information on BCC interests, availability (time of day and days of the week), prior experience, length of residence in Renton, and other information taken from the completed application. The Mayor's office will maintain the spreadsheet so that it is current at all times. In addition, all appropriate application forms and letters will continue to be maintained in the existing notebook system. Summary of recommendations for Council action: 1) Eliminate three advisory boards (Board of Ethics, Board of Adjustments, and the Unfair Housing Practices Board, and one advisory committee (Transportation Advisory Committee). 2) Expand and rename the Human Rights and Affairs Commission into the Renton Advisory Commission on Diversity. 3) Provide for student representation as voting members on each City board, commission, and committee. 4) Redefine the Library Board by codifying its existence in the RMC under authority of RCW 'Now 35A.27.010. 5) Modify Planning Commission duties to no longer include zoning text amendment review and recommendations. Summary of Administrative Recommendations (no Council action required): 1) Eliminate Board of Public Works 2) Eliminate Emergency Services Organization 3) Modify the Environmental Review Committee 4) Revise Recruitment and Selection Process Conclusion: The changes recommended above are relatively significant, given that there have been no changes in a number of years. However, I believe these changes will result in more efficient advisory boards, commissions, and committees that will better represent our diverse population, and provide both me and the City Council with advice that will help us make better decisions on behalf of the City of Renton. I also believe that these changes will provide more meaningful Nine service for those who volunteer their time. CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: C Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of:April 25, 2005 Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division Staff Contact Juliana Fries x:7278 Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Final Latecomer's Agreement Request: Sewer Correspondence.. extension; 14035 SE 122nd Street(Glenn Wharton, Ordinance X Petitioner) Resolution File: LA-04-001 Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Final cost figures Information Latecomer's Agreement with Exhibits Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept X Refer to Utilities Committee 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: Glen Wharton completed construction for the Latecomer's Agreement and requests final approval of the Agreement. The City Council granted preliminary approval of the application fora Latecomer's Agreement for a period of one year on May 17, 2004. Planning/Building/Public Works Department has verified the petition,the property ownership, cost figures, legal descriptions and maps. The total cost of the project is $42,257.20. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends: • That Council grant final approval of the application for a Latecomer's Agreement, approve the Agreement for a period of fifteen years and direct the City Clerk to mail notification to the affected property owners. • That the final notice shall include the final assessment per unit charge, the legal description and a map of the latecomer's agreement's boundaries and a description of the property owner's rights and options to participate in the latecomer's agreement. • That if no appeals are received within 20 days of the date of mailing, the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the latecomer's agreement. PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS -- Now DEPARTMENT MEM OR ANDUM DATE: April 19, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: j6/ Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler �,I FROM: Gregg Zimmermk Mministrator Planning/Building/Public Works Department STAFF CONTACT: Juliana Fries, x-7278 SUBJECT: ISSUE PAPER REGARDING REQUEST OF FINAL LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT FOR WHARTON SEWER MAIN EXTENSION Now ISSUE: Mr. Glenn Wharton is requesting a Latecomer's Agreement for installation of approximately 279 lineal feet of 8-inch sewer main along SE 122nd Street. RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of Planning/Building/Public Works Department that council accept applicant's request for a final latecomer's agreement for a period of fifteen years. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: In March 22nd of 2004, Mr. Wharton submitted an application for the Latecomer's Agreement Request (File No. LA-04-001). The application contained the Legal Description of the applicant's property, the list of King County tax account numbers (PID#s) for benefited properties, a vicinity map of applicant's property, benefiting properties and the location of the improvements, a set of civil engineering plans for the sewer main extension under consideration for latecomer's recovery and the processing fee. `4rrr Wharton Sewer Main Extension April 19,2005 Nirro Page 2 City Code Section 9-5 allows private developers and owners to apply for a latecomer's agreement for purposes of being reimbursed for a portion of their original utility or street construction costs when it is deemed to benefit adjacent properties. These costs or"assessments" are then spread among the property owners based on a pro rata share. The City Council granted preliminary approval of the application for a Latecomer's Agreement for a period of one year on May 17, 2004. The sewer main line has been constructed in an easement along the northerly property of Forrest Crest apartments and extended 279 feet to the west along SE 122nd Street. During construction it was determined that the existing utilities shown in the approved plans were in fact closer to the proposed sewer main. To maintain minimum separation the plans were revised and an additional manhole was installed, increasing the estimated costs. The method of cost distribution recommended for this instance is based upon front footage. The final cost per front foot is $87.31, which is within an acceptable range for typical sewer extensions. CONCLUSION: The applicant met all requirements and staff recommends approval of the Latecomer's Agreement with the revised final cost. Staff also recommends that the method of assessment be front footage. cc: Jay Covington,CAO Bonnie I.Walton,City Clerk Printed On: 04/13/2005 City of Renton Public Works Department Page 1 Project: Wharton Latecomer Item Est. Unit Total No. Description Unit Quantity Price Amount 001. 8" PVC Sewer Pipe, 2x48" Sanitary Sewer Manhole and 4 side sewer Lump Sum 1 $32,400.00 $32,400.00 002. Engineering Design Costs Lump Sum 1 $4,898.90 $4,898.90 Subtotal $37,298.90 005. 8.8% Sales Tax $3,282.30 006. City Permit Fees $1,676.00 Total Cost of Latecomer $42,257.20 Total Cost of Latecomer: $42,257.20 Total Front Footage (feet): 484 Cost per Front Footage: $87.31 Return Address. City Clerk's Office '91e"'' City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Title: LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT Property Tax Parcel Numbers: 102305-9216; Project File#: PRM—27-0027 102305-9181; 102305-9242 and 102305-9343 Grantor(s): Grantee(s): 1. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation 1. Glenn Wharton Complete legal description is in Exhibit"B"of this document. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Portions of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Secti s' 1 i North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton,King County, Wash ticiotHi THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this ,- 20 by and between the CITY OF RENTON, hereina referred f . " Y,"and Glenn Wharton, hereinafter referred to as"DEVELOPER"; .„ . „ 3 s WHEREAS,the "DEVELOPS•” ous o ,�� , wastewater systems and •appurtenances thereto at,nem,-.7?„;� e her” •esc 1 led property and to connect same to the "CITY'S"utility o s - �At" o that- mprovements will constitute an integral part thereof; and r ' •WHE' : r�fi �� xt or users are presently available to share in the cost and expen� � - "struct s ht such � vements, and the parties hereto having in mind the provisio �t��r , rms I.V `Municipal Water and Sewer Facilities Act"(R.C.W.35.91.020,et seq.)and `legislation(R.C.W. 35.72.010,et seq.); and WHEREAS,the'DEVELOPER"is willing to pay all the costs and expenses for the installation of said improvements; NOW,THEREFORE,IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND CONVENANTED BY AND BETWEEN THE AFORESAID PARTIES AS FOLLOWS: Page 1 a PRM27-0027: WHARTON LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT I. The"DEVELOPER"hereby acknowledges and covenants that he is the owner of the *481.0 following described property,to wit: See Exhibit"A" and the"DEVELOPER"hereby agrees and covenants to cause to have installed the following described improvements,to wit: 1. 275 linear feet of 8 inch PVC Sewer Main 2. 2 48 inch diameter manhole and such installation to be made in full compliance with all applicable .•g ,i,/ � � � regulations of the"CITY". The"DEVELOPER"further covena s` '��, .l�,:��tV at all expenses and claims in connection with the construction a .tion ofth, id improvements,whether for labor or materials or both, ' ': ,-en " 1 be paid 1 .p w.., all at the"DEVELOPER'S"expense, and the"DEVELOP ,' 44...Pnts and agrees to hold the "CITY"harmless from any liability '° • �n there �- 2. The"DEVELOPER"furt :A• s that ;.. = .=;3 ,z, � •. d construction as 4140, hereinabove specifi, 1 See 4 a t� `B"attached hereto for the legal description of the blo`t'`, 9,.i' s•£ e lands affected by this latecomer agree •' , ' •, E . . ' • "a 0 ,:•' ereto for the map showing in outline the land Y .,: , : . ; 'on., ... s per the terms of this agreement. The t =•• �. , •, ••_'- e cost of said improvement shall be employed to determine the pro rata rei _' ent to the"DEVELOPER"by any owner of real estate who did not contribute to the original cost of such improvement,and who subsequently wishes to tap into or hookup to or use said facilities,which tap or hookup shall include connections to lateral or branches connecting thereto,all subject to the laws and ordinances of the "CITY"and the provisions of this agreement. simili Page 2 PRM27-0027: WHARTON LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT The method of determining latecomer payments shall be by: Front foot method The pro rata cost is$87.31. 3. It is hereby found and determined that the construction and installation of said aforedescribed improvement is in the public interest. 4. The"DEVELOPER"hereby agrees and covenants to convey,transfer, and assign unto the "CITY"all rights, interest and title in and to said improvements and all appurte.,.,„1es and accessories thereto,free from any claim and encumbrance of any party w 1 � - ; "CITY"agrees to accept and maintain said improvement as part of i 40,a al 4:,.:.,,-m upon approval thereof by the Administrator of the Planning/Build; i ork .i.. .' ent or his/her authorized representative and after inspection?' co uction. T "DEVELOPER"further agrees and covenants to execu :Or ,, ler unto the" ITY" any and all documents including Quit Cl. u �a s and Bil„#,..., le that may reasonably , Niiiv be necessary to fully vest title in the"Cl � t -- tuat4Iiik anveyance and CC �)) t "CITY" transfer. The DEVELOPE her ag a ° '3 pay unto the CITY such _ lam.. service charges or oth- i' _ ay be� m+`by t`e"CITY"for use of the improvements for'w _ , t is ��' "'o. 5. Th 4:ii z,.- ,. th . ithout affecting the validity or terms of this agreement,to �" g ause tai-.-� is de v''sions to or additions of the above improvement and to allo , : co,fii:*lions to be made to said extensions or additions,without liability on the pa a l" Y„ 6. No person, firm, or corporation shall be granted a permit to use or be authorized to tap into the facility during the period of 15 years from date hereof,without first paying unto the "CITY", in addition to any and all other costs, fee, and charges made or assessed for each tap, or for the main facilities constructed in connection therewith, or for street, signalization, and lighting improvements, the amount required by the provisions of this contract except such charges shall not apply to any extension of the main facility. All Page 3 PRM27-0027: WHARTON LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT amounts so received by the "CITY" shall be paid out by it unto the "DEVELOPER" under Paid the terms of this agreement within thirty(30)days after receipt thereof, less a 15% administration fee. Furthermore, in case any tap, hookup, or connection is made into any such contracted facility without such payment having been first made,the legislative body of the "CITY" may cause to have removed such unauthorized tap, hookup, or connection, and all connections or related accessories located in the facility or right-of-way, and dispose of such unauthorized material so removed, without any liability on the part of the "CITY"whatever. It is further agreed, and covenanted that upon expiration of the terms of this agreement; to wit: 15 years from date hereof,the "CITY" shall be under no f rther obligation to collect or make any further sums unto the"DEVELOPER". : » The decision of the Administrator of the Planning/Building/Pu p isik, s D V. t or his/her authorized representative in determining or com su - amount due fr,r 1AL benefited owner who wishes to hookup to such impro • yt � nal and co usive • in all respects. x s • 7. It is further agreed and understood that thments to be undertaken and paid for by the"DE have ,. _� - ,a;g to be connected with the a utilities/transport. Itf �, I "CIT r, ,id upon such connection and acceptance by the"CITY"throv,� t ,� id extension and/or improvement shall be and th P systems. �'.al u� ties or transportation s 8. Thi 'c• i e placed for record with the King County Auditor's Office within thirty execution of the agreement. 9. Before the"CITY"will collect any latecomer's fee,the"DEVELOPER"will transfer title to all of the improvements under the latecomer's agreement to the"CITY". The "DEVELOPER"will also assign to the"CITY"the benefit and right to the latecomer's fee should the"CITY"be unable to locate the"DEVELOPER"to tender any latecomer's fee that the"CITY"has received. The"DEVELOPER" shall be responsible for keeping the "CITY" informed of its correct mailing address. Should the"CITY" be unable to locate NIS Page 4 PRM27-0027: WHARTON LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT **awe the "DEVELOPER" in order to deliver a latecomer's fee, the "CITY" shall undertake an independent investigation to determine the location of the"DEVELOPER". Should the "CITY" after a good faith attempt to locate the"DEVELOPER"be unable to do so,then the latecomer's fee shall be placed in the Special Deposit Fund held by the"CITY"for two(2)years. At any time within the two-year period the "DEVELOPER"may receive the latecomer's fee, without interest, by applying to the "CITY" for that latecomer's fee. After the expiration of the two-year period, all rights of the"DEVELOPER"to that fee shall expire, and the"CITY" shall be deemed to be the owner of those funds. 10. When the"CITY" has received the funds for a latecomer's fee, it will forw As 'fe- to the"DEVELOPER"within thirty(30)days of receipt of the funds. F j� �y d by negotiable instrument, such as a check,will be deemed receive.,T! 0 dam delivery to the "CITY". Should the"CITY"fail to forwarr i .'tecomer's fee -41 "DEVELOPER"through the "CITY'S" sole negligent . 'Y"shall pa, e "DEVELOPER" interest on those monies a th- rate oft -1 = %)percent per annum. However, should the"DEVELOPER" no ^e ', JTY"t1 . of its current correct YG mailing address, or should the"DEVELO,i t*.of$4101,vo _ Igent and thus contribute to the failure of the CIS aver th �`� -ti: ,then no interest shall accrue on late payment of Cis comr > -e. 1 1. Whey 441th;* latecomer's agreement can be granted for a period • g lout noed A,A*.s. No extensions will be granted beyond the period of timet hed Council. The latecomer's agreement will expire at the end of the perio. • ished by the City Council. 12. By instituting the latecomer's agreement,the"CITY"does not agree to assume any responsibility to enforce the latecomer's agreement. The recorded latecomer agreement will be a matter of public record and will serve as a notice to the owners of the potential assessment should connection to the improvements be made. The assessment roll listing the affected properties and the pro-rata potential latecomer charge for each will be on file with the"CITY". The"DEVELOPER"has responsibility to monitor those parties Page 5 PRM27-0027: WHARTON LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT connecting to the improvement. Should the "CITY"become aware of such a connection, ' 44004. it will use its best efforts to collect the latecomer's fee, but shall not incur any liability should it inadvertently fail to collect the latecomer's fee. p , F: 1�'�� te d aux+ Page 6 PRM27-0027: WHARTON LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT CITY OF RENTON By: Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler By: Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON )SS ' COUNTY OF KING ) de:; ' On this day of ,20 , I certify , or have satisfactory evidence that Kathy Keolker-Wheeler is t t bac& .ppeared before me,and who signed this instrument,on oath stated z e=zed to execute • the instrument and acknowledged as the May, d, of')•,.10s4 to be the free and voluntary act of such party for th- d purposes me i:41.10;„the instrument. Notary Public in e�� ,the Stat=k3 ington Notary(Print) ' �„. My appointment:a et Are $ � Date kms' Page 7 Aumow PRM27-0027: WHARTON LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT DEVELOPER Itiai By: By: INDIVIDUAL FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON )ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary(Print) 7' Myappointment expires: � Dated: = REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT �� Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON )ss COUNTY OF KING � V I certify that I know or have satisfactory e��. � at f��1 � �L - t.igned this in"•4 i2; on oath stated that he/she/they was/were ;j y Z± 34( e the instrumel and acknowledged it as the z . and of to‘':'-'...iii."i:t, and voluntary act of such party/parties forth f.•.oses me ,,,,1.3',4!,i the instrument. No '. blic in:.:Ii * Washington ,I , t) ' , i s ' ent .� : ,,. - ��4 ? ?-. a;>, - off-.CKNOWLEDGMENT Notary Seal mus s` .ox • 1 Co ' ` ' ,GTON )SS ;' OF ..� G ) v. day of ,20 ,before me personally appeared to me known to be of the corporation that executed the within instrument,and acknowledge the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation,for the uses and purposes therein mentioned,and each on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary(Print) My appointment expires: Dated: Page 8 `%a ' EXHIBIT A WHARTON LATECOMER (PRM27-007) DEVELOPER PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That portion of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 10, which lies southerly of Block 2 of McClain Addition as per plat recorded in Volume 59 of Plats, page 61, records of King County, and which lies west of the southerly production the of east line of Lot 2 of said Block 2 and east of the southerly production the of west line of Lot 4 of said Block 2; LESS the South 30 feet thereof All situate in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. EXHIBIT B **100 WHARTON LATECOMER(PRM27-007) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcel 2 of King County Short Plat No. 477114, as recorded under King County Rec. No. 7804120882, records of King County, Washington. All situate in the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 10, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. EXHIBIT C 1 i j 5F 1215 5t. 5F 1215t 5t, — O v , DEVELOPER'S -Q PROPERTY N 5F I22nd 5t ''vi.. 102305-9394 S' _ 0 150 300 1 1 : 1800 6 o,, Technical Services Wharton Sewer Latecomer Agreement + ♦ Planning/Building/PublicrieAprl2 Works File No. LA-04-001 ,f,�"N■T`�,$ Printed April 2005 CITY OF RENTON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL LATECOMER DISTRICT WHARTON LATECOMER Type: Wastewater Utility Improvements Total Cost: $42,257.20 .44104 Assessment District PRM 27—0027: Collection Line: Total Cost: $42,257.20 Total Front Footage: 484 Cost Per FF $87.31 Property Name/Address of Tax Payer of Record Front Footage Front Footage Identification Assessment Parcel#1 JOHNSON KENNETH E 257 $22,438.22 14035 SE 122ND ST .x RENTON WA 98059 KC Tax Act# 102305-9394 Legal Description: PARCEL 2 KCSP 477114 REC AF#7804120882 SD PLAT 6 ? SW 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 LESS NLY 90 FT OF SLY 170 FT !I F. " 30 "4 Y 160 FT & LESS SLY 129.38 FT OF NLY 159.38 FT OF .4.,":1•."- •F ELY 16I ,. Developer's Property BOETCHER DANIEL JOHN °f 7; $•,7 .74 12202 140TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 KC Tax Act# 102305-9216 Legal Description: POR OF S 1/2 OF NW 1/4 OF '0.1P,4‘` • �� &BETW SIDE LNS OF LOT 4 BLK 2 S AD \ 30 FT THOF Developer's Property BOETC �� •I` 75 $6,548.12 12202 41.,511 -.. -40!� . "`, RENTO KCTaxAct# - „rs' '1: Legal Descrip ;r , POF • 'P OF NW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 LY S OF&BTW E&W LNS OF LOT 2 • BL - : LA *� ,DD LESS CO RD Developer's Prope - • Nt. OLA F 75 $6,548.12 :2 .E 122ND ST TON WA 98059 KC Tax Act# 102305-9242 Legal Description: POR OF NW 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 LY SLY OF LOT 3 BLK 2 MCCLAIN ADD& BETW SIDE LNS OF SD LOT PROD S LESS CO RD Page I of 1 J CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: .. Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 4/25/2005 Illow Dept/Div/Board.. EDNSP Staff Contact Mark Santos-Johnson Agenda Status Ext. 6584 Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Correspondence.. Agreements - Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre and Ordinance Parkside at 95 Burnett Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Issue Paper Study Sessions Resolutions (2) Information Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Planning and Development Committee Legal Dept Finance Dept Other IFiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... N/A Transfer/Amendment N/A Amount Budgeted N/A Revenue Generated N/A Total Project Budget N/A City Share Total Project.. N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: In December 2003 the Council established a property tax exemption incentive to encourage multi- family housing development in designated residential targeted areas. The City has received Multi- Family Housing Property Tax Exemption applications for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre and Parkside at 95 Burnett. As provided for in RMC 4-1-220, the EDNSP Administrator needs to approve or deny the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption applications within 90 days of receipt of the applications and, if approved, the Council needs to approve agreements that address the terms and conditions for each Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption project to receive a partial property tax exemption upon completion. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: EDNSP recommends that the Council: (1) concur with the staff recommendation to authorize the EDNSP Administrator to approve the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption applications for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre and Parkside at 95 Burnett; and (2) adopt two resolutions to approve Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreements that address the terms and conditions for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre and Parkside at 95 Burnett to receive a partial property tax exemption upon completion. CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: April 20, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: � Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator PN. Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: Mark Santos-Johnson, ext. 6584 SUBJECT: Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Applications and Agreements - Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre and r Parkside at 95 Burnett ISSUE: The City has received Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption applications for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre and Parkside at 95 Burnett. As provided for in RMC 4-1- 220, the EDNSP Administrator needs to approve or deny the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption applications within 90 days of receipt of the applications and, if approved, the Council needs to approve agreements that address the terms and conditions for each Multi- Family Housing Property Tax Exemption project to receive a partial property tax exemption upon completion. RECOMMENDATION: EDNSP recommends that the Council: (1) concur with the staff recommendation to authorize the EDNSP Administrator to approve the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption applications for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre and Parkside at 95 Burnett; and (2) adopt two resolutions to approve Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreements that address the terms and conditions for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre and Parkside at 95 Burnett to receive a partial property tax exemption upon completion. Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Applications and Agreements April 20,2005 Page 2 `err✓ BACKGROUND SUMMARY: As authorized by Chapter 84.14 RCW, the Council adopted ordinance 5061 on December 22, 2003 (codified in RMC 4-1-220) to establish a property tax exemption incentive to encourage multi-family housing development in the following designated residential targeted areas: • Within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in one of the following: the Center Suburban (CS) zone, the Residential Multi-Family Suburban Center (RM-C) zone, or the Residential 10 dwelling units/acre (R- 10) zone; or • In the Center Downtown (CD) zone, Residential Multi-Family Urban Center (RM-U) zone, Residential Multi-Family Traditional (RM-T) zone, or • In the Urban Center North District 1 (UCN-1) zone. As outlined in Chapter 84.14 RCW and RMC 4-1-220, the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption (MFHPTE) provision allows the value of qualified new housing construction to be exempt from ad valorem property taxation for ten successive years after completion of the project. However, the exemption does not include the value of the land, existing improvements or non-housing-related improvements (e.g., commercial space). The multi- family housing property tax exemption applies to all levels of the ad valorem property tax, low including the local jurisdiction, county, state and all local taxing districts. The multi-family housing property tax exemption is in addition to any other tax credits, grants or incentives provided by law for the multi-family housing. The City received a MFHPTE application for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre (Merrill Gardens) on February 17, 2005, and for Parkside at 95 Burnett on April 1, 2005. The Merrill Gardens project is a five-story, 155-unit multi-family retirement residence with outdoor terraces, plus one lower level of parking. The Parkside at 95 Burnett project is a four-story, 106-unit multi-family housing project (over two levels of parking) with 10 two- story street-level townhouses. Both properties are residential rental projects. Please see Attachments 1 and 2 for additional project information and the potential projected multi- family property tax exemption for both projects and Attachment 3 for a related site map. The estimated potential property tax savings related to the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption are approximately $153,172 per year ($1,531,716 for the ten-year period) for the Merrill Gardens project and $80,101 per year ($801,006 for the ten-year period) for the Parkside at 95 Burnett project. This equates to a potential property tax savings of approximately $988 per year per housing unit ($9,882 per housing unit for the ten-year period) for the Merrill Gardens project and $756 per year per housing unit ($7,557 per housing unit for the ten-year period) for the Parkside at 95 Burnett project. `4•1110, The City of Renton's portion of the above estimated potential property tax savings related to the MFHPTE is approximately $41,653 per year ($416,534 for the ten-year period) for the Merrill Gardens project and $21,783 per year ($217,825 for the ten-year period) for the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Applications and Agreements April 20,2005 Page 3 Parkside at 95 Burnett project. Although the City will likely receive additional property tax revenue from anticipated increased assessed values for the land as a result of the new construction on both sites, the City will not receive property tax revenue from the improvements themselves until after the ten-year property tax exemption period. As part of the City's MFHPTE application, applicants are invited to comment on whether the ability to obtain a property tax exemption for their project made a difference in their decision to develop the project. For the Merrill Gardens project, the applicant noted: " Yes. It made a significant difference in economic performance and was one deciding factor in our development decision." For the Parkside at 95 Burnett project, the applicant stated: "Current rental rates in Renton make it difficult to justify the construction of apartment projects that utilize structured parking. The property tax abatement makes this project economically feasible." Both projects paid a $500 initial application fee and satisfy the City's Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption eligibility requirements as outlined in RMC 4-1-220D: • The multi-family housing units are located in one or more new buildings for each project designed for permanent residential occupancy, each with four or more dwelling units. Now • The projects are located in the Center Downtown (CD) zone, a residential targeted area; and • The projects each consist of a minimum of 30 dwelling units'; As provided for in RMC 4-1-220F, the EDNSP Administrator needs to approve or deny the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption applications within 90 days of receipt of the applications and, if approved, the Council needs to approve agreements that address the terms and conditions for each Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption project to receive a partial property tax exemption upon completion. To move forward with both projects, the EDNSP Administrator is requesting: (1) the Council's concurrence to approve the Multi- Family Housing Property Tax Exemption applications for the Merrill Gardens and Parkside at 95 Burnett projects, and (2) the Council's adoption of two resolutions to approve MFHPTE Agreements for the Merrill Gardens and Parkside at 95 Burnett projects. Please see Attachment 4 for the draft resolutions (including the draft Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement) for the Merrill Gardens and Parkside at 95 Burnett projects. Since the late-1990s the private sector has constructed 295 new multi-family housing units in downtown Renton, including 258 apartment units (i.e., 110 units at the Renaissance Apartments, 90 units at the Metropolitan Place and 58 units at Burnett Station) and 37 ' As provided for in RMC 4-1-220D2.b, the EDNSP Administrator waived the mixed-use development 'Ve requirement for both projects. Although the projects are integral to the revitalized downtown Renton neighborhood and commercial business district, the new residential developments are not located inside the current retail corridor in downtown Renton. The Administrator determined that ground-floor retail in either of these locations would struggle and therefore detract from the quality of the projects. Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Applications and Agreements April 20,2005 Page 4 'err+° condominiums at the 55 Williams project. The Merrill Gardens and Parkside at 95 Burnett projects will provide an additional 261 new multi-family housing units downtown. The projects will expand the housing opportunities in downtown Renton, increase the residential population downtown to help support existing and future businesses in the area and, thereby, assist the City's efforts to make downtown Renton the heart of the City with a lively mix of residential, office, retail and entertainment opportunities. CONCLUSION: Renton's Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption program was established in December 2003, in part, to help increase housing opportunities in downtown Renton. The Merrill Gardens and Parkside at 95 Burnett projects will both complement the City's downtown revitalization efforts and further the City's 2005-2010 Business Plan Goals. Enc: Draft Resolutions(with draft Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreements) for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre and Parkside at 95 Burnett cc: Jay Covington, CAO Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Michael Wilson, Finance&IS Acting Administrator Gregg Zimmerman, P/B/PW Administrator Neil Watts, Development Services Director Now • Attachment 1 *timelerrill Gardens at Renton Centre Project Information and Potential Projected Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption April 20, 2005 Project Information (Based on Information Provided by Applicant) Project Name Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre Street Address 104 Burnett Avenue S Owner Merrill Gardens @ Renton Centre,LLC Residential Targeted Area Center Downtown(CD)zone Brief Project Description Five-story, 155-unit multi-family retirement residence with outdoor terraces,plus one lower level of parking Estimated Construction Start Date February 23,2005 Estimated Completion Date September 1,2006 Type of Project Residential Rental Number of Housing Units 155 Planned Building Improvements Total SF 193,959 Nitre Residential Occupancy SF 139,509 Residential Common Areas SF 21,882 Residential Parking SF 32,568 RetaiVCommercial SF 0 Retail/Commercial Parking SF 0 Residential Percentage of Project 100.00% RetaiVCommercial Percentage of Project 0.00% Parking Stalls Structured 46 Surface 0 Total 46 Projected Cost of Construction $17,210,159 Projected Cost of Construction per Housing Unit $111,033 Projected Cost of Construction per SF $88.73 Current Assessed Value(from King County Assessor's Office online records) Land SF 80,025 Current Assessed Value for Land(2005) $1,120,300 Current Assessed Value for Land per SF $14.00 Current Assessed Value for Improvements $676,300 (includes$398,400 from parcel with north portion of former McLendon's Hardware store) }"fir►' Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre 'rojected Property Tax Calculation Estimated Assessed Value for Land after $1,120,300 (Reflects current value,but subject to increase based on increased Construction improvements to site) Estimated Assessed Value for Improvements after $12,907,619 (Estimated by City at 75%of projected construction costs) Estimated Assessed Value for Improvements per $83,275 Housing Unit Breakdown of Projected Property Tax 2005 Rate Estimated Estimated PropertyTotal Estimated (Based on 2005 Property Tax Rates) per$1,000 of Estimated Property Tax for Tax for Property Tax Assessed Property Tax Residential Retail/Commercial (Land& Value for Land Improvements Improvements Improvements) City of Renton-General Levy 3.14843 $3,527 $40,639 N/A $44,166 City of Renton-Special Levy 0.07861 $88 $1,015 N/A $1,103 Total City of Renton property tax 301...223258732022491 .22704 $3,615 $41,653 WA $45,269 King County 1.38229 $1,549 $17,842 N/A $19,391 Port of Seattle 0.25321 $284 $3,268 N/A $3,552 Hospital District#1 0.09039 $101 $1,167 N/A $1,268 Renton School District#403 3.99250 $4,473 $51,534 N/A $56,006 State of Washington School Fund 2.68951 $3,013 6$$35$$24311,::975219366125478 34,715 N/A $37,728 Emergency Medical Service 0.23182 $260 $2,992 N/A $3,252 Sub-total other property tax 8.63972 $9,679 $111,518 N/A $121,197 Total Property Tax 11.86676 $13,294 $153,172 N/A $166,466 4. Estimated Annual Property Tax per Housing Unit $86 $988 N/A $1,074 o nti ojec ed lV Iia s •o•e' E•em• o 4 ° ,1-",,�s s sf tS s s e i s p ti £ ` �'." ?t ,�� .-*j , .: s s s4 4s : -4'.' , '�,'.z54 . '{ .-s t i 3'.. _- � vF 9� � � . --+.�- q ' ,. i. 1. �lI r? i - •l s ; ik ,� .s ` As s ‘ ? sm s ase aA ` sa Ya sir: ~. 1!:.-;AP,..!,,,, .� a� . 's;"St�s a a 3a a i',;.,,' - l Vis y s ,�" �'$1��e 1", £ F s a `s €. -,.. it t t a s' 'v, '�' s� a'"--:'�e'-i a $ ' � .. a ^!..11 "Et' ., i ,�!_ e, . - ..,..,.._ u..�.. .• cMa? �* 3 4,"l: ' , 1.SI -.d''''''''',.ii '�+,.� %'', +11�.L a a.. t'a 1 .� }� t� X ..1' x rt. xi ate, { . _. � #�� .: , �� ."[�V-'�.W r�'-�� ,. . .Y; .�a` "-fi-�. :E • 3._,...4, �. , :i-�' :�r.'':c„"�- -ar.w.-F>.. ,.. - c' Attachment 2 +11610,rarkside at 95 Burnett Project Information and Potential Projected Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption April 20, 2005 Project Information (Based on Information Provided by Applicant) Project Name Parkside at 95 Burnett Street Address 77&95 Burnett Avenue South Owner Parkside at 95 Burnett,LLC Residential Targeted Area Center Downtown(CD)zone Brief Project Description Four-story,106-unit multi-family housing project(over two levels of parking)with 10 two-story street-level townhouses Estimated Construction Start Date June 2005 Estimated Completion Date December 2005 Type of Project Residential Rental Number of Housing Units 106 Planned Building Improvements Total SF 142,356 Residential Occupancy SF 85,885 Residential Common Areas SF 14,511 Residential Parking SF 41,960 Retail/Commercial SF 0 Retail/Commercial Parking SF 0 Residential Percentage of Project 100.00% Retail/Commercial Percentage of Project 0.00% Parking Stalls Structured 175 Surface 0 Total 175 Projected Cost of Construction $9,000,000 Projected Cost of Construction per Housing Unit $84,906 Projected Cost of Construction per SF $63.22 Current Assessed Value(from King County Assessor's Office online records) Land SF 36,365 Current Assessed Value for Land(2005) $436,300 Current Assessed Value for Land per SF $12.00 Current Assessed Value for Improvements $0 Parkside at 95 Burnett `rojected Property Tax Calculation Nile Estimated Assessed Value for Land after $436,300 (Reflects current value,but subject to increase based on increased Construction improvements to site) Estimated Assessed Value for Improvements after $6,750,000 (Estimated by City at 75%of projected construction costs) Estimated Assessed Value for Improvements per $63,679 Housing Unit Breakdown of Projected Property Tax 2005 Rate Estimated Estimated Property Total Estimated (Based on 2005 Property Tax Rates) per$1,000 of Estimated Property Tax for Tax for Property Tax Assessed Property Tax Residential Retail/Commercial (Land& Value for Land Improvements Improvements Improvements) City of Renton-General Levy 3.14843 $1,374 $21,252 N/A $22,626 City of Renton-Special Levy 0.07861 $34 $531 N/A $565 Total City of Renton property tax 3.22704 $1,408 $21,783 WA $23,190 King County 1.38229 $603 $9,330 N/A $9,934 Port of Seattle 0.25321 $110 $$91$:387031090 1,709 N/A $1,820 Hospital District#1 0.09039 $39 $610 N/A $650 Renton School District#403 3.99250 $1,742 $26,949 N/A $28,691 State of Washington School Fund 2.68951 $1,173 $18,154 N/A $19,328 Emergency Medical Seryice 0.23182 $101 $1,565 N/A $1,666 Sub-total other property tax 8.63972 $3,770 $58,318 N/A $62,088 Total Property Tax 11.86676 $5,177 $80,101 N/A $85,278 Estimated Annual Property Tax per Housing Unit $49 $756 N/A $805 , . .„-t-r,..„,IF•••i=i..,k-i-,-,-ittt,'''.„1-;,--'';jcttl;:.3-tt';T., k3S41't15t.tf-'ft'4ifel ;::-i':;;:;::;':i::'';.:i'/::';;';' Fug gy �- �` � a ' �z a 1.7,,...:*-1';'.‘.*--‘.:*C."--i.- l'''tr.-.---111, �., . �.- cam . .a ...1�4`_a... s ° r ��16'4 �' ��' �f � ', R.5( � - � • • ; •al � 1 *� � � '.� ;s��4Fes` < Qf!�sr} _ d7: � ! �� ta €n - �V � .=.-r,4:1;,'"*.':' ;§ ,t�� 1 ir € '?t f�' 'r•,,,-;„:4 'F d'iOi` ns `3r-._� - - Attachment 3 _ , Ilk $ -,-A771,,i.,• -.0 .4,"ft.k.,',I'"',30;1111144 LAKE WA,HINGION_ T li mi re no RBI mi.11111p m t V a a ri.4 -.!=z: r I ,47,••i--L.--IT m,_ ri'..,t-,z.,11.,.: .,4 VI IR 13-ft Ihrfor Iii 1 2.-.1 .,_ ram me I Oil -' mft="1 I iii li pill MINIM 0 1 II IMME=M Ilw lime 1:0 , _ _ ,,,---,2 - y,,, IP 3%. 1--nuffa rodr..4 slum ....,../... „,:v, ,,,:,,,. ,,,..-,,,, - .. .. 4 di kt rigarAmmlbl nIiIIIEIP":ii 71/ ,,,,4!,. .,_,,,,.:_..; ,‘;.! ;,.;:r.44.-i ' 1111 " Ltr-&-'^---.''''1--' ',--"---M I *An my - slim=c.:r•i-.7:r5:1-17:i'l'Fi." ---;:-,,,,Fre-v--- _±_. 11144fa 01 mil 6.111.M. ',".''1442Ed glizy,IA:-,iAti,4-- d NI / 1'r-I-NI•— 1"1"4-41 N,_i-Al 711F4:'-7r11744,EA in A i Imill , ... * re----.......;?. .tfl,---,1g,-ri_.4,,r',!,i-i-4.11 ......s1100,. 9 f °° Illti\k alk:7 v---,-4-"`,4445,-,-,-,1 Fri 2 11211%11-IFI i„tanie•= ,::‘,-iNk,',---'1AY..,_-..y7r.V-7'.,3 Ill 6 lit \ /'. ' '1,,I A\*'/<" .,A• ....7=Fro....Ars:84411:::;::::!!:::Esii..41;:iim...—::::::iii.:11.reits!,,i1-1,fi:,,::14,,,_•4ii....,s.:; 1 ::,rii..14iit1011!_eus..... iiisr:III!:1 ivicari:p „ 1,,, -,,-, „„ immomm I 1 l' ", 1 \:. . 'I _ l.\ \ 11 '. l"' =.11j ma tiiIiin11:II Si 91.4 g-.,i1 . r. re rei 2 Ll f.ii Mr— na .•4 leo - --"-• • i. 4.0 IN ' "l• l'''. LI: 1"firilr"on:11:11: ;`7“1 =ir IC Po gee c f.-1141911 6 IN. ow.,,. . . % I 7,.. ....a ..,'(' MN 610 its INV ift mo.. mil NB ill 14-IV•Ii miTilltigli ` '' ' ' .'-,14 'j \114 411 - 11. So•••• •q NI . INNIM -4•1111-080, *:44 Ir-' 441401 0 t011 All IIIIIS i .' Me 0 4.411 "4°'I.• 44 ' IIP Agfa Ell 111 Imillillia'4.4 IA 101.41 111441:111 161111:11:1:::"--- rillaral ... . 4 IP Ma wol % SIP OP 0 kle 5611-=--- ' NIL .)111\.. ..% 44" . **•-• v4.,/c1-,- , ,:::,-- =NI LEI I t IS ill E• likr:-Is Detail Map \ ii nr=LI- - - 1 • 1 Fir illiNN#IN Iv 1 \ .1.l,ff. ."-=WA`'''it--- Yft II \ ,., _ _..... I A ,1INI EM III1= glim• ,=;.==:,.!=r;_r=m,- 3-.....-...= 1 'r- ''''"''' ".-- I N 41h 4 11111111 11 1 al '-'ea ma ea sl ;,..,--- , -•um am mg a: ==•• wm7 i ini I Er:----===.=-= or-••=,"k -- MI MIIII6 ill Merrill , ja====m2=2 1 \ F'-'47.WI 13 174 i ling' At t 4 Parkside at iTi Gardens A i.1,.. .mv: Ell Illiii =711111111 7,4 ,,,,. 1 ,.BE rat sr.::m gun==._Er:imurire. • I: 95 Burnetj RM-U iiiI14 w•iiii ii II gE,-5 IF:iii.= . _..e,-.3 BE R. .. tri e S Airport Wo LT-_ -N. wimlimil, -.....isaim..,- =e,pro iriali ai 1 Tobin inieh, , lino=unEE3 tommilo 'VA Is-co it=us ns IP' toil Ilan II ,m IN mai WI mEtnit adliiiil _ _ •44 -4 ra Ira pc mg F- 1 1111 Ls I k in No Ens= — 1 1%,N..= •••••rmip, 10 1 ill i MEE 1E111 totems ' Ai ' 'im IV' am ,.... - • 1 ,,, ..= : 4 `05- • iii II - - _ A Mi R4 MI INN MI INZI Ell ME e i MI IIR 11111 I MI6" .11 ...Tr _,DiLia Iv'—mor'.3.1.s..'MIR . - See Detail - . Arits . m ;ow Mom No. iim, m<MIR .. 111111mm MI MI 411211 ty,a.7.111,1e.e..4 ME g NM 13 -. ... IP11111111111111111.63 111. WWI i\016 mum.MOM = INI 3 Kim g 4 Mil= MI -- Immill.. lin IIMIE • _ _ ;VI.... '411111111 FZ.° 1111 C D IN 1. iwi .1i......1, \ ma gum S 2nd St mil .. -... IC.4 : k-gt 04:1. 1111111 Ili MEI 1111 Wo.... re-- - Mik.1 a_ stirf up um...mom mi p4 N..A17.c\ _ ziAi)r-d 4 mftzmE--111 tea .1D111N.1.,. 1 — MI Proposed Projects for Multi-Family Housing i.Property Tax Exemption Residential Targeted Areas: '* NM Center Downtown h.r ....., Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning Pl§l Center Village . . Alex Pletsch.Admaustrator sano Urban Center- North1 G Del Ro e 1-ii\s ' 14 Apnl 2005 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ,,, RESOLUTION NO. -DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON, APPROVING A MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT FOR THE MERRILL GARDENS AT RENTON CENTRE PROJECT. WHEREAS, the City has an interest in stimulating new construction of multi-family housing in selected residential targeted areas to increase housing opportunities, to assist in achieving the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan and to reduce development pressures on single-family residential neighborhoods; and WHEREAS,the City has, pursuant to Chapter 84.14 RCW, designated several residential targeted areas for the allowance of a limited property tax exemption for new multi- family residential housing; and WHEREAS,the City has, through Ordinance No. 5061, enacted RMC 4-1-220 whereby Now property owners in residential targeted areas may qualify for a limited property tax exemption for new multi-family residential housing; and WHEREAS,the Merrill Gardens @ Renton Centre,LLC (referred to hereafter as the "Owner") has submitted a complete application for a multi-family housing tax exemption; WHEREAS,the Owner proposes to construct the Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre project with one hundred fifty five (155)new units of multi-family housing at 104 Burnett Avenue S,Renton,Washington, in the Center Downtown (CD)zone residential targeted area (referred to hereafter as the "Project"); and WHEREAS,the City's Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator has determined that the Project, if developed as proposed, will satisfy the requirements for the multi-family housing property tax exemption; and RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the Project will expand the housing opportunities available in Downtown Renton; and WHEREAS, the City's multi-family housing property tax exemption program requires the Owner to enter into a contract with the City regarding the terms and conditions of the Project; NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement attached as Exhibit A is hereby approved. SECTION II. The Mayor of Renton is hereby authorized and directed to execute the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement for the Project in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A with the Owner or its heirs, successors and assigns that own the Project, which agreement shall assure the development of the Project in accord with '141110 certain terms and conditions to allow the Owner to secure a limited property tax exemption for the Project's qualifying improvements. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2005. Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor 114400, 2 RESOLUTION NO. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Exhibit A: Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre Niw sires 3 RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT A- DRAFT MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT FOR MERRILL GARDENS AT RENTON CENTRE THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of , 200 by and between MERRILL GARDENS @ RENTON CENTRE, LLC (hereinafter referred to as the "Applicant"), and the CITY OF RENTON, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City"). Recitals. 1. Applicant has applied to the City for a limited property tax exemption as provided for in Chapter 84.14 RCW and RMC 4-1-220 for multi-family housing residential rental housing in the Center Downtown (CD) zone residential targeted area and the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator has approved the application; and 2. Applicant has submitted to the City preliminary site plans, floor plans and elevations for Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre with one hundred fifty five (155) new multi-family housing units (hereinafter referred to as the "Project") on property situated at 104 Burnett Avenue S, Renton, Washington, and more fully described in Exhibit A attached hereto, (hereinafter referred to as the "Property"); _r, and 3. Applicant is the owner of the Property; and 4. The City has determined that the Project will, if developed as proposed, satisfy the requirements for a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and Applicant do mutually agree as follows: 1. Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption City agrees, upon execution of this Agreement following approval by the City Council, to issue a Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption, which conditional certificate shall expire three (3) years from the date of approval of this Agreement by the City Council, unless extended by the Administrator of the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department (or any other City office, department or agency that shall succeed to its functions), or his or her designee, (hereafter referred to as "Administrator") as provided in RMC 4-1-2201. 2. Agreement to Construct Multi-Family Housing. a. Applicant agrees to construct the Project on the Property substantially as described in the site plans, floor plans, and elevations on file with the City's Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department or its functional • successor (hereafter referred to as "Department") as of the date of the City Council's approval of this Agreement, subject to such modifications thereto as may be required to .%w' comply with applicable codes and ordinances; provided, that in no event shall such construction provide fewer than thirty (30) new multi-family housing dwelling units designed for permanent residential occupancy. b. Applicant agrees to construct the Project on the Property to comply with all applicable zoning requirements, land use regulations, and building and housing code requirements, including but not limited to the City's development regulations in Title IV of the RMC and the City's applicable design standards and guidelines. The Applicant further agrees that approval of this Agreement by the City Council, its execution by the Mayor, or issuance of a Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption by the City pursuant to RMC 4-1-220F3 in no way constitutes approval of proposed improvements on the Property with respect to applicable provisions of the City's development regulations included in Title IV of the RMC or any other applicable regulation or obligates the City to approve proposed improvements to the Property. c. Applicant agrees that the Project will be completed within three years from the date of approval of this Agreement by the Council, unless extended by the Administrator for cause as provided in RMC 4-1-2201. 3. Requirements for Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. Applicant may, upon completion of the Project and upon issuance by the City of %✓ a temporary certificate of occupancy, or a permanent certificate of occupancy if no temporary certificate is issued, request a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. The request shall be in writing directed to the Administrator and be accompanied by the following: a. A statement of expenditures made with respect to each multi-family housing unit and the total expenditures made with respect to the entire Project and Property; b. A description of the completed work and a statement of qualification for the multi-family housing property tax exemption; c. A statement that the Project was completed within the required three-year period or any authorized extension and documentation that the Project was completed in compliance with the terms of this Agreement; and d. Any such further information that the Administrator deems necessary or useful to evaluate the Project's eligibility for the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. Resolution No. Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre 2 • 4. Agreement to Issue Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. The City agrees to file a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption with the King County Assessor within forty (40) days of submission by the Applicant of all materials required by paragraph 3 above, if Applicant has: a. Successfully completed the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and RMC 4-1-220; b. Filed a request with the City for a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption with the Administrator and submitted the materials described in Paragraph 3 above ; c. Paid the City a fee in the amount of two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00); and d. Met all other requirements provided in RMC 4-1-220 for issuance of the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. 5. Annual Certification. Within thirty (30) days after the first anniversary of the date the City filed the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption and each year thereafter for a period of ten (10) years, Applicant agrees to file a certification or declaration with the Administrator, verified upon oath or affirmation, with respect to the accuracy of the information 'err provided therein, containing the following: a. A statement of the occupancy and vacancy of the multi-family housing units during the previous year; b. A certification that the multi-family housing units, Project and Property have not changed use since the date of filing of the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption, c. A statement that the multi-family housing units, Project and Property continue to be in compliance with this Agreement and the requirements of RMC 4-1- 220; d A description of any improvements or changes to the Project made after the filing of the Final Certificate or the most recent certification; and e. Any such further information that the Administrator deems necessary or useful to evaluate eligibility for the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. 6. No Violations for Duration of Exemption. For the duration of the property tax exemption granted under RMC 4-1-220, Applicant agrees that the Project and the Property will have no violations of applicable Resolution No. Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre 3 zoning requirements, land use regulations, and building and housing code requirements, including but not limited to the development regulations in Title IV of the '4110" RMC, for which the Planning, Building and Public Works Department or its functional successor shall have issued a notice of violation, citation or other notification that is not resolved by a certificate of compliance, certificate of release, withdrawal or otherwise, within the time period for compliance, if any, provided in such notice of violation, citation or other notification or any extension of the time period for compliance granted by the Planning, Building and Public Works Department. 7. Notification of Transfer of Interest or Change in Use. Applicant agrees to notify the Administrator within thirty (30) days of any transfer of Applicant's ownership interest in the Project, the Property or any improvements made to the Property. Applicant further agrees to notify the Administrator and the King County Assessor within sixty (60) days of any change of use of any or all of the multi- family housing units on the Property to another use. Applicant acknowledges that such a change in use may result in cancellation of the property tax exemption and imposition of additional taxes, interest and penalty pursuant to State law. 8. Cancellation of Exemption - Appeal. a. The City reserves the right to cancel the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption if at any time the multi-family housing units, the Project or the Property no longer complies with the terms of this Agreement or with the requirements of RMC 4-1- ''4110, 220, or for any other reason no longer qualifies for a property tax exemption. b. If the property tax exemption is canceled for non-compliance, Applicant acknowledges that state law requires that an additional real property tax is to be imposed in the amount of: [a} the difference between the property tax paid and the property tax that would have been paid if it had included the value of the nonqualifying improvements, dated back to the date that the improvements became nonqualifying; [b] a penalty of 20% of the difference calculated under paragraph (a) of this paragraph 8; [c] interest at the statutory rate on delinquent property taxes and penalties, calculated from the date the tax would have been due without penalty if the improvements had been assessed without regard to the exemptions provided by Chapter 84.14 RCW and RMC 4-1-220. Applicant acknowledges that, pursuant to RCW 84.14.110, any additional tax owed, together with interest and penalty, become a lien on the Property and attach at the time the Property or portion of the Property is removed from multi- family housing use, and that the lien has priority to and must be fully paid and satisfied before a recognizance, mortgage, judgment, debt, obligation, or responsibility to or with which the Property may become charged or liable. Applicant further acknowledges that RCW 84.14.110 provides that any such lien may be foreclosed in the manner provided by law for foreclosure of liens for delinquent real property taxes. 'ti.r Resolution No. Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre 4 c. Upon determining that a tax exemption is to be canceled, the Administrator shall notify the property owner by certified mail, return receipt requested. some The property owner may appeal the determination in accordance with RMC 4-1-220L2. 9. Amendments. No modification of this Agreement shall be made unless mutually agreed upon by the parties in writing and unless in compliance with the provisions of RMC 4-1-220H, including but not limited to the Applicant's payment of a two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) contract amendment fee. 10. Binding Effect. The provisions, covenants, and conditions contained in this Agreement are binding upon the parties hereto and their legal heirs, representatives, successors, assigns, and subsidiaries. 11. Recording of Agreement. The Administrator shall cause to be recorded at the Applicant's expense, or require Applicant to record, in the real property records of the King County Department of Records and Elections, this Agreement and any other documents as will identify such terms and conditions of eligibility for exemption as the Administrator deems appropriate for recording. 12. Audits and Inspection of Records. Applicant understands and agrees that the City has the right to audit or review appropriate records to assure compliance with this Agreement and RMC 4-1-220 and to perform evaluations of the effectiveness of the multi-family housing property tax exemption program. Applicant agrees to make appropriate records available for review or audit upon seven days' written notice by the City. 13. Notices. All notices to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed given when hand-delivered within normal business hours, when actually received by facsimile transmission, or two business days after having been mailed, postage prepaid, to the parties hereto at the addresses set forth below, or to such other place as a party may from time to time designate in writing. err Resolution No. Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre 5 APPLICANT: Merrill Gardens @ Renton Centre, LLC 1938 Fairview Avenue E Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98102 Phone: 206-676-5300 Fax: 206-676-5322 Attn.: Steven Friedman CITY: City of Renton Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Phone: (425) 430-6592 Fax: (425) 430-7300 Attention: Administrator 14. Severability. In the event that any term or clause of this Agreement conflicts with applicable law, such conflict shall not affect other terms of this Agreement which can be given effect without the conflicting terms or clause, and to this end, the terms of the Agreement are declared to be severable. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year written above. MERRILL GARDENS @ RENTON CENTRE, LLC CITY OF RENTON [ENTER name, title, entity & address of applicant] Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Attorney Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk slow Resolution No. Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre 6 MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY _ TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A: That portion of Henry Tobin Donation Claim No. 37, Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, described as follows: Commencing at the northwest corner of Block 24, Town of Renton Plat, which corner bears south 89°07' east a distance of 30 feet and north 0°46' east a distance of 530 feet from the monument at the intersection of Second Avenue and Burnett Street; Thence north 0°46' east a distance of 150 feet; Thence south 89°07' east a distance of 115 feet; Thence south 0°46' west a distance of 150 feet; Thence north 89°07' west a distance of 115 feet to the point of beginning; ALSO, Lots 1 through 4, inclusive, and Lots 16 and 17, Block 24, Town of Renton, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 1 of Plats, page 135, in King County, Washington; EXCEPT the east 5 feet of said Lots 1 through 3 conveyed to the City of Renton for alley purposes by deed recorded under Recording Numbers 2117471 and 2117484; AND EXCEPT the north 10 feet of the south 30 feet of said Lot 3 conveyed for alley by Recording Number 7811200482; TOGETHER WITH those portions of the alley vacated by City of Renton Ordinance Number 3272, recorded under Recording Number 7812140796 adjoining or abutting thereon, which attached to said premises by operation of law. PARCEL B: Lot 18, Block 24, Town of Renton, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 1 of Plats, page 135, in King County, Washington; EXCEPT the west 5 feet thereof conveyed to the City of Renton for alley purposes by deed recorded under Recording Number 2117478. fin' Resolution No. Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Exhibit A-Legal Description Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre PARCEL C: That portion of the Henry Tobin Donation Land Claim No. 37, Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the east line of Burnett Street 150 feet north of the northwest corner of Block 24, Town of Renton, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 1 of Plats, page 135, in King County, Washington; Thence east parallel with the north line of said Block 24 a distance of 115 feet; Thence north parallel with the east line of Burnett Street 50 feet; Thence west parallel with the north line of said Block 24 a distance of 115 feet to the east line of Burnett Street; Thence south on the east line of Burnett Street 50 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL D: That portion of Henry Tobin Donation Land Claim No. 37, Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning on the east margin of Burnett Street in the City of Renton north 0°46' east 730 feet from the centerline of Second Avenue; Thence south 89°07' east 115 feet; Thence north 00°46' east 75 feet; Thence south 89°07' west 115 feet; Thence south 0°46' west 75 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL E: That portion of Henry Tobin Donation Land Claim No. 37, Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, described as follows: Commencing at the northwest corner of Block 24, Town of Renton, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 1 of Plats, page 135, in King County, Washington, which corner bears south 89°07' east 30 feet and north 0°46' east 530 feet from the monument at the intersection of Second Avenue and Burnett Street; Thence north 0°46' east 275 feet to the point of beginning; Thence north 0°46' east 76.52 feet; Thence south 89°07' east 115 feet; Thence south 0°46' west 76.52 feet; Thence north 89°07' west 115 feet to the point of beginning. Resolution No. Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre ii CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ..r RESOLUTION NO. -DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON, APPROVING A MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT FOR THE PARKSIDE AT 95 BURNETT PROJECT. WHEREAS,the City has an interest in stimulating new construction of multi-family housing in selected residential targeted areas to increase housing opportunities, to assist in achieving the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan and to reduce development pressures on single-family residential neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the City has, pursuant to Chapter 84.14 RCW, designated several residential targeted areas for the allowance of a limited property tax exemption for new multi- family residential housing; and WHEREAS, the City has, through Ordinance No. 5061, enacted RMC 4-1-220 whereby property owners in residential targeted areas may qualify for a limited property tax exemption for new multi-family residential housing; and WHEREAS,the Parkside at 95 Burnett LLC (referred to hereafter as the "Owner") has submitted a complete application for a multi-family housing tax exemption; WHEREAS,the Owner proposes to construct the Parkside at 95 Burnett project with one hundred six (106) new units of multi-family housing at 77 and 95 Burnett Avenue South, Renton, Washington, in the Center Downtown (CD)zone residential targeted area(referred to hereafter as the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the City's Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator has determined that the Project, if developed as proposed, will satisfy the requirements for the multi-family housing property tax exemption; and RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the Project will expand the housing opportunities available in Downtown ' Renton; and WHEREAS, the City's multi-family housing property tax exemption program requires the Owner to enter into a contract with the City regarding the terms and conditions of the Project; NOW, THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement attached as Exhibit A is hereby approved. SECTION II. The Mayor of Renton is hereby authorized to execute the Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement for the Project in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A with the Owner or its heirs, successors and assigns that own the Project, which agreement shall assure the development of the Project in accord with certain terms ,100,► and conditions to allow the Owner to secure a limited property tax exemption for the Project's qualifying improvements. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2005. Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor 4410, 2 RESOLUTION NO. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Exhibit A: Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement for Parkside at 95 Burnett 3 RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT A- DRAFT ate,, MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT FOR PARKSIDE AT 95 BURNETT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of , 200 by and between PARKSIDE AT BURNETT, LLC (hereinafter referred to as the "Applicant"), and the CITY OF RENTON, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City"). Recitals. 1. Applicant has applied to the City for a limited property tax exemption as provided for in Chapter 84.14 RCW and RMC 4-1-220 for multi-family housing residential rental housing in the Center Downtown zone residential targeted area and the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Administrator has approved the application; and 2. Applicant has submitted to the City preliminary site plans, floor plans and elevations for Parkside at 95 Burnett with one hundred six (106) new multi-family housing units (hereinafter referred to as the "Project") on property situated at 77 and 95 Burnett Avenue S, Renton, Washington, and more fully described in Exhibit A attached hereto, (hereinafter referred to as the "Property"); and 3. Applicant is the owner of the Property; and 4. The City has determined that the Project will, if developed as proposed, satisfy the requirements for a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and Applicant do mutually agree as follows: 1. Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption City agrees, upon execution of this Agreement following approval by the City Council, to issue a Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption, which conditional certificate shall expire three (3) years from the date of approval of this Agreement by the City Council, unless extended by the Administrator of the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department (or any other City office, department or agency that shall succeed to its functions), or his or her designee, (hereafter referred to as "Administrator") as provided in RMC 4-1-2201. 2. Agreement to Construct Multi-Family Housing. a. Applicant agrees to construct the Project on the Property substantially as described in the site plans, floor plans, and elevations on file with the City's Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department or its functional successor (hereafter referred to as "Department") as of the date of the City Council's approval of this Agreement, subject to such modifications thereto as may be required to comply with applicable codes and ordinances; provided, that in no event shall such construction provide fewer than thirty (30) new multi-family housing dwelling units designed for permanent residential occupancy. b. Applicant agrees to construct the Project on the Property to comply with all applicable zoning requirements, land use regulations, and building and housing code requirements, including but not limited to the City's development regulations in Title IV of the RMC and the City's applicable design standards and guidelines. The Applicant further agrees that approval of this Agreement by the City Council, its execution by the Mayor, or issuance of a Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption by the City pursuant to RMC 4-1-220F3 in no way constitutes approval of proposed improvements on the Property with respect to applicable provisions of the City's development regulations included in Title IV of the RMC or any other applicable regulation or obligates the City to approve proposed improvements to the Property. c. Applicant agrees that the Project will be completed within three years from the date of approval of this Agreement by the Council, unless extended by the Administrator for cause as provided in RMC 4-1-2201. 3. Requirements for Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. Applicant may, upon completion of the Project and upon issuance by the City of a temporary certificate of occupancy, or a permanent certificate of occupancy if no temporary certificate is issued, request a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. The request shall be in writing directed to the Administrator and be accompanied by the following: a. A statement of expenditures made with respect to each multi-family housing unit and the total expenditures made with respect to the entire Project and Property; b. A description of the completed work and a statement of qualification for the multi-family housing property tax exemption; c. A statement that the Project was completed within the required three-year period or any authorized extension and documentation that the Project was completed in compliance with the terms of this Agreement; and d. Any such further information that the Administrator deems necessary or useful to evaluate the Project's eligibility for the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. Resolution No Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Parkside at 95 Burnett 2 • 4. Agreement to Issue Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. %r► The City agrees to file a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption with the King County Assessor within forty (40) days of submission by the Applicant of all materials required by paragraph 3 above, if Applicant has: a. Successfully completed the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and RMC 4-1-220; b. Filed a request with the City for a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption with the Administrator and submitted the materials described in Paragraph 3 above ; c. Paid the City a fee in the amount of two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00); and d. Met all other requirements provided in RMC 4-1-220 for issuance of the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. 5. Annual Certification. Within thirty (30) days after the first anniversary of the date the City filed the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption and each year thereafter for a period of ten (10) years, Applicant agrees to file a certification or declaration with the Administrator, verified upon oath or affirmation, with respect to the accuracy of the information `'err provided therein, containing the following: a. A statement of the occupancy and vacancy of the multi-family housing units during the previous year; b. A certification that the multi-family housing units, Project and Property have not changed use since the date of filing of the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption, c. A statement that the multi-family housing units, Project and Property continue to be in compliance with this Agreement and the requirements of RMC 4-1- 220; d A description of any improvements or changes to the Project made after the filing of the Final Certificate or the most recent certification; and e. Any such further information that the Administrator deems necessary or useful to evaluate eligibility for the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. 6. No Violations for Duration of Exemption. For the duration of the property tax exemption granted under RMC 4-1-220, Applicant agrees that the Project and the Property will have no violations of applicable Resolution No Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Parkside at 95 Burnett 3 zoning requirements, land use regulations, and building and housing code requirements, including but not limited to the development regulations in Title IV of the 14100 RMC, for which the Planning, Building and Public Works Department or its functional successor shall have issued a notice of violation, citation or other notification that is not resolved by a certificate of compliance, certificate of release, withdrawal or otherwise, within the time period for compliance, if any, provided in such notice of violation, citation or other notification or any extension of the time period for compliance granted by the Planning, Building and Public Works Department. 7. Notification of Transfer of Interest or Change in Use. Applicant agrees to notify the Administrator within thirty (30) days of any transfer of Applicant's ownership interest in the Project, the Property or any improvements made to the Property. Applicant further agrees to notify the Administrator and the King County Assessor within sixty (60) days of any change of use of any or all of the multi- family housing units on the Property to another use. Applicant acknowledges that such a change in use may result in cancellation of the property tax exemption and imposition of additional taxes, interest and penalty pursuant to State law. 8. Cancellation of Exemption - Appeal. a. The City reserves the right to cancel the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption if at any time the multi-family housing units, the Project or the Property no longer complies with the terms of this Agreement or with the requirements of RMC 4-1- '"400 220, or for any other reason no longer qualifies for a property tax exemption. b. If the property tax exemption is canceled for non-compliance, Applicant acknowledges that state law requires that an additional real property tax is to be imposed in the amount of: [a} the difference between the property tax paid and the property tax that would have been paid if it had included the value of the nonqualifying improvements, dated back to the date that the improvements became nonqualifying; [b] a penalty of 20% of the difference calculated under paragraph (a) of this paragraph 8; [c] interest at the statutory rate on delinquent property taxes and penalties, calculated from the date the tax would have been due without penalty if the improvements had been assessed without regard to the exemptions provided by Chapter 84.14 RCW and RMC 4-1-220. Applicant acknowledges that, pursuant to RCW 84.14.110, any additional tax owed, together with interest and penalty, become a lien on the Property and attach at the time the Property or portion of the Property is removed from multi- family housing use, and that the lien has priority to and must be fully paid and satisfied before a recognizance, mortgage, judgment, debt, obligation, or responsibility to or with which the Property may become charged or liable. Applicant further acknowledges that RCW 84.14.110 provides that any such lien may be foreclosed in the manner provided by law for foreclosure of liens for delinquent real property taxes. Resolution No Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Parkside at 95 Burnett 4 c. Upon determining that a tax exemption is to be canceled, the Administrator shall notify the property owner by certified mail, return receipt requested. *gime The property owner may appeal the determination in accordance with RMC 4-1-220L2. 9. Amendments. No modification of this Agreement shall be made unless mutually agreed upon by the parties in writing and unless in compliance with the provisions of RMC 4-1-220H, including but not limited to the Applicant's payment of a two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) contract amendment fee. 10. Binding Effect. The provisions, covenants, and conditions contained in this Agreement are binding upon the parties hereto and their legal heirs, representatives, successors, assigns, and subsidiaries. 11. Recording of Agreement. The Administrator shall cause to be recorded at the Applicant's expense, or require Applicant to record, in the real property records of the King County Department of Records and Elections, this Agreement and any other documents as will identify such terms and conditions of eligibility for exemption as the Administrator deems appropriate for recording. 12. Audits and Inspection of Records. Applicant understands and agrees that the City has the right to audit or review appropriate records to assure compliance with this Agreement and RMC 4-1-220 and to perform evaluations of the effectiveness of the multi-family housing property tax exemption program. Applicant agrees to make appropriate records available for review or audit upon seven days' written notice by the City. 13. Notices. All notices to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed given when hand-delivered within normal business hours, when actually received by facsimile transmission, or two business days after having been mailed, postage prepaid, to the parties hereto at the addresses set forth below, or to such other place as a party may from time to time designate in writing. Niwir Resolution No Exhibit A-DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Parkside at 95 Burnett 5 h APPLICANT: Parkside at 95 Burnett 'k✓' 2256 38th Place East Seattle, WA 98112 Phone: 206-322-1381 Fax: 206-568-8589 Attn: Judith C. Nielsen, Manager CITY: City of Renton Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Phone: (425) 430-6592 Fax: (425) 430-7300 Attention: Administrator 14. Severability. In the event that any term or clause of this Agreement conflicts with applicable law, such conflict shall not affect other terms of this Agreement which can be given effect without the conflicting terms or clause, and to this end, the terms of the Agreement are declared to be severable. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year written above. err. Parkside at 95 Burnett, LLC CITY OF RENTON Judith C. Nielsen, Manager Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Attorney Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk Resolution No Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Parkside at 95 Burnett 6 MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION 77 Burnett Avenue South That portion of the Henry H. Tobin donation land claim no. 37, Parcel B of Renton Land Use Action #04-018-LLA Recording #20040413900018SDLLA Located in S.E. 1/4 of the N.E. 1/4 section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, in King County, Washington. 95 Burnett Avenue South That portion of the donation land claim of Diana B. Smithers, family of Diana B. Tobin, a widow, and the heirs at law of Henry H. Tobin, deceased, designated as claim no. 37 located in parts of sections 17, 18 and 20, Township 23 North, Range 5, Willamette Meridian, in King County, Washington, defined as follows: Beginning at a point 60 feet west of the northwest corner of Block 24 of the town of Renton, according to the plat thereof, recorded in volume 1 of plats, page 135 in King County, Washington; thence south 16.5 feet; thence west 109.5 feet to the Northern Pacific Railroad right-of-way; thence north along the east line of said right-of-way 300 feet; thence east 109.5 feet; thence south 283.5 feet to the point of beginning; except Nine the north 62 feet thereof. Now Resolution No. Exhibit A- DRAFT Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Agreement Exhibit A—Legal Description Parkside at 95 Burnett CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: a/ 'in I Submitting Data: For Agenda of: i Dept/Div/Board.. Finance&IS Department April 25,2005 Staff Contact Michael Wilson,Interim Finance/IS Agenda Status Administrator Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Bad Debt Write Off Ordinance Resolution Old Business Exhibits: New Business Study Sessions 1. Issue Memorandum Information 2. Listing of Outstanding Charges Deemed Uncollectible Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept Refer to Finance Committee of May 9,2005 Finance Dept Other Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project SUMMARY OF ACTION: In accordance with Policy& Procedure 220-03,Finance staff submits to the Council's Finance Committee a detailed list of outstanding bad debt totaling$52,524.22. These debt obligations have been deemed uncollectible. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Finance staff recommends that the Council approve the write off the detailed bad debt. 111101 H:\FINANCE\ADMINSUP\01_AgendaBills\Bad Debt April 2005.doc CITY OF RENTON FINANCE & INFORMATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: April 18, 2005 TO: Tern Briere, Council President City Councilmembers VIA: ,.) Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor ;f -cW\ FROM: Michael R. Wilson, Interim Finance&IS Administ at ^� SUBJECT: Bad Debt Write Off ISSUE: The Finance staff hereby submits its request to write off the current annual bad debt totaling $52,524.22. Detailed spreadsheets of this debt are attached. A summary of the bad debt totals follow: Police $15,279.20 Renton Municipal Airport $15,206.95 Community Services $10,151.55 Public Works $3,760.78 Nue Utility Billing Accounts $8,125.74 Total Bad Debt $52,524.22 BACKGROUND: Annually,the Finance staff reviews all outstanding debt and then turns these debt obligations over to a collection agency. During a 24-month period,the collection agency attempts to collect this debt. At the end of 24 months,the Finance staff reviews the uncollected outstanding debt with the collection agency to identify the debt obligations that cannot be collected for a variety of reasons. In accordance with City Policy &Procedure 220-03,bad debt over$100.00 that has been deemed uncollectible can only be written off from the City's accounting records after approval from the City Council's Finance Committee. RECOMMENDATION: Finance requests the Finance Committee's approval to write off the listed total bad debt from the City's accounting records. MW/LP/CZ/dlf Attachments,as stated cc: Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Derek Todd,Assistant to the CAO Linda Parks,Fiscal Services Director Elloyce Sumpter,Utility Billing Supervisor Norma Kuhn,Accounting Assistant,A/R H:\FINANCE\ADMINSUP\02_IssuePapers_memos to Council or Mayor\Bad Debt Write off memo_April 2005.doc ( CIT' _ RENTON ( • OUTSTANDING CHARGES DEEMED UNCOLLECTIBLE POLICE BAD DEBT OVER$100 Last Bill Date Customer# Full Name _ Description Current balance Reason 4/13/2002 1113 BURGER KING FALSE ALARM $400.00 Refuse to pay 4/13/2002 1124 COOK,KELLY RONALD ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $240.00 Skipped town ^� 4/13/2002 1128 DICKMEYER-MAY,DAVID ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $1,245.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1130 DOHRMAN,AMANDA S ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $576.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1131 DOYLE,CHARLES ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $780.00 Skipped town _______ 4/13/2002 1142 FORMULA ONE FAST LUBE#2047 FALSE ALARM $600.00 Returned mail -- , 4/13/2002 1156 HEALY,MARTIN J ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $575.00 Skipped town ______ 4/13/2002 1163 JAM'N PRODUCT LOGISTICS FALSE ALARM $200.00 Can't find owner 4/13/2002 1166 K-MART CORPORATION FALSE ALARM $600.00 Closed 4/13/2002 1173 KINZY,TARA M ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $175.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1174 KLEIN,KEITH ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $870.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1177 LEISURE TIME RENTALS FALSE ALARM $450.00 Can't find 4/13/2002 1191 MITCHELL,LINDA D ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $180.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1194 NEWMAN,TRACIE L ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $402.00 Skipped town _ 4/13/2002 1203 PIZZA HUT FALSE ALARM $400.00 Can't find previous owner 4/13/2002 1204 POIRIER,JEFFERY ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $257.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1212 RAMSEY,BRANDI A ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $165.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1221 RENTON TEXACO FALSE ALARM $400.00 Refuse to pay 4/13/2002 1225 ROGERS,JOHN M ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $1,500.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1229 SHAW,DANIEL ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $145.00 Skipped town v 4/13/2002 1230 SHOOTER MCCLUSKYS FALSE ALARM $350.00 Refuse to pay 4/13/2002 1231 SKELLEY,WILLIAM J ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $455.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1237 STEIN,THERESA ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $105.00 Skipped town • _ d 4/13/2002 1247 UNITED FURNITURE WAREHOUSE FALSE ALARM $200.00 Out of Business 4/13/2002 1259 WATKINS,DUANE J ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $580.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1262 WIESE,TRACY ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $125.00 Skipped town 4/13/2002 1266 YOUNG,MICHAEL W ELECTRONIC HOME DETENTION $540.00 Skipped town 6/18/2002 1342 CAMBRIDGE SECURITY PRIVATE SECURITY $117.68 Part of Kmart 6/26/2002 1355 KING,SING-CHI FALSE ALARM $600.00 Skipped town __ 8/16/2002 1391 SCAN QUEST FALSE ALARM $250.00 Mail undeliverable 10/3/2002 1455 RENTON BINGO PRIVATE SECURITY $221.52 Closed 12/18/2002 1172 KING OF GLORY CHURCH FALSE ALARM $1,275.00 Refuse to pay 6/11/2003 1627 AUTO EFX FALSE ALARM $300.00 Out of Business TOTAL 000.000000.005.5190.0090.02.000000 $15,279.20 Workbook:Bad Debt Write off April 2005.xls Worksheet:AR Write off over 100 police Page 1 of 1 ( CIT\( _ RENTON OUTSTANDING CHARGES DEEMED UNCOLLECTIBLE RENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT BAD DEBT OVER$100 _ Last Bill Date Customer# Full Name •Description Current Balance Reason 11/5/2003 1022 JOBMASTER COMPANY Monthly Airport Lease $639.10 Elderly man moved airplane 11/5/2003 1608 JOBMASTER Monthly Airport Lease $13,586.82 but left other belongings at airport 5/5/2003 1014 BOEING REALTY CORP Internal mistake $981.03 Internal audit adjustment TOTAL 000.000000.005.5190.0090.02.000000 $15,206.95 Workbook:Bad Debt Write off April 2005.xls Worksheet:AR write off over 100 airport Page I of I ( CITY( RENTON OUTSTANDING CHARGES DEEMED UNCOLLECTIBLE COMMUNITY SERVICES BAD DEBT OVER$100 1 Last Bill Date Customer# Full Name Description Current Balance Reason j 4/13/2002 1159 ICOPYRIGHT.COM Rental Community Center $5,907.30 Bankruptcy 4/13/2002 1190 MISSION OF LOVE PRODUCTIONS Rental Carco Theatre $396.00 No deposit-Uncollectible _ _ 4/13/2002 1217 RENTON JAYCEES _Rental Carco Theatre $408.50 No deposit-Uncollectible - 4/13/2002 1218 RENTON JR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Rental Carco Theatre $334.00 No deposit-Uncollectible v 4/13/2002 1238 STREET LEVEL DANCE Rental Carco Theatre $438.00 No deposit-Uncollectible, 5/29/2002 1335 FAIRWOOD-MAPLE VALLEY LICENSE Donation for egg hunt $800.00 No deposit-Uncollectible _ 11/7/2002 1456 NATL ASSOC,STUDENT ATHLETIC DEV Rental Community Center $803.50 No deposit-Uncollectible 1/30/2003 1583 ONE LOVE PROMOTIONS Rental Carco Theatre $465.25 No deposit-Uncollectible___ ncollectibleM 2/4/2003 1589 DREAMS&DESIRES MODEL TALENT Rental Carco Theatre $363.00 No deposit-Uncollectible _- ,1 11/24/2003 1748 ANDRADE,BOBBY Rental Community Center $236.00 No deposit-Uncollectible TOTAL 000.000000.020.5190.0090.02.000000 $10,151.55 Workbook:Bad Debt Write off April 2005.xls Worksheet:AR writeoff over 100 Comm Page I of I ( CIT _ RENTON ( • OUTSTANDING CHARGES DEEMED UNCOLLECTIBLE PUBLIC WORKS BAD DEBT OVER$100 Last Bill Date Customer# Full Name Description Current Balance Reason 4/13/2002 1168 KATSPAN,INC Lost hydrant valve $1,926.55 Skipped 4/13/2002 1180 MALIK,DAVID Pump rental $220.00 Refuse to pay 4/13/2002 1185 MC VAY CONSTRUCTION Missing hydrant meter $431.23 Undeliverable mail 1/30/2003 1521 BABOLDASHTIAN,MOHAMMAD Repair of damaged utility service $683.00 Refuse to pay T 4/13/2002 1139 FARRELL,GENE Repair of damaged utility service $220.00 Deceased 4/13/2002 1148 GOOD CHEVROLET Water pump rental $280.00 Refuse to pay e TOTAL 401.000000.004.5340.0070.02.000000 $3,760.78 Workbook:Bad Debt Write off April 2005.xls Worksheet:AR writeoff over 100 PW Page 1 of 1 CIT RENTON ( • OUTSTANDING CHARGES DEEMED UNCOLLECTIBLE UTILITY BILLING BAD DEBT OVER$100 ^_ Reference# Customer# Full Name Address Current Balance Reason 10173 131 BRYANT MOTORS 125 Meadow Ave N $129.29 Prior to 2002/lien rights expired 250512 5102 RAMAC INC 105 SW 7th St IRR $102.74 Bill McHales'Bankruptcy 430125 7762 KABBOS MANSOURZADER 3820 NE 12th St $786.47 Prior to 2002/lien rights expired 70547 1375 M HADI FAKHARZADEH 637 Morris Ave S $1,732.30 Prior to 2002/lien rights expired 10020 2047-001 KURTIS BRISKEY 901 S 23rd St $385.23 Bankruptcy �_ M 980052 16090 JAMN PRODUCT LOGISTICS 2501 East Valley Road $2,472.15 BR/Business Closed Lien Rights Expired 980061 16099 FYA 2830 Sunset Lane NE $2,096.94 BR/Business Closed Lien Rights Expired 980833 16603 CON GOR 810 Thomas Ave SW $107.14 BR/Business Closed Lien Rights Expired 76011BR2 20598 MICHAEL&BRENDA SHINAUL 911 S 30th PL $313.48 Bankruptcy TOTAL $8,125.74 Water 401.000000.000.3430.0040.00.000000 $1,456.11 Sewer 401.000000.000.3430.0050.00.000000 $332.27 Storm 401.000000.000.3430.0083.00.000000 $1,156.81 Metro 401.000000.000.3430.0056.00.000000 $387.91 Garbage 403.000000.000.3430.0070.00.000000 $4,217.59 Penalty 000.000000.000.3610.0051.00.000401 $575.05 Total $8,125.74 Workbook:Bad Debt Write off April 2005.xls Worksheet:Utility write off over 100 Page I of I CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: �a e Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 4/25/2005kkba o, Dept/Div/Board.. Hearing Examiner Staff Contact Fred J. Kaufman, ext. 6515 Agenda Status Consent X Subject: Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Elmhurst Preliminary Plat Ordinance File No. LUA-04-162, PP, ECF 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 kiwiAmount Budgeted Revenue Generated Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation on the Elmhurst Preliminary Plat was published on March 29, 2005. The appeal period ended on April 12, 2005. The Examiner recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat subject to the conditions outlined on page 11 of the Examiner's Reportand Recommendation. Conditions placed on this project are to be met at later stages of the platting process. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommends approval of the Elmhurst Preliminary Plat with conditions as outlined in the Examiner's Report and Recommendation. Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh March 29, 2005 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER '441,0e CITY OF RENTON Minutes APPLICANT: Liberty Ridge LLC Attn: Mike Merlino 9125 10th Ave S Seattle, WA 98108 CONTACT: David L. Halinen Halinen Law Offices, P.S. 10500 NE 8th Street, Ste. 1900 Bellevue, WA 98004 Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA 04-162, PP, ECF LOCATION: 201, 251, & 257 Bremerton Avenue NE SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval for a 64-lot subdivision of a multiple parcel, 9.6-acre, site intended for detached units. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve subject to conditions err DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on March 8, 2005. 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 March 15, 2005 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, March 15, 2005, at 9:31 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: Neighborhood Detail Map application,proof of posting,proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. 44114+" Exhibit No. 3: Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit No. 4: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan • Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 2 Exhibit No. 5: Grading and Drainage Plan Exhibit No. 6: Existing Conditions Exhibit No. 7: Zoning Map Exhibit No. 8: ERC Mitigation Measures Exhibit No. 9: Katie Walter, Professional Resume Exhibit No. 10: Sheet 1 of Preliminary Plat drawing set showing vacation of 15.5 foot right-of-way along Bremerton Avenue Exhibit No. 11: Vacation Petition to City dated Exhibit No. 12: Letter from Bonnie Walton dated 12/27/2004 3/1/2005 Exhibit No. 13: Renton City Council minutes dated Exhibit No. 14: Noise Report by Mr. Jerry Lilly 2/28/2005 Exhibit No. 15: Deed to the Foster property Exhibit No. 16: Lot Line Adjustment Exhibit No. 17: Access Easement Agreement dated Exhibit No. 18: Lawsuit,Kitsap Case Law March 9, 2004 Exhibit No. 19: Lawsuit, Snohomish Case Law Exhibit No.20: Second Grading Sheet The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The site is located in the east portion of the City of Renton just south of the NE 4`h'corridor and to the west of Bremerton Avenue NE. The site is zoned Residential-10. - On the site there is a Category 3 unregulated wetland located in the southwest portion of the site, which is proposed to be filled. There are two tracts proposed, Tract A in the southwest corner of the site for the storm drainage facility and Tract B which continues along the entire southwest and western edge of the property which would be a Native Growth Protection area. Maplewood Creek runs along this area and continues northward. There would be a 25-foot enhanced buffer on each side of the creek. Due to any wetland that would be potentially located within 100 feet of the site,the applicant did an assessment of this wetland in the northwest corner of the site and that is unregulated Category 3 therefore,this proposal would not be affected with that wetland. A Development Agreement was made on this site, it was approved in August of 2004 with several stipulations. One,this site would be zoned R-10 as well as the Comprehensive Plan Use designation of Residential-Options (RO). There are also some site-specific restrictions that state that all residential buildings must be single-family, all lots abutting the south boundary line must be 50 feet in width (Lots 23 through 29), and lastly the net density cannot exceed 10 du/ac. The proposed density for this plat is 8.3 du/ac. The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance—Mitigated for the project, which included fourteen mitigation measures. No appeals of the determination were filed. The purpose of the Residential Options designation is to create new, lower-density neighborhoods in a traditional development style while at the same time support infill development. This proposal is consistent with the Residential Options land use development and the environmental element. `Nt rr Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 3 Nose A net density of the development would be 8.3 dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowed range. This proposal is all detached single-family units and complies with the density and unit mix requirements for R-10 zoning. All lots comply with the lot dimension requirements as well as meeting the required setbacks. The proposal's compliance with these building standards would be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. Several buildings and outbuildings currently exist on the site, the applicant must obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all buildings prior to the recording of the final plat. The R-10 zone requires setback areas to be landscaped including the addition of trees and shrubs to be planted within the front yard area of all lots within the plat. The satisfaction of this condition is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division Project Manager. The side lot line of the proposed lots are at right angles to the street line. All lots would gain access to public roadways either directly, or via private driveway access easements. As proposed, lots comply with arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. Each of the lots satisfies the minimum lot area and dimension requirements of the R-10 zone. All lots located at the intersection of public rights-of-way would meet code, all would have a radius equal to or greater than 15 feet. Access is proposed via the Bremerton Avenue NE coming from the south through the Laurelhurst Plat. This proposed plat required two means of access, depending on the outcome of the Ridgeview Plat, north of the site along Bremerton Avenue NE, it is a requirement by code that a minimum of 20 feet width of pavement and a pedestrian walkway be required along Bremerton Avenue NE from the northern property line up to NE 4th Street. If the right-of-way required to be dedicated by the Ridgeview Court Plat is not in place prior to the recording of the Elmhurst Plat, the applicant of this plat would be required to dedicate the public right-of-way along that parcel. There also is a requirement for a dedication of a minimum of 25 feet from the centerline of Bremerton Avenue NE for this subject plat. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement is suggested for the development, which would be responsible for any common improvements and/or tracts within the plat. Traffic, Park and Fire Mitigations fees were imposed by the ERC. The subject site is located within the Renton School District boundaries and they have indicated that they can accommodate the approximately 28 new students. The storm drainage/surface water would be located in Tract A in the southwest corner of the property between Lots 22 and 23. In order to enhance the storm drainage tract it is to be fenced, landscaped and irrigated unless drought tolerant plants are used. The property lines of Tract A fronting Road A, Lot 22 and 23 should include a landscape visual barrier and fencing. The property lines along Lot 22 and 23 should include a six foot high solid wood fence or other approved material (no chain link),the portion to the southwest of Tract A required only the split rail fence. Staff recommends approval of the Elmhurst Preliminary Plat subject to five conditions. `'fir►' David Halinen, 10500 NE 8th Street, Suite 1900, Bellevue, WA 98004 stated that he represents the owner/applicant Liberty Ridge LLC. There were a couple of questions that arose during Ms. Fiala's testimony, Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 4 Noe in terms of the question of shared driveways,the applicant is planning to have individual driveways, the purchaser of the project has requested that and that is the applicant's intention to provide those driveways. Secondly, regarding the small segment of Tract A that abuts the south line of the property,they are willing to fence that in any way that the City staff would like to have it done. The applicant has reviewed the proposed conditions for approval and finds them acceptable. There was a question regarding the unregulated wetland in Tract A, Katie Walter, a wetland scientist, biologist and botanist is present today and can address that question. Katie Walter, Shannon and Wilson,400 N 34"' Street, Suite 100, Seattle, WA 98103 stated that she performed the wetland delineation both on this site and the site to the north back in 1998. The wetland to the north is just offsite north along the west property boundary. It is a small wetland,just over 2,000 square feet in size. It was designated a Category 3 wetland under the City's regulations and the question was with respect to its closeness to Maplewood Creek. That creek has been channelized in the past,the area was developed early in the 1950's, and at different periods of time the creek has been channelized and moved and it appears that long before now that wetland has become isolated from the creek. There is a dirt berm that exists between the creek and that wetland. The isolated wetland on site is slightly different in that it appears to have formed on fill as a result of a stormwater pipe that outlets near the east side of the wetland and it appears that that wetland is isolated, most of the water that gets to that wetland either infiltrates or evaporates and probably during very large storm events it may have some overland flow. The creek on site, which runs along the western property boundary has been heavily channelized, it's about four feet lower on the northern side than the site boundary depending on the `grrw amount of fill in different places on that site. On the southern portion it is six to eight feet lower than the actual site. On the northern two-thirds of that site it's been channelized along the property boundary, it's an ephemeral stream, it wasn't flowing, in fact it was completely dry in June of 2004, and in December of 2004 it wasn't flowing, but there were some puddles of water. It was flowing in 1998 when she was at the site. Ii does flow occasionally, but mostly during storm events in the area. The buffer along the creek is heavily vegetated with blackberries with almost no native vegetation. On the southern end there are a few more trees and some native vegetation. Mr. Halinen stated that for the record,the Bremerton Avenue right-of-way abutting the site,there were three small strips of land along the west edge of Bremerton Avenue designated as a 15.5 foot ROW to be vacated that is within proposed Lot 1. The second strip has a note that also shows 15.5 foot ROW to be vacated from Lot 46 north to Lot 42 up to proposed Road A, and finally the very south end of the site there is a note that says 7.5 foot existing ROW to be vacated, along the east edge of Lot 29. The applicant filed a petition with the City on December 27, 2004. This is a contiguous strip that Road A will cross and does not need to be vacated. This matter went before the City Council on February 28 and the Council voted to approve the requested street vacation with two conditions; area of vacation for the two northerly portions of the original request be set to a maximum vacation width of 12.5 feet and secondly,the petitioner shall provide satisfactory proof that outside utilities have received and are satisfied with any easements which are necessary to protect their facilities in the requested vacation area. Going forward with construction plans,the three-foot adjustment will be made within the lots and make everything fit. The reason that a Noise Analysis was done was in view of the Ridgeview Court project to the north, there was testimony by the manager of the abutting postal facility concerning truck and delivery noises that he wanted to make the City aware of. in that particular case, the Examiner indicated a recommendation for denial of that project, or in the alternative some special conditions of approval were suggested. That matter is now on appeal to the City Council by the applicant. While the Elmhurst site is further from the postal site than the Ridgeview Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 5 Nose Court, it seemed prudent to have some field noise measurements taken over an extended period of time, 64 hours, so that some hard data would be available. That work was done by Jerry Lilly, who could not be here today, one of his colleagues, Michael Yantis is here today to provide an overview of the testing. Michael Yantis, Yantis Acoustical Design, 720 Olive Way, Suite 1400, Seattle, WA 98101 stated that he was here today on behalf of Jerry Lilly. He visited the project site on Sunday, March 6 with Mr. Lilly. The noise monitoring stations were set and they were able to review both the location of the stations and the equipment that was used. Two noise-monitoring locations were set up on site, one on the north boundary of Elmhurst property and a second approximately mid point on that north boundary line. Mr. Lilly took data for approximately 64 hours between March 6 and March 9 at these two locations. Position two took hourly data and position one was continuous recording of data every 2 seconds. Primary noise sources were traffic on NE 4th Street, aircraft flyovers, and although the Post Office has been indicated as a noise source in the vicinity, the study indicated that it was not a primary noise source in the area. Mr. Yantis continued with an overview of the report. Noise codes do not specifically apply to public roadways and aircraft because these noises are exempt from the noise codes, developmental regulations help provide guidelines for jurisdictions and developers and how they might build their developments to make sure that the residents don't have noise levels that are excessive. Both Bellevue and Snohomish guidelines are based on the HUD guidelines that provide noise guidelines that are suitable for residential developments. Noise levels above 65 LDN are in the less acceptable category, noise levels under 65 are generally acceptable. The C'ty of Renton also has a noise ordinance that regulates noise levels between adjacent properties. The results of the measurements that Mr. Lilly recorded show that the Ldn (day-night average)varied from 56.3 at position 2 to a *snr high of 57.8 at position 1. They are all very close in noise level. In addition to the long-term noise levels that were measured, Mr. Lilly paid particular attention to noise levels that might be occurring from the Post Office. While he was on site, there were two events that happened, that were truck events. One event happened at 4:45 pm when a truck left the facility and beeped its horn and the other event was the arrival of a semi-truck trailer rig that traveled onto the property, dropped its tailgate and unloaded material. Both of these events, although the noise levels are identifiable, they are a little bit higher than the typical activity happening on the site during that time. Using Figures from the report, he showed how Mr. Lilly was able to assess what might be an aircraft event versus some unknown event. In summary the noise levels that Mr. Lilly measured and reported in his report are suitable for residential use. There are within the HUD guidelines, maximum noise levels are primarily due to aircraft flyovers and they are consistent with other residential areas in the vicinity. Rose Woodall, 248 Union Ave NE, Renton, WA 98059 stated that her property abuts this proposed plat at the northwest corner out to Union Avenue. She has lived there 33 years and lots of changes have taken place. Her concern is that her back lot is like a park, if there is a split rail fence, it seems that children could just climb over. The City of Renton is going to build a park on the west side of Union Avenue directly across from her property, it seems that the children could cut across from this development, through her property and to the park. She would like to have a fence that kids are not going to be able to crawl over. She is concerned about her liability if the children jumped in the creek and wade across. The Examiner explained that the City does not usually require fencing between similar types of uses, in other words single family and single family. Perhaps you and the applicant can work something out, although a fence of some type is required to protect the stream buffer. 'erre Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 6 ''rr✓ Cliff Williams, 5326 SW Manning, Seattle, WA 98116 stated he was here representing the property owner of the development bordering to the northeast, known as Ridgeview Court. They are in support of this development. It represents a well planned and logical development and transition from the R-8 developments to the R-10 and then up into Ridgeview Court which has been zoned R-20. They have worked together in coordinating the site developments, the key things addressed are the road profile for Bremerton Avenue,the sewer service for Ridgeview Court, and also the grading between the property lines on the north side. They would like to complement the developer on the initiative to undertake this noise study. They find the study results very encouraging for all parties concerned. Thomas Foster, Langley Fourth Avenue Associates LLC, 5460 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 106, Seattle, WA 98188 stated that they own the property to the northwest and adjacent to the Post Office. He submitted a letter to the City staff yesterday only to encourage the staff to look at the overall development of the area when you have Ridgeview Court to the east and Elmhurst to the south. They have a small piece of property to the south of the Post Office that potentially could be landlocked based on the new zoning of CA that happened in November. The southwest corner of the property is the end of the wetlands on the property and also the site of their storm detention pond. Some of the area has been cleared and they are currently under construction development permit with the City of Renton to complete the requirements for a Short Plat. He was encouraging the staff to look at the overall development potential of the site and area for pedestrian friendly access and also to provide for secondary fire access to not only their property but to the other properties as well. If Bremerton was ever to become blocked a secondary access from their property onto either one of these sites could add additional fire control possibilities and also would enhance pedestrian access to NE 4th and would help the development of their property as well. Terrance Flaig, President of Fernwood North Homeowner's Association, PO Box 3106, Renton, WA 98056 icee stated that he had a question regarding the grading of the site. Specifically the homeowners that abut the southern end of Elmhurst are concerned about grading that has been done to this site prior to the beginning of Elmhurst. When he and his wife moved here,this was zoned residential but there was a business operated here, McCann Trucking owned this land they were a trucking and excavating business. When the property was sold to Tydico and as soon as that happened they began to bring in large truckloads of earth and fill without applying for or receiving any permits. They raised the level of this land considerably, particularly in the area that abuts Fernwood North to the south of their land. Since this was not done with permits from the City of Renton, they wonder if this is going to be allowed to exist the way it is or if some effort is going to be made to return this level of the land to what it was before the illegal grading was done. They are concerned because it is quite a bit higher now than the lots in Fernwood North. The homes that will be built will be towering above them and provide an unsightly view to the north. The Examiner stated that they were talking about Lots 32, 33, 34, and 35 in Fernwood North and suggested that perhaps staff may have some comments about this issue. Kayren Kittrick, Development Services stated that Elmhurst can be held to dedicate the rights-of-way off Bremerton when they don't own the property. A secondary access is required by Fire for this site. The preference is to the north, the owners of the property to the north have been in serious talks and trying to make sure that their designs met code. It has always been the intent that Ridgeview would go first, or a little ahead, or at the same time as Elmhurst. When Ridgeview was denied, it was necessary to make sure that that was secured, that is the secondary access, it is the way that they designed for their secondary access. Whether an easement would be sufficient if the timing did not work out, the answer is no,the dedication must be for sure, it is necessary to know that it is going to go through. Split rail fences are basically to allow for the movement of small animals that would go through that area. Planning would most likely have some concerns about blocking off that location entirely, but there could be Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 7 '4411/' some discussions on something that might have small openings. Not quite sure how to solve that particular problem. Regarding Mr. Foster and his wish to have secondary access to the north is an issue that they agree on, but there is nothing that is in the code that would allow for this. The Transportation Division would be very interested in something through the Ridgeview Court, some type of connection through there. However, in that instance,the Post Office declined to participate. Ultimately this comes down to some type of agreement between private property owners in this case. Mr. Foster does have access up to NE 4th, primary access, but he does need a secondary access,just not sure what is going to be developed on his property. The site has been used out of standards both under King County and City of Renton when they took it over. There is no plan to do any grading or changing of the site height. All grading will be within the site, cut and fill, nothing new being brought in and nothing being taken out. Mr. Halinen stated that regarding Mr. Foster's comments and concerns about wanting a secondary access, Mr. Foster pointed out that the company he represents is a recent purchaser of the property that wraps behind the Post Office. The property was purchased September 2004. In 1999 a Lot Line Adjustment was done and included the Post Office property and the Langley Property(Mr. Foster). Regarding the secondary access,this is a problem of self-creation. An Access Easement Agreement was recorded March 9, 2004 proving that the Post Office did get title. The Lot Line Adjustment was set up to dead end at the back end of the property,they didn't need to do that,they could have had a loop easement along the east side of the postal property to provide for secondary access for emergency vehicles. It was set up deliberately, sold the property in its current condition to someone who would like to have one of the abutters bear the burden of a secondary access. This should have been considered and dealt with prior to selling off the properties. Elmhurst should not have to bear IUrn' the burden of these issues,they should not have to give access through Elmhurst. Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering and Design LLC, 4118 Lind Avenue, Renton, WA 98055 stated that there are four existing lots in Fernwood North, Lots 32, 33, 34 and 35 that abut against the area in question. The pad elevations are set such that they can get access from Bremerton Avenue,they are set to provide sewer connections to these lots, and to provide access for lot drainage into the detention pond. All this grading occurs on-site, within the Elmhurst property lines,they do not even come close to the south property line. If the lots were lowered, they would not drain into the detention pond. Lot 27 will be a little bit higher than what it is today, Lots 26, 25,24, and 23 are being raised anywhere from three to five feet, depending on where you measure it. Those elevations are 25 feet into the property where this will occur. Some of that could be buffered out a little, but not very much. The Examiner stated that it doesn't sound like the City will address what may have happened prior to annexation. Ms. Kittrick stated the City will not explore the site levels, it was like that when it came in for site approvals. They will not require the owner to return to what the property was like years ago. 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 11:24 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS &RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following: Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 8 FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, Liberty Ridge, LLC, represented by David L. Halinen, filed a request for a 64-lot 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 issued a Determination of Non Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M). 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located at 201, 251 and 257 Bremerton Avenue NE. The subject site is located on the west side of Bremerton approximately 600 feet south of NE 4th Street. 6. 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 homes, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 7. The subject site is currently zoned R-10 (Residential Options including detached Single Family uses). 8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 5092 enacted in September 2004. 'gime 9. The subject site is approximately 9.6 acres or 418,176 square feet. The parcel is rectangular and is approximately 650 feet long along Bremerton (north to south)by approximately 640 feet deep. 10. The site has been used for construction offices and staging and older homes and outbuildings generally served office purposes. 11. The subject site slopes generally downward 3 to 5 percent from the north-northwest to the south- southwest where Maplewood Creek crosses the subject site. The site also has bands of steeper terrain that vary between 20 to 40 percent. Fill was placed on the subject site in the past and this material appears to have been placed without benefit of a permit. Neighbors report that it raised the elevation of the property adjacent to the creek 8 to 10 feet. 12. A Category 3 wetland is located in the northwest corner of the subject site and it is unregulated. Another wetland located offsite is also unregulated. As noted, Maplewood Creek crosses the southwest portion of the site. 13. The subject site is mainly cleared of vegetation but small stands or rows of trees are located near the south and west property lines, near the existing older structures in the northeast corner of the site and near the creek. Most of the trees with the exception of those in the protected creek corridor would be removed to allow development at the R-10 density permitted by the zoning. 14. The subject site is governed by a separate development agreement. There are site-specific restrictions that include that all residential buildings be single family, lots abutting the south boundary of the site (abutting R-8 homes) be not less than 50 feet wide and that the density not exceed 10 units per acre. Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 9 15. The applicant proposes dividing the subject site into 64 lots. The lots would be arranged around the perimeter of the site and in two interior blocks. Lot sizes will vary from 3,801 square feet to 5,979 square feet. The R-10 zone requires lots to be not less than 3,000 square feet, lot width to be 30 feet for interior lots and 40 feet for corner lots and lot depth to be 55 feet. Staff reported that lots would vary between 40 feet to 54 feet wide and from 95 feet to 112 feet deep. The lots along the south property line will comply with the 50-foot width required by the Development Agreement. 16. Two east to west roads will provide access to the interior of the subject site from Bremerton. These two roads will be connected to each other in a loop by a north to south road running through the western third of the site. A second north to south road will run between the east to west roads in the middle of the site creating the blockwise lot arrangement. Bremerton has an inconsistent alignment and width along the frontage of the subject site. The applicant is seeking a vacation and will rededicate property to create a more consistent alignment. 17. Bremerton does narrow north of the site adjacent to where the Ridgeview Plat was proposed. The City Council will be determining the status of that plat during an appeal procedure. Staff has noted that Bremerton does need to serve this proposed plat. 18. The density for the plat would be 8.25 dwelling units per acre after subtracting sensitive areas (creek corridor)and roadways. 19. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate approximately 28 school age children. These students would be spread across the grades and would be assigned on a space available basis. 20. The development will increase traffic approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 640 trips for the 64 single-family homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips, or approximately 64 additional peak hour trips, will be generated in the morning and evening. 21. The applicant has submitted a Noise Analysis Report for the project to determine if noise from the nearby but non-adjacent Post Office would be a factor for residential development of the subject site. The report was done since the Hearing Examiner recommended that the proposed Ridgeview Plat immediately north of the subject site but also directly abutting the Post Office be rejected due to incompatible noise generated by the adjacent Post Office. 22. The summary of the report contains the following language: "The ambient noise measurements conducted at the Elmhurst site's north edge demonstrate that the site is suitable for residential development... While there are routine loading and unloading activities and other activities at the post office that generate occasional environmental noise, this study has clearly shown that the intensity and duration of the noise generated by the post office is insufficient to significantly impact residential use of the Elmhurst site. (Footnote 2)... Footnote 2: Anticipated future development of the Ridgeview Court site and the vacant parcel immediately to the north of the west half of the Elmhurst site will 4411160 significantly screen the Elmhurst site from post office-generated noise, further reducing its intensity on the Elmhurst site." Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 10 23. Stormwater will be collected in a pond in Tract,A which will serve as both a detention and water quality facility. The pond, which is located in the southwest corner of the site, will be adjacent to Maplewood Creek. Energy would be dissipated using a "bubble-up" system with the overflow running to the creek. It would meet the 1998 King County standards, Level 2 flow control. 24. Staff has recommended that the pond be screened and landscaped. The screen is to form a visual barrier but one that does not interfere with traffic. Staff recommended the materials to use and to avoid chain link fencing. 25. The subject site will be served by City water and sewer services. Utility line extensions to serve the site will be required and governed by code. 26. Staff has approved a street modification allowing narrower roadways. Since this narrows what would be parking strips or landscape areas, staff has recommended the addition of trees 27. The owner of the adjacent property north of the subject site was concerned about access to a portion of his property behind the post office. That property fronts along NE 4th Street and access is possible from there. it was noted that the current owner's predecessor in interest created the odd-shaped parcel by segregating off the post office site leaving the remainder. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed plat appears to serve the public use and interest. Due to a recommendation by this office that another residential development(Ridgeview Court)adjacent to the post office was inappropriate, the applicant was concerned that post office noise might create issues for developing the subject site. Those noises might be an issue but it appears that the distance between the subject site and the post office site should help attenuate the noise. The subject site can be distinguished from the Ridgeview court parcel by a number of factors. The subject site is zoned for residential purposes and is shielded by the adjacent Ridgeview Court property, which as a transitional property can be used for commercial purposes. In addition, open space that now lies between the subject site and post office could be developed with uses that further attenuate the noise. That is new structures could occupy the intervening open space and block post office noises. The greater distance and the potential for intervening buildings were not factors that could help the other property. The noise studies that were conducted were specifically conducted for the subject site and cannot be relied on for determining impacts on other properties and other properties cannot count on the development of intervening buildings that could eventually buffer this site from the post office. 2. The proposed plat appears to create reasonably rectangular lots. A fairly regular grid roadway and block system rather than a deadend cul-de-sac will also serve the 64-lot plat. The smaller lots of the R- 10 zone will still provide detached single-family housing choices to those who want less yard maintenance and smaller homes. 3. The plat will offset its impacts on fire, parks and transportation services by paying mitigation fees. It will also contribute to the tax base of the City when developed with homes. The additional population and traffic will be felt in this currently sparsely developed area but those impacts were anticipated when the Zoning was adopted for the area. 4. The applicant will be planting trees on the lots while also preserving the stream course and the current '' vegetation in buffers surrounding the creek. It appears that filling that occurred on the subject site can Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 11 'err remain and might have be permitted to allow appropriate sewer service. The applicant will have to demonstrate that the materials are suitable for foundation support. 5. The applicant will have to satisfy the City's needs for access to and along Bremerton to NE 4th Street. 6. In conclusion, the proposed plat should be approved by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should approve the 64-lot Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the conditions imposed by the ERC. 2. The applicant shall have to demonstrate that the on-site fill materials are suitable for foundation support. 3. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all buildings located on the property prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager. 4. All lots within the plat shall be required to have a minimum of one new approved tree, with a minimum caliper of 1-1/2 inches(deciduous)or 6-8 feet in height(conifer), and shrubs(or equivalent)planted within the front yard. The applicant shall be required to set forth a restriction on the final plat stating this requirement. Each application for a single family building permit shall include a plan noting the location and type of plant materials within the front yard. All front yard landscaping shall be planted fir✓ prior to final building permit inspection. The satisfaction of this condition is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division Project Manager. 5. The right-of-way for Bremerton Ave.NE along Parcel #518210-0042 (327 Bremerton Ave.NE)shall be dedicated prior to the recording of the Elmhurst Final Plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager prior to recording of the final plat. 6. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared improvements. A draft of the documents(s), if necessary, shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to recording of the final plat. 7. Tract A shall be fenced, landscaped, and irrigated(unless drought tolerant plants are used). The property lines of Tract A fronting Road A, Lot 22 and 23 shall include a landscaped visual barrier so as to not interfere with sight distance triangles including plant materials which would provide a year-round dense screen within three(3)years from the time of planting. Also,the property lines along i_ots 22 and 23 shall be fenced with a six-foot high solid wood fence, or other approved material (no chain link). Tract A fronting Road A shall be fenced with either a wrought iron, or chain link with vinyl covering, or other decorative wood fence. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan and fence design identifying construction and plant materials for the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager prior to installation. Fences and landscaping shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat. vim,► Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 12 '' ORDERED THIS 29th day of March 2005. FRED J. KAUF4AN HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 29th day of March 2005 to the parties of record: Susan Fiala Kayren Kittrick Rose Woodall 1055 S Grady Way 1055 S Grady Way 248 Union Ave NE Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98059 Liberty Ridge LLC Katie Walter David L. Halinen Attn: Mike Merlin() Shannon and Wilson Halinen Law Offices, P.S. 9125 10th Ave S 400 N 34th Street, Suite 100 10500 NE 8°i St., Ste. 1900 Seattle, WA 98108 Seattle, WA 98103 Bellevue, WA 98004 Lou Larsen C. Thomas Foster Michael Yantis Pacific Engineering and Design LLC Langley Fourth Ave Associates LLC Yantis Acoustical Design %we 4118 Lind Avenue 5460 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 106 720 Olive Way, Suite 1400 Renton, WA 98055 Seattle, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98101 Terrance Flaig Cliff Williams President of Fernwood North HOA 5326 SW Manning PO Box 3106 Seattle, WA 98116 Renton, WA 98056 TRANSMITTED THIS 29'►' day of March 2005 to the following: Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Stan Engler, Fire Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Larry Meckling, Building Official Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Planning Commission Larry Warren, City Attorney Transportation Division Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Utilities Division Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Neil Watts, Development Services Jennifer Henning, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services Stacy Tucker, 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.,April 12,2005. 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 Nolo request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14)days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 13 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.,April 12,2005. 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. 4. ( SIC. 15 TWP. 23 N. RNG. 5 E. W.M. , , „ is-.N.E-"4.'•..4TH.•;;,+:{rRµ:.ST--. -.-. --•- -.tor , -•uxee:xv • .r-cr ...x....,...14-1 x...a :• .E,:war =t±iaS2,8TH- f ST, y Is 30 ti7A03 ZTS.4T(Itl.xxl I4 f. •' p� �f/.11 %MS •'KV a1 � b .1j MO 4 M uo/�� ,lfAl 14,= 1, Ti o � L1zWy1y Z' : ZIT n 09. " • s LSI r w Iiin ❑ E ., , Apra IL, 1 Q �, 10 gQ •I: .1 « •_—. (1) .7 pyy �Z41 Z �, .A .D n N 1 t==` O [�� .Ti W = A O O O ` �` O• r j� 12) 1 (2) • 1 g_ = 1 t7. aO" a (3) _ O O SR 1079089 Q ` LI- ,0 m 4, 0 ® 7/- 0.1 4$ .w , 3o ►on 0 @ . 230 S,_ 0 'iliO_ SP.084.83 '4 2 - 3 4 , R �__ 17 u- ..... 344 an.dit IX'.mn/b756..... k r ```�� 12.11 1 _-__ ,�`` ✓ ___— 1.15 Ac. r am, ZO I ° at. 0 1 i 'Q.,. © j I• 7© se MARTIN ' S ACRE TRACT' - 1 s . y xu Q ., 1 156...-.=-- c (r3.c I O 32fca 0x3.131 i! PLIMIT 10 li ,--Z 3 Frooll91 I--:.'?"..,.1:3- •.r- ' =_.-C)-, _ ` -•-.A.-1Z...--_- 214 0=%7 o O o 26p O o c%•o z 1 SP.878t80 0.,5.1?882063 ® C8 d0 Vet; vK 14 (1) 1 1 (2) 01411 :7.-• __Ili 1 . e• t 4 ® Ad 4;. 6,. o AI''..4 :-....• _, • _.‘r 4 ._. .___. F.,' 4.____. ._____, 1■� 11 isi ia / $R 678075 1. o/ "+ � &al 2191 ^7 C9 n a O / , f ! �p 1151 'L I MAA 1.x1 330 •if � ,Ar (I) (2) ( S 1.50 Ac. s N.E. 2NO ST. ' i wir_...d,., �. - ..,. _ _�!C•I 1 SR 179144 @� J +r c:1 Q !II. .1 • ��56=3' _ .y'32►f0"9Tp. - a0� '�♦ Lo1,�75 a 0.3Z2 4" w%NJ Ibir iii Ar, Ta 4.76 Aa , ?+ �-. ,�1 - � 4�i �M'" 4.32 Ac. 9 67 -1 3CZ - sIle' z: cr, Teki S it • "._'. :I 0.6ZIc. as o PP' I. :2. tif. 2d ..oo , w z �: lit 2.64 < 12 1. ko f. 6 1 •Ry1 R NN • • ] 'S Ac. QF 2.30Ac. • 1 ) (Bl ,0 13247 J D ^ - ( ( ( 4EMLOw$ " SEC. 15, TWP. 23 N., RNG. 5 E., W.M. ' 04$Lltlt0/11.5'.$1.f �, p ., i , ,,,,, I Nw.. 3( �. l . , ,i,,„4 i t'l t i Q PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RIOCEVIEW COURT I '1;',;:i; 'II \y \\ MrRTI 'S ACRE TRACTS UNRECORDED 1 APPLICATION PENOINI^AT CITY OF RENTON)14/,,, 1 lwr! 40 _:..� :� ..� -,,,,),-'-';,),,—..`4,..14,14::-;".... t._.( Ay,•.,T�'_� -1�1- .,..•„:-....-.- �l r ` -S r . —i3~— -'-7.5;;'_ —___ ARRA. -- -- --- 1 V .. -..-•1:11r:-, � I t -'� _�r-i^ \ ) CyIUMiC YCILE IM -::',3- �r -1 r Y�5 �� 11Q1 r.6 1�r.� m "� ( 'r I 'f0 t a I i i1r ill i11 i .4 2 l'1 aX.LG r4 li 1,11ti g.:. 11 lir 1 '- I N 1 I I Il w.:I,' t1 I + ,,lt. '� li l�i ! �1'v11\ . . =`.;.,11�i I i .v i i I�` I t 11 'k�- r 'tM r�4(�^ V�ITX„4L,DATUM 4' 1 Z {11 l 1 , p L L. —J _ A q �I �� j i 'I 1 ' i f 1 {�� ■� ► L L J 42*A,1 i an Y Ro 1A MAW)N Ga'1nIM M1R1W,.Y V b t P�, iii °dR f li, I',I� + . 1l�' : ,{ l , , t V , r N 'l 'I's' �'vlt fV- a `','„',',,:'/ i V�`'/ C y I �- '1 duis v 1' , , t 1 ,�i j tf �1 ! Fl1E VUE uw ISA b4 1 Q , 1111 1 ,,,/,,,,,'1�t :T<" , .:,.,,,2.,..,......_,.....-„,,,,,r G °'.� f( a�nra� ,mow.-• d� j lose En row[ C G g 1 „ y i 'iY�� 1 Mir `,,0;; <vtt < Tau Ce MC townwvAI MASS kAr MC JRI[tI y --8 ��,f L -11„ �1V I '44,7414)N •, ;S(�, _ X11 Mr KOMACIT OSPa�[ 1 7.67 AN0' I�.1N. HAVOC,IVII 1� ^ _ ' A l i. ' ;t' iIt • Ili I ,ii I \., � -Id ', arrAnow. ..al.rm. kc� 1 r 1 ! 1, F - -- �•1 j;T �wnaw owi.M> lRr'aaunnvr Of MC liar cam*a u2 lS . y 1,v g 4Lt, 1 1'1 11L-` !i l 1,)Ie r -� - a� 1�i� I" Ifs rM.,r watlw. wpm UMW mom,ro.na.+we++a+w(o s> .yt , ! -_ _ �I'�;!�S 1 - _ - ,F:1,.i;�1 7 ' • ,r+ A UwaT.Mo WA,$ o sr a MOM mK EO R.ma , -'t,9,f l� ,I E •c " u J 44 pq, cwlaawor wwas v,�,eye(vxiar eawTaaoa.rr wl APRA,AT A MAKS�l'l n , 1 7 i�- --- 1 - ' \ 1..'.• ,,.,- _• 1/ ` A I711RT MTVINO 1W CO'MC sTl M.... °�'� /1, �� 1-- t. 11� ..i 1 `r� '`— , J 7 1 --• — 1 — -,, 'i. • . — _ -- (, 44/1044 MC MOVKAIT OOOIQ O.9tC11OM 10.mxwr.V SJ MAIM. NAE 2ND T"1 3 -- \�i 1 _J� I �[ S I -'�••� ,. 1 ' I• RAMC(.LAST of 710E ru,wcr74 aaawt Mc waM AL0I0 . ATE,l'.4-,-. - - r wruw d ua/rur fire uh7)ere 000.wurn wr rano TO 1 �L .I(, ' ; V ,; LL -1, • _ ,11 -=7-7` - 1 -_ -1 j ,„,,,,,...,,,C 11a6tIN 1J7w7L]E,.r Aur/awl: MC MWIRYaoM II• 'I ` ` e fit - _ --- � r - - __ ��`I IV", Y.l ttx7.eaXenw IAawal v as.►,nua AwO AK oaO ii -i r�e7ae d 1,0000aE1ff wwt AMllm m 7wE wo -r' I 1 �� i j° 1 37' 1,4!j',,',„ :'"^ eoalawA7a FOR.raw NOW,aarAMe49 ---,(3.--r— i 1 - -ARRA --...; G�" 1 +,.- � i 11��A' "+1� 1j'� • ,71—. 1 $1g 11 "i IAURELHURI T PHASE 1 t1 T1 8 .....:--, li 1 \ C � u^ R °€i<'EL1' (UNpR CONSTRUCTION) 1 ` Y\ -.- _ : ARRA._--........ i'lli• t < TA 3- ,IV .- • ',, a �t 3 1 t' iigi t. j� �&1�'t S �1ti� �- ��)D1„ it 3� 1 31 1 t „'—, -.il 9I ! ! _ — y ____ .✓i�1 ,t��hb '( �� ( j1 rile 111 I 1 '� —'--—___-__-� ¢� pp 1 s d 1 '"•�' d \ J J 1 �Pg a 1 4Y ,U V ,.� ti e An', 1 .o.. l"1� ,, - A "� ':4, +{, ,:, 14 ill' a 1 1}I*n ..-_ARRA... -i,-,--7,..,.7t,..,,+.,, M li , .,4 +1,\1 aRA. l 0901« a5 � \ � . 1 V � v t \4 t / , 8 CRAM.9r .100 t _� ',\..� \ �"'" ��r -lir-19 _ \ -_-i1 �LfE� ``�\\ -ARR A..-_...___A RRA.._-----1 1 �1 .:1/0'.: {lmut OAR 19-01-04 J I \ . . ▪ I I I I • �U,t. '. ~ • V 1 r,.�,,'. `\ I SUIT ACV, I� V V \ . " 111 1 I III ! •: ; ,,+:g,y_` . 17�4ACTB ` 11 I 1 I `w II \ 1 t 1,�4i)' \TRACT T T/IY amvly •n / 1.°0 CI-RANINO i • ARRA 1 j► c, �' ' {I, a/ • \` "' m�•Fa`~ 35 1. "'1 33 .' ^t \I ,�,, ,, \'' y v'i-[` ,,'"m`Z,I��F -_ V^ .. i 1 t vv v I TRACT I 11"v11��' k.� tllt `�r ♦� ---�--�- v 1 FERNWOODA NORTH \ t '' `� � ,rA..� 1E rj( _.. 4:::,,,\ 2�, j 0.2011•1110i-POO //{/ ,�1t Q P03 ss11, u;k,� , J CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA04-162, PP, ECF PROJECT NAME: Elmhurst Preliminary Plat APPLICANT: Liberty Ridge LLC, Mike Merlino LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 201,251,&257 Bremerton Avenue NE DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review and Preliminary Plat approval for a 64-lot subdivision of a multiple parcel, 9.6-acre site. Two tracts for open space and storm drainage are included. The site is zoned Residential - 10 du/ac and is to abide by a Development Agreement. The lots range in size from 3,801 sq. ft. to 5,870 sq. ft. and intended for detached units. All existing buildings would be demolished. Access is proposed via Bremerton Ave. NE to new internal public streets and private access easements. One non-regulated Category 3 wetland would be filled. Maplewood Creek crosses the southwestern portion of the plat. LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. A Geotechnical Engineer shall determine the suitability of the existing on-site fill prior to its use on-site. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services during construction. ,� 2. At the time of building permits, additional geotechnical studies addressing the suitability of site soils for use as structural fill shall be prepared and submitted. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services. 3. The applicant shall comply with the "Geotechnical Engineering Study" prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc., dated August 30, 2004, regarding "Site Preparation and General Earthwork" and "Utility Support and Backfill" The satisfaction of this requirement shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services during construction, utility work and building construction. 4. The project shall be required to be designed and comply with the Department of Ecology's (DOE) Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements,outlined in Volume II of the 2001 Stormwater Management Manual. 5. All contractors are to be made aware of the potential presence of environmental contaminants and instructed to notify the property owner immediately if discolored, odiferous, or otherwise suspect soil is encountered during excavation activities. 6. If suspect soil is encountered during excavation activities, work in these areas is to be stopped until such time as a qualified environmental professional can assess the observed conditions and recommend corrective measures. 7. If the presence of environmental contaminants is confirmed within the suspect soils at concentrations exceeding applicable MTCA cleanup levels, then (a) those soils are to be handled and managed in accordance with MTCA and; (b) the work will be managed and overseen by a qualified environmental professional and properly documented and reported to the Department of Ecology (DOE) in accordance with MTCA. 8. The project shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (Level 2 flow control)and water quality improvements. 9. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee based on a rate of$488.00 per new single-family fir► lot. Credit to be given for the existing three residences. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. 10. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new average daily trip associated with the project. Credit to be given for the existing three residences. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. 61 11. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per new single-family lot. Credit to be given for the existing three residences. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. rorr►' 12. Evergreen and deciduous trees (i.e. Douglas fir, western hemlock, and big leaf maple) shall be planted on 15-foot centers within the 25-foot wide buffer along the east side of the stream. Two-gallon size tree stock shall be used. Planting should occur in the Fall to allow plants to develop roots over the Winter. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. 13. During site preparation and construction of improvements and residences, the applicant shall install silt fencing with brightly colored construction flags to indicate the boundaries of the stream/creek buffer. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division and be completed prior to the issuance of construction/utility permits. 14. After the development of roadway and utility improvements, the applicant shall install permanent fencing(i.e. split-rail fence or other approved barrier) and signage along the entire edge of the stream/creek buffer. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division prior to the recording of the final plat. LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A: *iisrfHE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: THE NORTH 'h OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 'A OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH,RANGE 5 EAST,W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 37.5 FEET THEREOF FOR ROAD; (ALSO KNOWN AS THE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 FEET OF THE NORTH '/2 OF TRACT 5,MARTINS ACRE TRACTS,ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF); SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: THE SOUTH '/z OF THE SOUTHEAST 'A OF HE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH,RANGE 5 EAST,W.M.; EXCEPT THE EASTERLY 7.5 FEET FOR ROAD; (ALSO KNOWN AS THE SOUTHERLY '/2 OF TRACTS 5 AND 6, MARTINS ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF); SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: THE NORTH 'h OF THE SOUTHEAST 'A OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH,RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 37.5 FEET THEREOF FOR ROAD; AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 FEET OF THE REMAINDER; (ALSO KNOWN AS THE NORTH '/2 OF TRACTS 5 AND 6, MARTINS ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF; EXCEPT THE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 OF SAID TRACT 5); SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Q:web/pw/devserv/forms/p!ann ing/masterapp.doc E6 - 10T23NR5E W1/2 1 �W UMW E 4thl St. r • 3��e • CA CA NE s-r. I>, gill II I 1111 NE �,y . 7g ..■ 1 Arn r CA Al R-10 R-10(P) 1_ ce , , .............rmin • ,7, . ai R-8 R-I1 b I :HIM WA V411 mum8 � SE 132nd gritraftril -1wow 613 iv% d I (_,____ D ' � Iw ■ N - =pI► S►H iMOIN 0 r.g ■ gramme 0_; tt\ W R a• : urim��►•,;��a c I 8481 .M 7 fi��` EgE il Eh MINN, '� H EIIIII P `Ulla 101 --,Era T z w 10 ��Z��aI� ...a_ . -gooik ,0 o �� pi vs „outs _ . 4. rimus0 a 011140w.41 Ow Ow 'SU., -ft winol.0 0 0,0 • 11111111110w OA' lta * Otels 0 00 RMHMVO 0 . -8 -___9 0 / 5E 1g5t St SE 142nd St. V RC(P) 0 :(P) r G6 - 22 T23N R5E W 1/2 ~�Y ZONING `�° F6 ZONING ————A^nton GSk�limitp 2:4800 + { 1 #� 15 T23N R5E W 1/Z 5315 2v ,-, • 4'45=4005- Cl OF RENTON APR i '4 2005 Renton City Council l0:30‘1.»i RECEIVED 1055 South Grady Way CITY CLERK'S OFFICE *me Renton, WA 98055 April 7,2005 City Council Members, We, residents of Garden Avenue North and members of the North Renton Neighborhood Association, are writing to propose that the street name of Garden Avenue North be changed on the north side of North 8th Street. We are asking for this change in order to help alleviate traffic problems and confusion that has been observed in our neighborhood and on our street. Current Street Design: Currently Garden Avenue North runs from Bronson Way North through to North 8th Street where there is a "dog arm" then continues through to NE Park Drive. Garden Avenue North is zoned as a residential street from Bronson through to North 4th which includes a school zone. At the intersection of North 4th and Garden Avenue North there is a cement and white bumped barrier as well as signs which are designed to keep traffic from using Garden Avenue North as a through street between the residential areas and the commercial areas. Traffic Issues: Residents have noticed non-residential traffic traveling through on Garden in attempts to travel straight through to North 8th Street. Some travelers will stop to ask residents for directions on *taw how to get to Fry's Electronics, Gene Coulon Park or special events like Cirque Du Soleil. Residents have also recently noticed an increase in semi-truck traffic on Garden Avenue North on the 200 & 300 blocks possibly due to an increase in construction and business activity. Often these semi trucks are seen proceeding across the clearly marked barrier, which is meant to force traffic to the West, in order to continue straight on to the commercial side of Garden Avenue North. To make it even more confusing for incoming traffic, Garden Avenue North appears on popular map websites as a through street although it is not a through street. At North 4th Street traffic is forced to the West and this is not apparent on these maps (see printouts from MapQuest, Maps.com, and Yahoo Maps). Our Proposal: It would make more sense and help avoid even more confusion as the area becomes developed and more traffic comes to the area if the commercial side of Garden Avenue North were given a different name (North of 8th street). This will be particularly helpful for construction workers and consumers for the new Harvest Partners development. Changing the name would make it more evident where commercial and residential areas begin and end. We think that since there is only one business currently located at the North end of Garden Avenue North (Fry's Electronics) that would be affected by a name change that it is a good and preventative time to make this name change. The street could be named to something more fitting for the upcoming development or to a name the City thinks would best benefit the area. , Thank you for considering our request. Below are names of residents who are interested in this change: 'tome Name Address Signature / - , „ 't ,L1'• :':.:-- \ IK‘ 01(:ea IZ('M- ---3 6 c-csic-,z,).,,f cc N ,•-.c kf---•,< , ,,,,' ••:-:, L-' / iy/ / _____. • 1\). . , - ' C --'" ) Cr 6-v-,,- ,-(c__ i ,e fi -J(-2 ci..)„(5-...._- .) -D , A ve;-;' L - ; CoLC A - b 3 e -- S- , -- -1 N A t• i r L.Q....... kv* - • ' - ,.) 1',caviiL k. tAii 4' 52(beck-ry 3 _. o . •,,4ti i•,- ... :,,,,-,i,._ )--- '*.airie Thank you for considering our request. Below are names of residents who are interested in this change: Ntspe Name Address Signature ----- , ---,,m_ , And ret:1 . Cr-vdr 10 ci CI (v1 j'alie 0' _.,,,t--.6et • ___ ---- . 7 CiCcv-ctszA A,:kid ) ----fir"- / . A 4 Ail ji / A' ----,4," •/17 , (/"--) i /671t r 1 ti---)j 5 iL „ , ,:.?,{/P 57 S' cd 6‘,7,4.4-5,7i fitAe__p_ -'.Ei--x_6,6/ ... ,i, „ .. • .>. /. ,‘.„.....z_ ,: , ,_ ,. / ) z , , /1--i ?it. '',-. . ,., , ... /. . p ---, ,j , ,. ,k,-, v , , :---, .'\;L )( C» - ‘NC4' . I) 1, Ci 1 i n ;._„' f ,_- y .)c) ) , 1 . _ : Ai IctIlLEL Ef916C127 231 ,:,--- &:.. i • ,..- ...._} •f 4---, . : _______ T;4 fi.3 57T.:4 2 1 0C 4g OG)/9(it'll/ • ..o ( (-- 0 (..z. 1-Art: Ni ----„? ...--..— -1 ,.- Gailldio J , / \ i IA 0 .,11,--s c 1,..) d - D 7 f ') **NW CITY OF RENTON Ju bra +.ed APR 1'4. 2005 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE an der knjefloc4(--- 3N rd , A-Ve- N' R--w, ggo55 Aar k LA-(aj 311-1Gar P-►-� �(/� e(t4-0.r1, W A- Is 055 60,11,1 'Da r\As V2(5 Gar4ert Avg Iii. ----- --------:. **sr' Map Quest , .. ... , ,___.,....„.„..,..---,-...,:.--„,„....,:,-„,.,.„-„,,---„,..-.„.,....„. ,,,,.. ,:'"7",;•:iz.ir--'4,'-;',i;,;-,,;;,4;ffi..Mrf:''.=',:''` ''-','''''-:'TMPI:'-'-Zrtr7.r i -,::IttAAPINESTi z Ne22-ne67 I 600tri • Nu 20th St 18011ft.-..., 142 a . -. _... ..t. z.7. .: / .;.• :u ti ,•.4t1. , • Ne 12th St > c, 's Ne flth St : ‘-' 4 . . .. -0 k Si 1711'1R 1) Z „'-' 14 Na 8th St ..„.1L_ .2ir rtrsie 71b C't Hightarids Park iN Rortron 0 r- z. • .., 4 *funk's"' N 6t i St t tS N 6th StZ" _ R 4:.z. Airpall 5 111 ' Ne 5th PI o N 4th St --,,- ,i Z ilt v is n + Z 7. Airport Way S -,,sil AN4 10 Ne . Niko, ' Renton44.,.: 4- oo - Se 211d P•S‘ '1dSt . ,. S 2nd St 53rd St c: dSt — , c 2005 Ma.Quest,com Inc ©2005 NAVTE0*„. 'law ( ( t it. ----- _ -c3 _ i `:.'t 1 ::-.' - ,r.,,'L.',:;11;-- 4;;,!•,%,•,,,,;4_,;,` J '..n ;,;;:;":.••••,;„,.';`,•;4,i1.-4,,,,;;;;;,.,•;.;. : 0 c7.1 ""',.7::"-1"; ' - =.7:::::, ;--...--::•;,::,:fttiteli ':::,;::::''.•.::05,.*IPA,N::1 ••::. 1 (.; i,•-, 11 ‘,„..,,,,i ;a-AV ,. •- . -*-,,, ,,,,,,,,,,-,'-, —4 i ;,,-: i.,:';•'•;.14-1;a0,,;;;;;;J.1;j; ,J; ; 3 2., 1 z"TZ ''',.'.(,.-: -:qtTfift"4:72 .••-. I 1-J 9 0 :::.., f.1 .„ r: ";c'-':' ' ":;:;;;,?'"'.1,1ji;5 4144;";j:j;.::•'.';;,';'„ 1 = „,-_,;;;•''''D-' ,, „ ,, ; . •j:':'.',';;Vek! *0000,,,,;':;',.0; •::•,:ok'llt.::::::::1,•,• : :,, f;! I 41-- . 'i°48:,..,.;',,-, •-: i -4 I ,'' \,4,•,:',,:Z LID J:J:1r A,,,;., 1,1 lhorris Ave tea :;:'' 'oe,•4 .7,-;-•::':::::. i --:: — .... UI , 7 •-,u _RAirh Ave. . ,. --,:•:,,,. .. ':.. I D J.,'t .Y. :---------------———::::-." • . '''''',J,,, J01,0.'J'''''' " — 1 ... 1 ' •1.:-4,1".044-ke' I, .-,1 ... _ __....._ . :j.. ' 1 JD .g,•.' -.1 j,I j''''.N.,.:::',._•,,. 7' 7.4:4„,,, ' ..-'•;:I '.0' '''•-•._,.."--•—..;;;,,;04,11,1_ „j•I ,J0°'` ..,---- ,. ._... '''''I, .: •- ''''',,,,_'"''',0....,--,,,.....0.0_,..„).-f I....4.0 i`0 JL'' ';',,, '•0' -• '77-"----14),--rdil L';•;=-'•1,1-- - I • ,. . J J1 Edrnoocis k,,,e 1,..1c. .„... . .1 • ,,1 ., i -1 H.:in iligioll 4'. C.: H,: , H .:1 1 -I,,'::1 •. 7;ID i 1 .J.k;,,.;? 1•4.;....., ', 1, „ lec'xi:-.!...1..,1e.. ., .Lig 1 r4 ''' •''''7!..•',". j ' , '0''''''''' J1 i • I 1 I, 1 1 ' • . ; , Yahoo Maps{ tCEF.t . _ _ - VIEW Tn • YAK 2 street - 909 C .t _ .r g _ -,1 -- _ Amusement Rarks � - i i - - 'it 1 Beaches N 6th St ' .Golf Courses ? I r Lr- Hiking Trails -- - i a. - t� J .Mavis Theaters _" Make Map •`s - � '_ ---- !•. -- -Ea n tv . _ Museums .N �: :�,3s',,', i Night Clubs Clicking on Mapt ti ,tt.,z; N n C. i Resorts -. - - w-" .. --" -- eg ,Z Sporting Venues Re-Center �Os _ ---=:7; - Spas Re-Center _ - _ Only - - .,•8 ._ ,-. .- , Theater 120[';;;;-'d C1. `c:1!_rY_!r€t:7 Seru=c ,- P^t.,c LSr__ '1000-tt ,�n, r. "R;5ervices '' e2.1:1; 2.i vanoo! ©2oo4NAVTEO 7 ,. ->., - my ir-- 1......1 t., , , i , , , r' •%. I . & ,. ' ;,- .:7 -. „, •-• --- - . ---7-----___--_-_=---=_..... --"'" ------.---_----- .- __,..........---- „..../..."- -...4...-_-•40e.- Ar Ar Ili 116 -.44446.7444,14.- '..".......- - -- - -....... - _ • - - --a' ---"IIIIIIIIIIIIk _rn_ ... __,......... ."*"-- Heading North on Garden Avenue N. at the intersection of N. 4 . Notice the cement and white bumped barrier and the directional signs forcing traffic to the West. '%6••• , _ ' : 2 1, •*.Y' 1,. , ... _ -- - „ _ __ L______ ._ ,;,... __-....-..„ -,-...------------- „,„,„ _ -_ _--* ._ ---------- .. ....---- Heading South on Garden Avenue N. at the intersection of N. 4' . *tie APPROVED BY 1 UTILITIES COMMITTEE M ®UAICIL COMMITTEE REPORT Date y a5-2OOS April 25,2005 Clean Sweep Renton (April 18, 2004) The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the implementation of a portion of the Clean Sweep Renton program. The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve appropriation of from the Solid Waste Utility fund balance in 2005, for the implementation of the Reuse It! Renton event, projected to cost$6,325 and the Neighborhood Association Cleanup event,projected to cost $39,450. The Committee further recommends that the one- time Neighbor-to-Neighbor Curbside Cleanup event projected to cost $299,225, and the associated public education and outreach campaign,projected to cost $55,000 be referred to the Committee of the Whole. 1l13ctuSSed a- etdopfed of the dounc/l ince-111,13. Randy Corman, Chair Don Persson, Member Marcie Palmer, Substitute Member cc: Gregg Zimmerman,PBPW Administrator Lys Hornsby,Utility Systems Director Linda Knight,Solid Waste Coordinator 1:\COMMITTEE\Reports\Utilities\20051CIeanSweep.doc\LHHtp AP:MOVED BY __1 WY COUNCIL UTILITIES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT Date .25- a 00,5- April OSApril 25,2005 Central Business District Utility Replacement Project Bid Award (Referred April 18, 2004) The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to transfer funds totaling $100,000 from Wastewater account 45395 (Sewer Main Extension—Sunset Ph II)to account 45405 and funds totaling $120,000 from Water account 55170 (Water Main Rehabilitation)to account 55290 to cover the additional costs of the project. The Utilities Committee also recommends the Central Business District Utility Replacement project be awarded to Americon Inc. d/b/a TAB Enterprises, in the amount of$709,109.50. Don Persson, Member �l I erGt ,t___i Marcie Palmer, Substitute Member cc: Gregg Zimmerman,PBPW Administrator Lys Hornsby,Utility Systems Director Mike &rioif, I,4)Qsteweder Einecr A'P OVED BY FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT CM?COUNCIL April 25, 2005 Date a5 aoo.5' APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND PAYROLL VOUCHERS The Finance Committee approves for payment on April 25, 2005, claim vouchers 236561-237060 and 3 wire transfers, totaling $1,856,304.61 , and 569 direct deposits, payroll vouchers 56807- 57030, and 1 wire transfer, totaling $1,847,627.31 . ,--- ,,,- -"--"' V..e_sLyj------------ ion Persson, Chair tr�� Toni Nelson, Vice- air Iu . Denis Law, Member A PPP Okf E BY -3 TRANSPORTATION/AVIATION COMMITTEE crit comm. COMMITTEE REPORT 1-'25"x00,5" Date April 25,2005 Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) Improvements Project Perteet, Inc. Supplement Agreement No. 5 CAG 01-071 (Referred: April 18, 2005) The Transportation/Aviation Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the supplemental agreement with Perteet, Inc. for the purpose of moving the gas facility location and underground certain electrical facilities to improve aesthetics of the entrance to the access road in the amount of$38,650. The Committee further recommends that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the supplemental agrrement. ,-)(4 ("Jima_ Marcie PChair Don Persson, Vice-Chair Randy Corman, Member cc: Sandra Meyer,Transportation Systems Director Leslie Lahndt,Transportation Design Supervisor Rob Lochmiller,Transportation Project Manager •Prejcct-file TRANSPORTATION/AVIATION COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT Date 143°1°°5- April 25,2005 South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements W&H Pacific Supplemental Agreement No. 2 CAG 04-013 (Referred: April 18, 2005) The Transportation/Aviation Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the supplemental agreement with W&H Pacific in the amount of$927,329.59 for the purpose of completing final design and contract plans and specifications for the needed roadway and stormwater, water and sewer utilities to support the development of Lakeshore Landing. The Committee further recommends that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the supplemental agreement. 7L7Q . Mar '- r, r Don Persson, Vice-Chair Randy Corman, Member cc: Sandra Meyer,Transportation Systems Director Leslie Lahndt,Transportation Design Supervisor Rob Lochmiller,Transportation Project Manager Projcct rile .rpr.-- ' tf Eli PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT Date 1'45" 5- a00S . April 25,2005 • Interagency.Jaii Bookings and Fees (Referred 10/11/04) The Public Safety Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to accept jail bookings from other municipalities on a space-available basis, at a daily rate of$70. The Committee further recommends that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the Interlocal agreements. Denis W. Law, Chair Randy Corman, Vice-Chair oni Nelson, M ber C: Garry Anderson,Chief of Police Penny Bartley,Jail Manager / a Date `t'°26'-`12"6- COMMUNITY 25-GODSCOMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE MAJORITY COMMITTEE REPORT April 25, 2005 Pet Strolling at Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park (Referred July 19, 2004) The Community Services Committee recommends concurrence in the Board of Park Commissioner's and staff recommendation to not change the current park rules and regulations stipulating that dogs are not allowed at parks with swimming beaches. The majority feels the presence of pets at heavily used parks such as Coulon Beach Park could be disturbing to some patrons. In addition, it could be difficult to enforce park rules and keep the park environment clean and healthy, as not all pet owners comply with park rules to clean up after their pets. Fire Station#15, located at 1404 N. 30th Street,will be used on an experimental basis as an off-leash dog park facility. Dogs will continue to be allowed in the remaining forty-three park and open space areas as well as on all trail systems January through December. Several of the sites provide access to the Cedar River where dogs are allowed in the water. Toni Nelson, Chair Dan Clawson, Member cc: Dennis Culp,Community Services Administrator Leslie Betlach, Parks Director Terrence Flatley, Parks Maintenance Manager LeeWheeler, Fire Chief � I 157 ft FIRE STATION #15 SITE EXP RIMENTAL OFF-LEASH DO PARK I ' 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 ft 100ft 0 0 o O 0 o O 0 • O 0 M o • o O _ _ — o • 0 0 SMALL LARGE DOG DOG AREA AREA 0 0 0I O 0 ° • o O 0 0 • NORTH 30TH STREET ,!7'_ NOT ADOPTED Majority Report adopted instead COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE MINORITY COMMITTEE REPORT April 25, 2005 Pet Strolling at Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park (Referred July 19, 2004) The Community Services Committee Minority recommends that the Park Rules and Regulations be modified to allow for the designation and accommodation of pet strolling at parks with swimming beaches. Pets will be allowed in parks with swimming beaches during the months of October through April, so long as the pet is under the owner's control and on a leash no longer than eight(8) feet in length. At Coulon Beach Park, pets will be allowed to use the area north of the northern-most restroom facility. In all instances,pets will not be allowed in the sandy beach area or in the water due to health concerns. It will be the responsibility of the pet owner to pick up and dispose of pet debris in order to maintain the park in a clean and healthy condition. Fire Station#15, located at 1404 N 30th Street, will be used on an experimental basis as an off-leash dog park facility. Dogs will continue to be allowed in the remaining forty-three park and open space areas as well as on all trail systems January through December. Several of these sites provide access to the Cedar River where dogs are allowed in the water. er2 - Marcie Palmer, Vice Chair cc: Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator Leslie Betlach, Parks Director Terrence Flatley, Parks Maintenance Manager 157 ft r FIRE STATION #15 SITE EXF1ERIMENTAL OFF-LEASH D(340 . PARK 0 0 0 0 o O O o O o o O 57ft 100ft ° o 0 o • 0 o • 0 o 0 O M p 0 M = e O N o — — o SMALL LARGE o DOG DOG ° AREA AREA ° f o o i r, o 0 o o 0 o o . . . . , L_ ______________ NORTH 30TH STREET .mac I AZet ode ` a�"-BOOS CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5/3S AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE SHORELINE AND CRITICAL AREAS POLICY AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S 1995 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MAPS AND DATA IN CONJUNCTION THEREWITH. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Renton has heretofore adopted and filed a "Comprehensive Plan" and the City Council of Renton has implemented and amended said "Comprehensive Plan" from time to time, together with the adoption of various codes, reports and records; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has heretofore recommended to the City Council, from time to time, certain amendments to the City's "Comprehensive Plan;" and WHEREAS, the City of Renton, pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act, has been required to integrate Shoreline Management policies into its "Comprehensive Plan;" and WHEREAS, the proposed revisions to the Environment Element and specific policies in the Land Use Element are needed for policy consistency in guiding implementation of the Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS,RCW 90.58.020 requires the City to consider shoreline use priorities; and WHEREAS, the City considered policy amendments as described in the "Proposed Renton Comprehensive Plan and Shoreline Master Program Policy Amendments" prepared by Jones & Stokes, January 26, 2005, on behalf of the City; and WHEREAS, the City considered appropriate amendments to the Shoreline Use Environments Map for the Black River and Cedar River to address Shoreline Master Program text/map conflicts and further considered amendments for an unclassified annexed area in order ORDINANCE NO. to make the Shoreline Master Program consistent with environmental limitations and existing uses as described in the "Proposed Renton Shoreline Master Program Use Environment Amendments,"prepared by Jones& Stokes, dated March 8, 2004, on behalf of the City; and WHEREAS, the City's protection of shorelines and critical areas is multifaceted and includes City ownership of environmentally sensitive sites, regional collaboration, City capital improvement programming that involves habitat restoration, as well as shoreline and critical area policies and regulations; and WHEREAS, the City conducted early agency review with the State of Washington Department of Ecology Early State Agency Review with a meeting on March 23, 2004, which resulted in receipt by the City of State comments in May 2004, and responses by the City to comments in July 2004; and WHEREAS, the City notified State and local governments and tribal agencies and parties of record of the work program through a notice of application and SEPA determination; and WHEREAS, the City issued a SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance in August 2004, which Determination was timely appealed and was upheld on appeal by the City's Hearing Examiner on December 16, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City held periodic public meetings with the Planning Commission between Spring 2003 and Spring 2005 and City Council Planning and Development Committee between Spring 2004 and Spring 2005, as well as televised workshop sessions with the Council Committee of the Whole between January 2004 and September 2004; and 2 ORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS, the City conducted a public open house on July 27, 2004, a focus of which was the proposed stream/lake/shoreline policy and regulation amendments, and a workshop with Seattle/King County Master Builders and neighboring jurisdictions on August 16, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City has provided opportunity for the public to comment on the review and suggest needed revisions of the plan and regulations, and held public hearings March 2, 2005, and March 21, 2005, on this matter; and WHEREAS, the City considered and responded to government agency and public comments as compiled and documented in "Responses to Planning Commission Hearing Comments: Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration" dated March 9, 2005 and "Updated Responses to City Council Hearing Comments Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration" dated March 31, 2005, both prepared on behalf of the City; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made certain findings and recommendations to the City Council, including implementing policies; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined after due consideration of the testimony and evidence before it that it is advisable and appropriate to amend and modify the City's "Comprehensive Plan;" and WHEREAS, such modification and integration of the Shoreline Master Program into the Comprehensive Plan is in the best interest of the public; and WHEREAS, the City will consider comprehensive Shoreline Master Program amendments in a subsequent work program to comply with Shoreline Management Guidelines in accordance with the timelines included in the State law; 3 ORDINANCE NO. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. This ordinance is also supported by the following conclusions based on the adopted findings: 1) The City followed its established public participation program; 2) Revisions are needed to the Comprehensive Plan; 3) The City has conducted its seven-year update requirement under RCW 36.70A.130 for all portions of the Comprehensive Plan by completing the portions of the work program needed to implement the Critical Areas, Shorelines and Best Available Science review; 4) All policies within these Elements were reviewed and those policies that remained without amendment are found to be in compliance with the Growth Management Act, as amended, and the Shoreline Management Act; 5) All modified and revised Elements of the Comprehensive Plan are internally consistent and provide sufficient capacity of land at urban densities and sufficient levels of service to comply with Countywide Planning Policies and the 20 year population forecast from the Office of Financial Management and comply with the Growth Management Act as amended; 6) Consistent with the City Council Planning and Development Committee Report of April 11, 2005, and the City's Comprehensive Plan Amendment procedures, as well as Growth Management Act requirements, the non-Shoreline Master Program policy amendments as described in the memo "Proposed Renton Comprehensive Plan and Shoreline Master Program Policy Amendments," Jones & Stokes, January 26, 2005" will be deferred for processing to the City's 2005 Comprehensive Plan Amendment review cycle later this year; and 4 ORDINANCE NO. 7) The amendments to the Shoreline Master Program in this Ordinance are intended to integrate Shoreline Master Program Goals and Policies into the City Comprehensive Plan and to address use priorities of RCW 90.58.020. The City will consider comprehensive Shoreline Master Program amendments in a subsequent work program to comply with Shoreline Management Guidelines in accordance with the timelines included in the State law. SECTION II. The "Comprehensive Plan," maps, data and reports in support of the "Comprehensive Plan" are hereby modified, amended and adopted to include the amendments to the following elements: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element, Environmental Element, and the Glossary as shown on the attached Exhibits A, B, and C incorporated herein as if fully set forth. SECTION III. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to make the necessary changes on said City's "Comprehensive Plan" to evidence the aforementioned amendments, and to prepare a submittal package to the State of Washington Department of Ecology who will have approval authority regarding Shoreline Master Program Amendments. SECTION IV. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file this ordinance as provided by law, and keep a complete copy of said document on file with the City Clerk's office. SECTION V. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after publication, and after approval by the State of Washington Department of Ecology as consistent with State Shoreline laws and rules. 5 ORDINANCE NO. • PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2005. Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD.1179:4/21/05:ma 6 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT Exhibit A The following policies and amendments to policies are added to the Environmental Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The remaining policies of the Environmental Element are unchanged. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT GOAL 1. Continue protection of Renton's natural systems,natural beauty, and environmental quality. 2. f Reserved for 2005 Comprehensive Plan Amendments to Environment Element.] 3. Manage Shorelines of the State to protect unique and fragile areas,retain and enhance natural amenities within an urban environment,and minimize hazards to public safety. Flood Plains Objective EN-E: Protect the natural functions of 100-year floodplains and floodways. Policy EN-25a. Prohibit permanent structures Policy EN-29a. Emphasize non-structural methods from developing in floodways due to risks in planning for flood prevention and damage associated with deep and fast flowing water. reduction. Substantial stream channel modification,realignment, and straightening should Policy EN-26a. Limit development within the 100 be discouraged as means of flood protection. year floodplain to that which is not harmed by flooding. Roads and finished floors of structures Policy EN-30a. Dredging activities may be should be located above the 100 year flood level, conducted as follows: and new development should provide compensation for existing flood storage capacity due to filling. a. Continue as-needed maintenance dredging of the constructed channel section of the Lower Cedar Policy EN-27a. Restrict land uses to those that do River per the City of Renton's agreement with the not cause backwater or significantly increase the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for flood control velocity of floodwaters. using best management practices to minimize salmonid habitat disruption. Policy EN-28a. Incorporate design features,which are intended to keep harmful substances from b. In coordination with Federal or State permitting floodwaters in any development,which is allowed agencies, the City may allow dredging outside of in the 100-year floodplain. the lower Cedar River for public purposes such as to protect public facilities,or when needed to improve aquatic habitat, for example to correct 1 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT problems of material distribution or water quality when such problems adversely affect aquatic life. Discussion: The maintenance dredging of the lower 1.25 miles of the constructed channel section Policy EN-31a Renton's floodplain land use and of the Lower Cedar River will continue to be management activities should be carried out in needed periodically. The City of Renton was the coordination with King County, adjacent cities, and local project sponsor with the U.S. Army Corps of State and Federal agencies. The City should Engineers for the construction of the Cedar River partner with agencies to implement regional plans Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project. As such as the King County Flood Hazard Reduction the local project sponsor, the City of Renton is Plan. required by its Project Cooperation Agreement with the US Corps of Engineers to maintain the Policy EN-32a The existing flood storage and federal project, which includes future maintenance conveyance functions and ecological values of dredging. floodplains, wetlands, and riparian corridors should be protected, and should, where possible, be enhanced or restored. Shorelines of the State: Natural Resources and Hazard Management Summary: Approximately 18 miles of shoreline in the City of Renton are under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act(SMA) of 1971, including Lake Washington, Green River, Cedar River, Black River, Springbrook Creek,and May Creek are shorelines within the City. Generally,regulated shorelines include the water bodies and their shorelands extending landward from the floodway or ordinary high water mark for two hundred(200) feet in all directions. This jurisdictional area increases to include all marshes, bogs, swamps, and river deltas, associated with the regulated Shorelines of the State.The total of this area is subject to shoreline use classification and regulation. Natural environment conservation and flood hazard minimization are priorities of the SMA and of the Renton's required Shoreline Master Program,of which the policies of this sub-element are a part. (Also refer to the Land Use Element, Shorelines of the State:Land Use, Recreation, and Circulation Management.) Objective EN-R: Protect and preserve resources and amenities of all Shorelines of the State situated in the City of Renton for use and enjoyment by present and future generations. Policy EN-88 Existing natural resources should Policy EN-89 Shoreline land uses including be conserved. residential,commercial, industrial, civic, and mixed 1. Water quality and water flow should be uses should be allowed consistent with the Land maintained at a level to permit recreational use,to Use Element. Existing and future activities on all provide suitable habitat for aquatic life,and to shorelines of the State regulated by the City of satisfy other required human needs. Renton should be designed to minimize adverse 2. Aquatic habitats and spawning grounds effects on the environment. should be protected, improved and, if feasible, restored. Policy EN-90 The City of Renton should take 3. Terrestrial wildlife habitats, including aggressive action with responsible governmental wetlands,riparian areas, and upland habitats should agencies to assure that discharges from all drainage be protected, improved and, if feasible,increased. basins are considered an integral part of shoreline 4. Unique natural and fragile areas should be planning. designated and maintained as open space. Passive 1. Soil erosion and sedimentation, which recreation access and use should be restricted, if adversely affect any shoreline within the City of necessary,for the conservation of these areas. Renton, should be prevented or controlled. 2 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT 2. The contamination of existing watercourses 1. Low density development should be should be prevented or controlled. encouraged to the extent that such development would permit and provide for the continuation of the existing natural character of the shoreline, and Policy EN-91 All further development of the is consistent with underlying zoning. shorelines of May Creek east of FAI-405 right-of- 2. For the subject locations,the waterways way, and that portion of Springbrook Creek should be left in an undeveloped natural state as beginning from approximately SW 27th Street on much as possible. the north to SW 31st Street on the south, abutting City-owned wetlands in this area, and for that Policy EN-92. Floodplain objective EN-E and portion of the west side of the Creek in the vicinity associated policies are incorporated by reference as of SW 38th Street abutting the City's recently part of the City of Renton Shoreline Master acquired Wetlands Mitigation Bank should be Program objectives and policies. compatible with the existing natural state of the shoreline. 3 City of Renton Land Use Element Exhibit B The following policies and amendments to policies are added to the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The remaining policies of the Land Use Element are unchanged. LAND USE ELEMENT GOALS I. Plan for future growth of the Urban Area based on regionally developed growth forecasts, adopted growth targets, and land capacity as determined through implementation of the Growth Management Act. II. Minimize risk associated with potential aviation incidents on the ground and for aircraft occupants. III. Actively pursue annexations. IV. Maintain the City's natural and cultural history by documenting and appropriately recognizing its historic and/or archaeological sites. V. Pursue the transition of non-conforming uses and structures to encourage more conforming uses and development patterns. VI. Develop a system of facilities that meet the public and quasi-public service needs of present and future employees. VII. Maintain the City's agricultural and mining resources as part of Renton's cultural history. VIII. Promote new development and neighborhoods in the City that: 1) Contribute to a strong sense of community and neighborhood identity; 2) Are walkable places where people can shop, play, and get to work without always having to drive; 3) Are developed at densities sufficient to support public transportation and make efficient use of urban services and infrastructure; 1 City of Renton Land Use Element 4) Offer a variety of housing types for a population diverse in age, income, and lifestyle; 5) Are varied or unique in character; 6) Support"grid" and "flexible grid" street and pathway patterns where appropriate; 7) Are visually attractive, safe, and healthy environments in which to live; 8) Offer connection to the community instead of isolation; and 9) Provide a sense of home. IX. Develop well-balanced attractive, convenient, robust commercial office, office, and residential development within designated Centers serving the City and the region. X. Support existing businesses and provide an energetic business environment for new commercial activity providing a range of service, office, commercial, and mixed use residential uses that enhance the City's employment and tax base along arterial boulevards and in designated development areas. XI. Achieve a mix of land uses including industrial, high technology, office, and commercial activities in Employment Areas that lead to economic growth and a strengthening of Renton's employment base. XII. Plan and coordinate land uses,public access, and natural resource protection along Shorelines of the State in accordance with the State Shoreline Management Act. IV. HISTORICAL AND ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Goal: Maintain the City's natural and cultural history by documenting and appropriately recognizing its historic and/or archaeological sites. Discussion: Renton has a rich and interesting history as a community. It was the site of an established Native American settlement and changed through the years of early European immigration into a pioneer town. The City incorporated in 1901 and later became a major regional employment center and residential area. The following policies are intended to guide efforts to recognize and integrate Renton's past into future development as the City evolves into a dynamic urban community. Objective LU-O: Communicate Renton's history by protecting historic and archaeological sites and structures when appropriate and as opportunities arise. Policy LU-61. Historic resources should continue to be identified and mapped within the City as an on-going process. 2 City of Renton Land Use Element Policy LU-62. Natural and cultural resources should be identified by project proponents when applying for land use approval, as part of the application submitted for review. Suspected or newly discovered historic or cultural sites should be kept free from intrusions for a reasonable time until their value is determined. Policy LU-63. Potentially adverse impacts on cultural resources deemed to be significant should be mitigated as a condition of project approval. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. Policy LU-64. The City should work cooperatively with King County by exchanging resource information pertaining to natural and cultural resources. Policy LU-65. Historical and archaeological sites, identified as significant by the City of Renton, should be preserved and/or incorporated into development projects. Policy LU-66. Downtown buildings and site development proposals should be encouraged to incorporate displays about Renton's history, including prominent families and individuals, businesses, and events associated with downtown's past. Implementation of this policy should occur within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update. XII. SHORELINES OF THE STATE: LAND USE, RECREATION, AND CIRCULATION MANAGEMENT Summary: Shorelines are of limited supply and are faced with rapidly increasing demands for uses such as marinas, fishing, swimming and scenic views, as well as recreation,private housing, commercial and industrial uses. The Washington State Shoreline Management Act (SMA)passed in 1971 and is based on the philosophy that the shorelines of our State are among our most "valuable" and "fragile" natural resources and that unrestricted development of these resources is not in the best public interest. Therefore, planning and management are necessary in order to prevent the harmful effects of uncoordinated and piece-meal development of our State's shorelines. Under the Washington State SMA, local governments have the primary responsibility for initiating the planning program and administering the regulatory requirements of the Act, with the Department of Ecology acting in a supportive, review, or approval capacity depending on the particular shoreline proposal and regulatory requirements. Jurisdiction Approximately 18 miles of shoreline in the City of Renton are under the jurisdiction of the SMA as shown in Figures XII-A and XII-B: 1. Cedar River. 3 City of Renton Land Use Element 2. Green River. 3. Lake Washington. 4. May Creek from the intersection of May Creek and N.E. 31st Street in the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 32-24-5E WM downstream in a northeasterly direction to its mouth at Lake Washington. 5. Springbrook Creek from the Black River on the north to S.W. 43rd Street on the south. 6. Black River. All are considered as Shorelines of the State. Further, by State standards, the Green River and Lake Washington are classified as Shorelines of State-wide Significance, requiring more close review and regulation, and comprise approximately 5.8 miles of the shorelines of the State regulated by City of Renton. Shoreline Master Programs As set forth in the provisions of the Act, local governments must fulfill the following basic requirements for regulated shorelines: • Compilation of a comprehensive inventory which includes a survey of natural characteristics, present land uses, and patterns of ownership. • Development of a Master Program, including, goals, policies, and regulations to provide an objective guide for regulating the use of shorelines. • Administration of a shoreline permit system for proposed substantial development on Shorelines of the State regulated by Renton. In compliance with the inventory requirement of the Act, the Renton Planning Department conducted a comprehensive inventory of the natural characteristics, present land uses, and patterns of ownership along the City's shoreline. The inventory was completed in October 1972, and provided a substantial basis for the development of this Master Program. The Renton Shoreline Master Program (RSMP or SMP) shoreline environments and specific use regulations reflect the local conditions that are documented in that inventory. As updates have been prepared over time for particular locations or for particular policies or regulations, additional inventory and analysis documentation has been supplied in accordance with the SMA and Washington Administrative Code requirements. The City of Renton, with the help of its local citizens, developed a SMP in compliance with the Act to serve as a guide for regulating use of the Shorelines of the State within Renton's jurisdiction. The components of the Renton SMP, and their location in the City's plans and regulations, are as follows: • Shoreline goals, objectives, policies: o Land Use Element Subsection- Shorelines of the State: Land Use, Recreation, and Circulation Management 4 City of Renton Land Use Element o Environment Element Subsection - Shorelines of the State: Natural Resources and Hazard Management • Shoreline use environments: o Land Use Element Subsection- Shorelines of the State: Land Use, Recreation, and Circulation Management o Renton Municipal Code, Title 4. • Shoreline use regulations, and provisions for variances and conditional uses. o Renton Municipal Code, Title 4. Management Objectives & Intent The basic intent of the RSMP is to provide for the management of shorelines of the State within Renton's jurisdiction by planning for and fostering all reasonable and appropriate uses and to ensure, if development takes place, that it is done in a manner which will promote and enhance the best interests of the general public. The RSMP has further been composed to protect the public interest and general welfare in shorelines regulated by Renton and, at the same time, to recognize and protect owners' legal property rights consistent with the public interest. The goals and policies of the RSMP are formulated so as to enhance the public use and enjoyment of the shorelines so long as that public use is consistent with, and does not impair, legal private property rights. It is recognized that the Shorelines of the State found in Renton are located within a major urbanized area, and that they are subject to ever increasing pressures of additional uses necessitating increased coordination in the management and development of the shorelines. An attempt has, therefore, been made to present a planned, rational, and concerted effort to increase coordinated and optimum utilization of the Shorelines of the State under Renton's jurisdiction. The SMA legislative policy indicates that uses are preferred on Shorelines of the State as follows: "In the implementation of this policy the public's opportunity to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of natural shorelines of the state shall be preserved to the greatest extent feasible consistent with the overall best interest of the state and the people generally. To this end uses shall be preferred which are consistent with control of pollution and prevention of damage to the natural environment, or are unique to or dependent upon use of the state's shoreline. Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines of the state, in those limited instances when authorized, shall be given priority for single family residences and their appurtenant structures, ports, shoreline recreational uses including but not limited to parks,marinas,piers, and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines of the state, industrial and commercial developments which are particularly dependent on their location on or use of the shorelines of the state and other development that will provide an opportunity for substantial numbers of the 5 City of Renton Land Use Element people to enjoy the shorelines of the state. Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines and shorelands of the state shall be recognized by the department. Shorelines and shorelands of the state shall be appropriately classified and these classifications shall be revised when circumstances warrant regardless of whether the change in circumstances occurs through man-made causes or natural causes." (RCW 90.58.020, excerpted in part) Additionally, the Master Program has also been formulated so as to provide for uses of Shorelines of Statewide Significance (i.e. Lake Washington; Green River) in the following order of preference consistent with the SMA: 1. Recognize and protect the state-wide interest over local interest on shorelines of state-wide significance. 2. Preserve the natural character of the shorelines. 3. Result in long-term over short-term benefits. 4. Protect the resources and ecology of the shorelines. 5. Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines. 6. Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shorelines. 7. Provide for any other element deemed appropriate or necessary. It should also be noted that the Washington State Department of Ecology has designated Lake Washington as a "region" for the purpose of shoreline planning. The Lake Washington Regional Shoreline goals and Policies adopted by the Regional Citizens Advisory Committee on October 31, 1973, were considered in the formulation of the RSMP. Shoreline Use Environments Summary: Shorelines of the State are to be classified into "use environments" based upon current development pattern, biophysical capabilities, and other factors. Policies, standards, and regulations can be customized by use environment, shoreline, and use depending on needs. Generally, regulated shorelines include the water bodies and their shorelands extending landward from the floodway or ordinary high water mark for two hundred(200) feet in all directions. This jurisdictional area increases to include all marshes,bogs, swamps, and river deltas, associated with the regulated Shorelines of the State. The total of this area is subject to shoreline use classification and regulation. Objective LU-DDDD: Categorize shorelines based on the existing development pattern, the biophysical capabilities and limitations of the area being considered for development, and the goals and aspirations of local citizenry. Policy LU-460. Three environments,Natural, Conservancy, and Urban, are to be designated on Shorelines of the State to provide a uniform basis to apply policies and use regulations within distinctively different shoreline areas. These classifications are applied at a programmatic level on Figure XII-A and XII-B. Policy LU-461. Natural Environment Classification. Shoreline areas meeting the following intent and characteristics should be designated with the Natural use environment classification: 6 City of Renton Land Use Element • A. Natural Environment Intent: The purpose of the Natural environment is to protect and preserve unique and fragile shoreline or wetland environments in their natural state. The Natural environment is intended to provide areas of wildlife sanctuary and habitat preservation. B. Areas to be designated Natural Environment Shorelines: Areas that are to be designated Natural environment should include: 1. Areas that are unique or fragile. 2. Floodway areas. C. Acceptable Activities and Uses: The primary human-related activities are intended to be floodway drainage or storage. Limited public access and passive recreation opportunities, when compatible with the unique and fragile characteristics, may be allowed. Policy LU-462. Conservancy Environment Classification. Shoreline areas meeting the following intent and characteristics should be designated with the Conservancy use environment classification: A. Conservancy Environment Intent: The purpose in designating a Conservancy environment is to protect, conserve, and manage existing areas with irreplaceable natural or aesthetic features in essentially their native state,while providing for limited use of the area. The Conservancy environment is intended to provide a pleasant break in the surrounding urban community. This environment seeks to satisfy a portion of the present and future needs of Renton. B. Areas to be Designated as a Conservancy Environment: Areas that are to be designated Conservancy environment should include: 1. Areas of high scenic value. 2. Valuable areas for wildlife habitat. 3. Hazardous slope areas. 4. Flood-prone areas. 5. Areas which cannot provide adequate utilities for intense development. 6. Areas with unique or fragile features. C. Acceptable Activities and Uses: Activities and uses considered to be acceptable in a Conservancy environment are those of a nonconsumptive nature which do not degrade the existing character of the area. Uses that are to be predominant in a Conservancy environment are low density residential,passive agricultural uses such as pasture or range lands, and passive outdoor recreation. Active public recreation when compatible with the biophysical characteristics of the land may also be allowed. Policy LU-463. Urban Environment Classification. Shoreline areas meeting the following intent and characteristics should be designated with the Urban use environment classification: City of Renton Land Use Element A. Urban Environment Intent: The purpose of the Urban environment is to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines within urbanized areas by providing for public use, especially access to and along the water's edge, and by managing development so that it enhances and maintains shorelines for a multiplicity of viable and necessary urban uses. B. Areas to be Designated as an Urban Environment: The Urban Environment is particularly suitable to those areas presently subjected to extremely intensive use pressure, as well as areas planned to accommodate intensive urban expansion. On certain shorelines planned for future urban expansion, there should be limitations based on the physical aspects of the site. Shorelines of the State regulated by the City which are not designated as Conservancy or Natural are designated as Urban. C. Acceptable Uses and Activities: High-intensity Land Uses: The Urban environment is an area of high-intensity land use including residential, commercial, and industrial development. Water-Oriented Activities: Because shorelines suitable for urban uses are a limited resource, emphasis should be given to development within already developed areas and particularly to water-oriented industrial and commercial uses. Public Access: Priority is also given to planning for public visual and physical access to water in the Urban environment. To enhance waterfront and ensure maximum public use, industrial and commercial facilities should be designed to permit pedestrian waterfront activities where practicable, and the various access points ought to be linked to non-motorized transportation routes such as bicycles and hiking paths. Shoreline Uses and Activities Objective LU-EEEE: Plan and coordinate the shorelines of the State to afford best use of the limited water resource, and to provide natural amenities within an urban environment. Policy LU-464 Reasonable and appropriate shoreline uses and activities should be allowed based upon the following parameters: 1. Short-term economic gain or convenience in development should be evaluated in relationship to potential long-term effects on the shoreline. 2. Increases in the density or intensity of shoreline uses or activities as a result of Comprehensive Plan, zoning, or development regulation amendments should only be allowed when: a. There is a demonstrated need for the use or activity; and b. The uses or activities are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan vision; and c. The use or activity is consistent with the use preference policies in this Section. 8 City of Renton Land Use Element 3. Mixed-use developments or activities along shorelines should be planned where location and integration of compatible uses or activities are feasible, and when consistent with Policy LU-467. 4. Shoreline uses and activities should be developed with uniform or coordinated site and architectural design. Buildings, fences, and other structures should be sited to avoid or reduce impacts to public views of the shoreline. Landscaping should be employed to reduce from public view outdoor work or storage areas. These aesthetic considerations should be encouraged when contemplating new development, extensive redevelopment of existing facilities or for general enhancement of shoreline areas. 5. Shoreline uses and activities should be discouraged if they would cause significant noise or odor or unsafe conditions that would impede the achievement of shoreline use preferences on the site or on adjacent or abutting sites. 6. All shoreline developments should be designed and constructed to protect the rights and privacy of adjacent property owners. Policy LU-465 Shoreline Master Program policies, environments, regulations, and permit review should be applied to achieve the following use preferences on Shorelines of Statewide Significance which includes Lake Washington, as follows: 1. Recognize and protect the statewide interest over local interest, and promote long-term benefits over short-term benefits. Consider Federal, State, and regional policies and programs. 2. Preserve the natural character, resources, and ecology of the shoreline. Measures may include, but are not limited to: a. Requiring uses and activities to be designed to avoid unique and fragile areas; b. Reviewing and conditioning proposals to achieve no-net-loss of shoreline ecological function; c. Promoting watershed enhancement, fish passage enhancement, or other shoreline ecology enhancement proposals. 3. Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines, and increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shorelines. 4. a. Provide opportunities for water-oriented uses, which include water dependent, water related, or water enjoyment uses: i. Water Dependent Development: Water dependent uses are uses that cannot exist in any other location and depend on a water or waterfront location. Examples of water dependent development include,but are not limited to, marinas, ferry terminals, float plane facilities, and other uses that are dependent upon a water location. ii. Water Related Uses: Water related uses include uses that support a water dependent use or have a functional requirement for 9 • City of Renton Land Use Element a waterfront location. Examples of water related uses include, but are not limited to, warehousing goods transported by water, log storage, or other uses that depend on a waterfront location. iii. Water Enjoyment Uses: Water enjoyment uses include recreational uses or uses facilitating public access for a substantial number of people. Examples may include,but are not limited to, ecological reserves, parks,piers, restaurants, museums, aquariums, hotels/resorts, mixed-use commercial/office, or others which facilitate public access. b. Non-water oriented uses may be considered water oriented uses when significant public access is provided. 5. Provide for any other shoreline activity or use deemed appropriate or necessary, and consistent with the State Shoreline Management Act and the Renton Shoreline Master Program policies. Policy LU-466 Except for Lake Washington which is addressed in Policy LU- 465,Shoreline Master Program policies, environments,regulations, and permit review should be applied to achieve the following use preferences on Shorelines of the State: 1. Preference should be given to those uses or activities which: a. Enhance the natural amenities of the shorelines, such as, but not limited to, activities which promote watershed enhancement, fish passage enhancement, reduced impervious surfaces, or other shoreline ecology enhancement proposals; and/or b. Depend on a shorelines location or provide public access to the shorelines, such as water dependent, water related, or water enjoyment uses, as described in Policy LU-465, subsection 4. 2. Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines of the state, developed in consideration of critical areas and protective of unique and fragile areas, are given priority for: Single family residences and their appurtenant structures; Shoreline recreational uses such as parks,marinas,piers, and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines of the state; Industrial and commercial developments which are particularly dependent on their location on or use of the shorelines of the state; and Additional water dependent,water related, and water enjoyment uses, or other development that will provide an opportunity for substantial numbers of the people to enjoy the Shorelines of the State. Policy LU-467 Those shoreline uses or activities which are not water-oriented should be encouraged to relocate away from the shoreline. Io City of Renton Land Use Element Policy LU-468. Plans should be developed for shorelines particularly suited for water-dependent uses or activities. Policy LU-469. Festivals and temporary uses involving public interest and not substantially or permanently impairing water quality, water flow or unique and fragile areas may be allowed. Shoreline Economic Uses Objective LU-FFFF: Existing economic uses and activities on the shorelines are to be recognized and economic uses or activities that are water-oriented are to be encouraged. Policy LU-470. Economic uses and activities which are not water-oriented should be discouraged. In those instances where such uses or activities are permitted, public access to and along the water's edge should be provided. Policy LU-471. Future economic uses and activities should utilize the shoreline in an efficient manner. 1. Economic uses and activities should locate the water-oriented portion of their development along the shoreline and place inland all facilities which do not require a water's edge location. 2. The length, width, and height of over-water structures should be limited to the smallest reasonable dimensions. 3. Shoreline developments should be designed to enhance the scenic view. Policy LU-472. Mixed-use economic developments on the shoreline should be encouraged to provide public recreational opportunities wherever feasible. Policy LU-473. Shoreline facilities for the moorage and servicing of boats and other vessels,may be allowed in appropriate locations within commercial or industrial zones, and should be prohibited in single family zoned areas wherever feasible, unless part of a public recreation property in a residential zone. 1. Commercial dockings and marinas are to meet all health standards. 2. Marinas and other economic activities are to be required to contain and clean up spills or discharges of pollutants associated with boating activities. 3. Shoreline facilities for the moorage and servicing of boats and other vessels should be developed in size and location when it would not impair unique or fragile areas, or impact Federal or State listed species. Policy LU-474. The expansion of log raft storage on Lake Washington should be discouraged. Policy LU-475. Containment or mitigation of pollutants is to be required of all economic activities on the shoreline by property owner and/or operator. II City of Renton Land Use Element Shoreline Residential Uses Objective LU-GGGG: Existing residential uses are to be recognized, but future residential development should optimize regulated public access to and along the shorelines consistent with legal property rights of the owner. Policy LU-476. Residential uses over water should not be permitted. Policy LU-477. Residential development should not be constructed in unique and fragile areas. Policy LU-478. New residential developments along or impinging upon the shoreline should be permitted only where sanitary sewer facilities are available. Policy LU-479. Future shoreline subdivision,multifamily developments, and planned urban developments (P.U.D.) should provide regulated public access to and/or along the water's edge. Policy LU-480. New residential developments should optimize utilization of open space areas. Policy LU-481. All further development on the shorelines of the May Creek east of FAI-405 right-of-way and that portion of Springbrook Creek beginning from approximately SW 27th Street on the north to SW 31st Street on the south, abutting City-owned wetlands in this area, and for that portion of the west side of the Creek in the vicinity of SW 38th Street abutting the City's recently acquired Wetlands Mitigation Bank should be compatible with the existing natural state of the shoreline. 1. Low density development should be encouraged to the extent that such development would permit and provide for the continuation of the existing natural character of the shoreline, and is consistent with the underlying zoning. 2. For the subject locations,the waterways should be left in an undeveloped natural state as much as possible. Shoreline Recreation Objective LU-HHHH: Water-oriented recreational activities available to the public are to be encouraged. Policy LU-482. Water-oriented recreational activities should be encouraged. 1. Accessibility to the water's edge should be improved. 2. Shoreline park areas should be increased in size and number. 3. Areas for specialized recreation should be developed. 4. Both passive and active recreational areas are to be provided. Policy LU-483. Recreational fishing should be supported, maintained and increased. Policy LU-484. As private shorelands are developed, rights of public access should be attained based upon public access and recreation plans developed by the City. 12 City of Renton Land Use Element • Policy LU-485. Local jurisdictions should join in a cooperative effort to expand recreational opportunities through programs of acquisition, development, and maintenance of waterfront areas. Policy LU-486. Subject to State and Federal regulations, the water's depth may be changed to foster recreational aspects. Shoreline Public Access Objective LU-IIII: Increase public accessibility to shorelines, and preserve and improve the natural amenities. Policy LU-487. Public access should recognize and be consistent with legal property rights of the owner. Policy LU-488. Just compensation should be provided to property owners for land acquired for public use. Policy LU-489. Public access to and along the water's edge should be consistent with public safety and preservation/conservation of the natural amenities. Policy LU-490. Public access to and along the water's edge should be available throughout publicly owned shoreline areas. Policy LU-491. Public access from public streets should be made available over public property or by easement. Policy LU-492. Future multi-family,planned urban developments, subdivisions, commercial and industrial developments should be encouraged to provide public access along the water's edge. Policy LU-493. Private access to the publicly owned shoreline corridor should not be denied to owners of property contiguous to said corridor. Policy LU-494. When making extensive modifications or extensions to existing structures, multi-family, planned urban development, subdivision, commercial and industrial developers should be encouraged to provide for public access to and along the water's edge if physically feasible. Policy LU-495. High-rise structures in the shoreline jurisdiction generally should not be permitted,but could be permitted in the shoreline jurisdiction if: 1. Views of the shoreline would not be substantially obstructed due to topographic conditions, and 2. Some overriding considerations of the public interest would be served. Shoreline low-rise development should provide substantial grade level views of the water from public shoreline roads running generally parallel to the water's edge. Policy LU-496. Both passive and active public areas should be designed and provided. Policy LU-497. In order to encourage public use of the shoreline corridor,public parking should be provided at frequent locations. 13 City of Renton Land Use Element Policy LU-498. Preservation or improvement of the natural amenities should be a basic consideration in the design of shoreline areas to which public access is provided, including the trail system. Policy LU-499. In planning for public access, emphasis should be placed on foot and bicycle paths rather than roads, except in areas where public boat launching would be desirable. Shoreline Circulation Objective LU-JJJJ: Minimize motor vehicular traffic and encourage pedestrian traffic within the shorelines. Policy LU-500. Shoreline roadways should be scenic boulevards where possible. Road standards should meet roadway function and emergency access standards and provide for multiple modes, while reducing impervious surfaces where feasible, and managing surface water runoff to achieve appropriate water quality. Policy LU-501. Public transportation should be encouraged to facilitate access to shoreline recreation areas. Policy LU-502. Pedestrian and bicycle pathways, including provisions for maintenance, operation and security, should be developed. 1. Access points to and along the shoreline should be linked by pedestrian and bicycle pathways. 2. Separate pedestrian and bicycle pathways should be included in new or expanded bridges or scenic boulevards within the shorelines. 3. Separate pedestrian and bicycle pathways should be included in publicly financed transportation systems or rights-of-way, consistent with public interest and safety. Policy LU-503. Commercial boating operations, other than marinas, should be discouraged,but if permitted, should be limited to commercial and industrial areas. Shoreline Historic/Cultural/Scientific/Education Resources &Activities Objective LU-KKKK: Shoreline areas having historical, cultural, educational, or scientific value should be retained. Policy LU-504. Through programs, acquisition, or regulations, shoreline sites with historic, cultural, educational, or scientific value should be protected, and such features may be integrated with other shoreline uses if appropriate to the character of the resource. Policy LU-505. Historic and Archaeological Resources Objective LU-O and associated policies are incorporated by reference as part of the City of Renton Shoreline Master Program objectives and policies. 14 City of Renton Land Use Element — , •,,4:' -"'" •' ''.. , ' J.,----; '•; •. 1 i . 4, • . i .• ''t- ' I-..,...-., 1 <7'?7.•• ,c-:=-, 1.-.-‘1..,, ,..,, .. . • Jr'' ' i' '.' ':'--A' ''' '''-1:'"''-2-.,""i`.•.....,:.., , .,, ;,.;,4; ' ' ,- • 1 , . - '-. -',...' . ...0‘.-' - ,..,,.. ••••,-.:..:,,,...: ,i- 1 4 • ';7 ...; J' ':,.. e, .-. . •.,,,,,,i--V1,-,4' ;•:. ,•.. -• „.,..:,, - • .• . . - F,_ , , . -.f-', '.- ''.;-•,,,'-, , •••-_ - -- - -ii.',:_l''', 4 .• ;,- ' ' 1-• ,ir -,..-,i.. ,,, . :'---i;:' '':..- - - : . ' ,,:7,1..,-..y, iv,,' . r-',--' _-÷.-.1-.- d ;-.. • ---'•-•---t- , ,.-- ',.---•', 1— "i ',---t. -1 •---,- ......- - ---,;4--4_No, • _ - •• --: - --- -- N.--.'f); I FL.,.' i'_--'-Iu-...t, f•, -'--,--., -I Irr-;,- - .. 1,..,:.,,,,,; .-4,', :‘,.;''''J.,...',,..._ :::7",:ia: 7.,...,•,k .1-• Ni \E t:'.111 -•!11 1, . - t. "•, ',.- '.• ,'" I.:A ,,-. --,-.s--1 ,.1..,•-- '''',:. -,...-:jr r:.;°'i-7,„:„, ,,.f.:74-.=-:‘, ,,i4:"=';',.. --'. l' • -I•,•..- -.. T.._T.- ----.....f ••-•,..;-,:,3-, -. • - -4:-. -'••,,,;---%-, i:,-- -I - ••• ' It4:I I13; ;-'1'111- ,4"'.1.------,t-11 :' P..;-,- .,' . . . _, ; )',! 1,----1.i .L., I t- ,:. •-•-',*, •1 :,--v-,12_1! ''..'" -- _ . ., . , - . -..,,,_ r, „,..-, - -'• -. -t- r,-f. -: 4 _:: --.,-T:. , ',. , '' i;, .",-':•'-r,_i '-- 7,-,- . - ,, '.k, ......4-- L, .; _..-..;_. . i-,.:,, ,. .,•,,.• .- . 1 .:::. :.:i,A' 1. .-.,'• '% -1,.:•---,-,-;:;.:-/„,-; I. 7.4...I',, :-,•.,,.,,,.. -,.. '..___. i , ' ''s'\ -;; --'-''s:::- :,..'-1,7-: : --7 ,..., I -I- •- ,,,or-'11,,i, --,•-•:: , q•,,,g..,.:::, • ,„ i ,-"-:''i,--.--,-,- ' \•ii-:,--, , ,,,,..„;,..i_,,z--t,. • 1 , , , i,-----N-vo,:zzli, i,-.:::••:;,.....-i-;:: 1,,,,,.„.‘..,',.:.,, . ,._ '-;,-,.,'!'.;.: (--;.--;„''.„ ''',‘,,,,-..';:_i,,,,,,-..,--,::4T:.;-7.,•,:, -1-: 4,--- i I•,-.•-'''..--•-&.,..-2,i:::::',',.1'. 1,;;,...-,74:1::74-,...7,"',.'-i,------r -7i-- lV'-.,-..-'--,'7-.'--,1.1;.1.--'-;-',-.--'.-'-',i-.-t.-,--,!.'''':'''''7.,.',"7.:".-,.7,,!2,;,'-,.,2';V%,..-;.-"'''-t'1i:',.-'.;'',;-=•,,...:-,:."k-"C--.;i-:,.'--.7tf)i:,': "2 ,'i':,. --',-:.,1%„-l-.....i,. .---1i-!:3--,.-.f-'7!. 11t,g-2-„-„-''...j,-..7,,1:/:,,•;- ;_•.-•..,•1,-.',.,-.,„,...,.,..YT-i,-.„.:;;-,,,-.;.-..,,,1.I,.;-_---;,.;__-._..-„4-,,,- _ _ ' i r; , ,.7 „ .-:, ” . T .., , ;‘ f .,-,ii-_---.,. , ''''-'•.,,_, .,.,:-.-, T.:i,t.1', ---:;,......-"TP:.--ill..:‘:i-1, --'4- )-; ',.:' -,i.7;"' 17 .1.- -'-';,7T----,,; :f.-. --7 i , '--, ,- .. '.,...'--- '-'-*:-.;, i.!, '41',`'. I '- I,.!?,''., .,t./.iv, '' --I I -•-•.r ''''-'-''' - $ '' ' , ,. ,, , , - ' ''•:-1, ". 4 i '---_, , - : 1 , t ' - ' ',? : •r-1.,:„.f, ' -77- tit• ' .•-,.--, ' '--C'...-i.'‘,.- ).-. -_ -:-l-:- L -;,:v - -,I - ,.;rA. i;:::-.::-'''-, . ,....,•:7'7,1:1,;.1--::.';.1. :Ekti: T:.,-,:%,:':_•-.,-',,--,i,,,-=1,17,,-1-11-. i ,.,-_-_-,-2,t-,1,,,,,,- :..,,,;—-, 4, , '.,,,-;7:-1: .•''"--''- ,.. .," -- - ;;-,114--,,,,,..-9/!,,:l i.: - T 1 ..'',: 1 i'• i-;--.-- ---,.--T. - :-. .i. ,•---• i•..JI•-..2"-`.1 f1-: ii I 1_,'-.,'-;--.; /-1 kfii 1 -;„•-,''. :/----•;; . i ;.:: ."..1 _ . : "I 11:, .--,-'.';;-;-•,,°•--7.1-"_-,...---i t.-, -' . . ' . '-- '.-.2'. - ', ---.:----1-,1Z.'-i-r---1±.--,-- '• .---T.,,..;irt '-:..‘. IS---- ' ---,-,!.;':4,:‘,,,,-,„, i '',-.),4,44' - -. T •,.---, T :.-p-, '1,,,..'-,7-"- ",% "::-• .--',--- , '...,,n.,,, ,- ,.- . ,,, . :,. . ,..,. ,,. .4 .... „,„.!' „,',,, i'-',/ i.,,-,1;i,. .i:-E_ •1.1'..- ,,,_,,,, ; .-,...:,,- ,....,„,:„.. ', . 1 .,..fl- ...,''',....N) %,(0 , .. :. , .. ;k , „... , _ ,,- • v 1$1. =e__:... '' : it\-=-':"A''-'.','-. ,.-'. '-''''--'-- .-,-*"!•..V4---L! '''.. -',•:-'----;:::-.- r- ,': - ---,A-- --c,..-1-..,,, • , -,--, ., ,..,..,,,,...,•;,.,., ....., .,, .. ..,, • .-- --- -- - - , ,, ,,...,,-...-,..,•,•,... , . 1. . OW vs-, - ;IL ;, , - ,•,,,,,,2,-; ',i..., ,___ ',,,, ,..,. City of Renton ..,,',' 1 ,.! .-,--,;-; ',f! I 1;--i'4?-il-'.-- __T '•' -- -- • l' I Shoreline -,-,-,- i - ' I :,'' Environments Map 1 -,, ,..•I ::':''''÷f:_:.i..1----;- There may be wetlands and tloodways assodated with other Shorelires of -., I- -,' ; •,-ni" -:: ,- the State within the City of Renton that are not shown cn this map.Those _ ..j - - : -7:. ,-- - - •l I ' . [ ' ''"----r" --- ';--''r'..-, f• assodated wetlands and floodways are also governed by the Citys . ' -.' i 1 •TT,- .:', !A ; .4,,, Shoreline regulations. — Urban Environment •1 j - ' f" Conservancy Environment - fft,• I iI i • Natural Environment Water Class 1 -,.. November 2003; '-• , ,i--- ,,,..k —— City Limits_.--.„. Corrected April 2005 Figure XII-A: City of Renton Shoreline Environments Map 15 City of Renton Land Use Element 3 N€ y' Z OREL1NL 13#,.pl!N1.s/ NY NiAll. -- Alti-all ilf.ill tail 1=1; .. -ul�!�r SIN Of I ____,_-,, i;,;; w s amt v, J /�� Illwort 'erg r r / � SW tzu r.�rn .r:,.. /II ,1i' .01 liii-'•eri 111 _ :ek.,, =®� F1.r..► •t mri 1 ]-- -----`. I1! >a ^� LTi :=-me � La —.-1:7.-5-. 1Ca— Hi., le 5 Iti,",.j "'N. \ +4 f14:' \ IFN �5.�[yt ' ?-1 i-,11,..b'' .111MILi qiim..p.! 7 MIK? C :dilei.0 ai hr. 7„,,...21 ��., s s.�o . ______ _._ ir__„"iiii.atital, . .. _:,_:::........les., ,, ..:., ---,,a ii- I iti. . -epos -,7:„., 5 11 i>1 L........i ) t SW'27 ' .11 is F:It ,,Irli§ z 4.;f:F.1-1; 779.' :'''; El i 2 v. ...., .,..-1::;,.:.:971 LIS ,., ,,,,j,?, r..:ri.., te n . .,... ..... ,..„....,,,.,..,„..,),„„ri,. ..... t„., -- .----- • - ,a,Ar,-;•:-_-.,:., :-,,,,;,- , ,.... 'I /..,,,,,--,,,_-,- .,,,,,,,,,41i,,Q11111511 L-,•-,11 .4.1... i ,1;-.t ili MIMI RIB w °I--.'iir7 ' -- I 1 ) mufcr 1 Fia sK -� )tom iff Mr Vi fd SN J9IFN r4 or FA __ /SW q:1 SI SH IDI Sm , 'prat:: p r_r 1 41,/N. SW.Sd SI. ill* ®f 1. 4 ' 7A' A . _ J -11 nli iri if C ..... shL, 4,, 1 r '- U Urban Environment rollrtaraaNaewiDworvustic woattt: 0 1000 2000 C Conservancy Environment nytacOnl.,D.Vlsaa.kl,M.Dotson I wetland. la; ' January 1914 1:12000 --- — Shoreline Boundary ——City Limits Nile This map depicts the approximate location of the Springbrook Creek shoreline boundary and associated wetlands govemed by the Renton Shoreline Master Program Application of the Renton Shoreline Master Program to a property is determined on a site-specific basis by the Development Services Division utilizing the regulations and definitions in the Program and any site specific environmental analysis. Figure XII-B: City of Renton Springbrook Creek Shoreline Environments Detail 16 Ab. GLOSSARY Exhibit C The Comprehensive Plan Glossary is amended to include the following terms. The remaining terms in the glossary are unchanged. GLOSSARY floodway: For purposes of determining the jurisdiction of the Renton Shoreline Master Program in conjunction with the definition of"shoreland" below, "floodway" means those portions of the area of a river valley lying streamward from the outer limits of a watercourse upon which flood waters are carried during periods of flooding that occur with reasonable regularity, although not necessarily annually, said floodway being identified, under normal condition, by changes in surface soil conditions or changes in types or quality of vegetative ground cover condition. The floodway shall not include those lands that can reasonably be expected to be protected flood waters by flood control devices maintained by or maintained under license from the Federal Government, the State, or a political subdivision of the State. high rise: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, a structure exceeding seventy-five(75) feet in height. Master Program: The comprehensive shoreline use plan for the City of Renton and the use regulations, together with maps, diagrams, charts or other descriptive material and text, and a statement of desired goals and standards developed in accordance with the policies enunciated in Section 2 of the Washington State Shoreline Management Act. mixed-use, shoreline: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, the combining of compatible uses within one development, of which the major use or activity is water-oriented. All uses or activities other than the major one are directly related and necessary to the major use or activity. shoreland or shoreland areas: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, those lands extending landward for two hundred (200) feet in all directions, as measured on a horizontal plane from ordinary high water mark; floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward two hundred feet from such floodways; and all marshes, bogs, swamps, and river deltas, associated with streams, lakes and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of the State Shorelines Management Act. For purposes of determining jurisdictional area, the boundary will be either two hundred (200) feet from the ordinary high water mark, or two hundred (200) feet from the floodway, whichever is greater. shorelines: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, all of the water areas of the State regulated by the City of Renton, including reservoirs, and their associated shorelands, together with the lands underlying them, except: A. Shorelines of state-wide significance. B. Shorelines on segments of streams upstream of a point where the mean annual flow is twenty (20) cubic feet per second or less and the wetlands associated with such upstream Page 1 of 3 GLOSSARY segments. C. Shorelines on lakes less than twenty(20) acres in size and wetlands associated with such small lakes. shorelines of state-wide significance: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, those shorelines described in RCW 90.58.030(2)(e). shorelines of the state: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, the total of all shorelines and "shorelines of state-wide significance" regulated by the City of Renton. unique and fragile areas: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, those portions of the shoreline which (1) contain or substantially contribute to the maintenance of endangered or valuable forms of life and (2) have unstable or potentially hazardous topographic, geologic or hydrologic features (such as steep slopes, marshes). water-dependent: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, referring to uses or portions of a use which cannot exist in any other location and is dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic nature of its operations. Examples of water-dependent uses may include ship cargo terminal loading areas, ferry and passenger terminals, barge loading facilities, ship building and dry docking, marinas, aquaculture, float plane facilities and sewer outfalls. water-enjoyment: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, referring to a recreational use, or other use facilitating public access to the shoreline as a primary characteristic of the use; or a use that provides for recreational use or aesthetic enjoyment of the shoreline for a substantial number of people as a general characteristic of the use and which through the location, design and operation assures the public's ability to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. In order to qualify as a water-enjoyment use, the use must be open to the general public and the shoreline oriented space within the project must be devoted to the specific aspects of the use that fosters shoreline enjoyment. Primary water-enjoyment uses may include, but are not limited to, parks, piers and other improvements facilitating public access to the shorelines of the state; and general water-enjoyment uses may include, but are not limited to restaurants, museums, aquariums, scientific/ecological reserves, resorts/hotels and mixed-use commercial/office; provided that such uses conform to the above water-enjoyment specifications and the provisions of the Renton Shoreline Master Program. water-oriented/non-water-oriented: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, "water-oriented" refers to any combination of water-dependent, water-related, and/or water- enjoyment uses and serves as an all-encompassing definition for priority uses under the Shoreline Management Act. "Non-water oriented" serves to describe those uses which have little or no relationship to the shoreline and are not considered priority uses under the Shoreline Management Act. Examples of non-water-oriented uses include professional offices, automobile sales or repair shops, mini-storage facilities, multi-family residential development, department stores and gas stations; these uses may be considered water-oriented where there is significant public access. Page 2 of 3 GLOSSARY water-related: For the purposes of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, referring to a use or portion of a use which is not intrinsically dependent on a waterfront location, but whose economic viability is dependent upon a waterfront location because: A. Of a functional requirement for a waterfront location such as the arrival or shipment of materials by water or the need for large quantities of water, or B. The use provides a necessary service supportive of the water-dependent commercial activities and the proximity of the use to its customers makes its services less expensive and/or more convenient. Examples include manufacturers of ship parts large enough that transportation becomes a significant factor in the products cost, professional services serving primarily water- dependent activities and storage of water-transported foods. Examples of water-related uses may include warehousing of goods transported by water, seafood processing plants, hydroelectric generating plants, gravel storage when transported by barge, oil refineries where transport is by tanker, and log storage. Page 3 of 3 a4& 7t ' a s-atoos CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. S/36 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION 1-3-2.Ck(2) OF CHAPTER 3, REMEDIES AND PENALTIES, OF TITLE I (ADMINISTRATIVE); AND CHAPTER 3, ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND OVERLAY DISTRICTS; CHAPTER 8, PERMITS - GENERAL AND APPEALS; CHAPTER 9, PERMITS — SPECIFIC; CHAPTER 10, LEGAL NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES, USES, AND LOTS; AND CHAPTER 11, DEFINITIONS; OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" TO AMEND SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM REGULATIONS. WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act mandates integration of Shoreline Master Program requirements into the City's development regulations; and WHEREAS, State of Washington legislation (ESHB 1933) requires the City to provide equivalent ecological protection for critical areas in the shoreline jurisdiction, and RCW 90.58.020 requires the City to consider shoreline use priorities; and WHEREAS, the City considered functions and values of its shorelines of the state in the "City of Renton Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommendations" report dated February 27, 2003, prepared by AC Kindig & Company and Cedarock Consultants, Inc. on behalf of the City of Renton; and WHEREAS, the City's Shoreline Master Program regulation amendments focus primarily on new shoreline buffers, which are designed to develop standard stream/lake/shoreline buffer widths that would result in no net loss of functions and values. Further, to provide incentives to restore degraded buffer conditions, the City's amendments allow for both standard and flexible review processes, so that applications proposing to substantially improve functions and values may be allowed to reduce buffer widths with added site-specific studies and mitigation; and ORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS, the City considered appropriate amendments to the Shoreline Use Environments Map for the Black River and Cedar River to address Shoreline Master Program text/map conflicts, and further considered amendments for an unclassified annexed area in order to make the Shoreline Master Program consistent with environmental limitations and existing uses as described in the "Proposed Renton Shoreline Master Program Use Environment Amendments,"prepared by Jones & Stokes, dated March 8, 2004, on behalf of the City; and WHEREAS, the City participates in Water Resource Inventory Areas 8 and 9 planning processes which are expected to be completed in 2005; and WHEREAS, the City's protection of shorelines and critical areas is multifaceted and includes City ownership of environmentally sensitive sites, regional collaboration, City capital improvement programming that involves habitat restoration, as well as shoreline and critical area regulations; and WHEREAS, the City conducted early agency review with the State of Washington Department of Ecology Early State Agency Review with a meeting on March 23, 2004, which resulted in receipt by the City of State comments in May 2004, and responses by the City to comments in July 2004; and WHEREAS, the City notified State and local governments and tribal agencies and parties of record of the work program through a notice of application and SEPA determination; and WHEREAS, the City issued a SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance in August 2004, which Determination was timely appealed and which was upheld on appeal by the City's Hearing Examiner on December 16, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City established a public participation program pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(2) and provided notice of the update process pursuant to RCW 36.70A.035, provided for early and continuous public participation pursuant to RCW 36.70A.140 by 2 • ORDINANCE NO. publishing a meeting schedule, provided updates to the schedule on public television and the City web site; and WHEREAS, the City held periodic public meetings with the Planning Commission between Spring 2003 and Spring 2005 and City Council Planning and Development Committee meetings between Spring 2004 and Spring 2005, as well as televised workshop sessions with the Council Committee of the Whole between January 2004 and September 2004; and WHEREAS, the City conducted a public open house on July 27, 2004 a focus of which was the proposed stream/lake/shoreline policy and regulation amendments, and a workshop with Seattle/King County Master Builders and neighboring jurisdictions on August 16, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City has provided opportunity for the public to comment on the review and suggest needed revisions of the plan and regulations, and held public hearings March 2, 2005, and March 21, 2005, on this matter; and WHEREAS, the City considered and responded to government agency and public comments as compiled and documented in "Responses to Planning Commission Hearing Comments: Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration" dated March 9, 2005 and "Updated Responses to City Council Hearing Comments Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration" dated March 31, 2005, both prepared on behalf of the City; and WHEREAS, the proposed shoreline master program amendments were made available in public review drafts dated July 13, 2004 and January 26, 2005 together with Planning Commission and Planning and Development Committee amendments in response to comments received by the City through March 31, 2005; and 3 ORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS, the documents considered by the City in its shoreline master program regulation update are listed in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, such modification and integration of the Shoreline Master Program is in the best interest of the public; and WHEREAS, the City will consider comprehensive shoreline master program amendments in a subsequent work program to comply with Shoreline Management Guidelines in accordance with the timelines included in the State law; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. This ordinance is also supported by the following conclusions based on the adopted findings. 1) The City followed its established public participation program; 2) Revisions are needed to the Shoreline Master Program; 3) The City has conducted its seven-year update requirement under RCW36.70A.130 for all portions of the Comprehensive Plan by completing the portions of the work program needed to implement the Critical Areas, Shorelines and Best Available Science review; 4) All development standards within these sections were reviewed and found to be in compliance with the Growth Management Act and the Shoreline Management Act;and 5) The amendments to the Shoreline Master Program in this Ordinance are intended to provide ecological protection to the shorelines and to consider use priorities. The City will consider comprehensive Shoreline Master Program amendments in a subsequent work program 4 ORDINANCE NO. to comply with Shoreline Management Guidelines in accordance with the timelines included in the State law. SECTION II. Section 1-3-2.C.e(2)of Chapter 3, Remedies and Penalties, of Title I (Administrative) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) Shoreline Master Program Regulations: RMC 4-3-090 and 4-9-197. SECTION III. Section 4-3-090 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, 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: 4-3-090 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM REGULATIONS: A. PROGRAM ADOPTED: The Shoreline Master Program, as issued and prepared by City of Renton, includes policies and regulations pursuant to the Washington State Shoreline Management Act, RCW 90.58. This section RMC 4-3-090 provides shoreline regulations from the officially adopted Shoreline Master Program. B. COMPONENTS OF PROGRAM: The components of the Renton Shoreline Master Program, and their location in the City's plans and regulations, are as follows: 1. Goals, Objectives, Policies: a. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Subsection - Shorelines of the State: Land Use, Recreation, and Circulation Management 5 ORDINANCE NO. b. Comprehensive Plan Environment Element Subsection - Shorelines of the State: Natural Resources and Hazard Management c. RMC 4-3-090.D: Purposes and Priorities. 2. Use Environments: a. General Boundaries: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Subsection - Shorelines of the State: Land Use, Recreation, and Circulation Management b. General and Specific Boundaries: RMC 4-3-090 F, G, H, and I. 3. Use Regulations, and Provisions for Variances and Conditional Uses. a. Shoreline Use Regulations: RMC 4-3-090. b. Shoreline Permit Procedures, including Exemptions, Substantial Development Permit, Variances, and Conditional Uses: RMC 4-9-197. c. Non-conforming Uses in Shoreline Jurisdiction in RMC 4-10-100. 4. Definitions: RMC 4-11. C. AMENDMENTS TO SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM: 1. Time: The City shall review its Master Program pursuant to the time and other procedural requirements found in the Shoreline Management Act [RCW 90.58] and the Growth Management Act [RCW 36.70A]. 2. Review Process: Any amendments to the Master Program shall be reviewed first by the Planning Commission, which shall conduct one public hearing on the proposed amendment.The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council, which may hold one public hearing before making a determination. Any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Washington State Department of Ecology for approval in accordance with the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 2747 [RCW 90.58], and the Growth Management Act [RCW 36.70A]. 6 ORDINANCE NO. 3. Adoption by Ordinance: Any and all amendments, additions or modifications to said Master Program, shall be by ordinance. D. PURPOSES AND PRIORITIES: The purpose of these regulations is to manage the Shorelines of the State within the City of Renton in accordance with the Washington State Shoreline Management Act, RCW 90.58, planning appropriate uses in recognition of the following use priorities: 1. Shoreline use priorities shall be consistent with RCW 90.58.020 for all Shorelines of the State. 2. Each shoreline has its own unique qualities which make it valuable, particularly Shorelines of Statewide Significance, which in Renton include Lake Washington and the Green River. Preference is, therefore, given to the following uses in descending order of priority for Shorelines of Statewide Significance (as established by RCW 90.58.020): a. Recognize and protect the statewide interest over local interest for shorelines of statewide significance. b. Preserve the natural character of the shorelines. c. Result in long-term over short-term benefits. d. Protect the resources and ecology of the shorelines. e. Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines. f. Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline. g. Provide for any other use or activity deemed appropriate or necessary. E. REGULATED WATER BODIES: 7 ORDINANCE NO. 1. Applicability: The Renton Shoreline Master Program applies to Shorelines of the State, which includes Shorelines and Shorelines of Statewide Significance as defined in RMC 4-11 and as listed below. a. Shorelines: The Cedar River, Black River, Springbrook Creek, and May Creek are classified as Shorelines. b. Shorelines of Statewide Significance: The Green River and Lake Washington are classified as Shorelines of Statewide Significance. 2. Extent of Shoreline Jurisdiction: The jurisdictional area includes: a. Lands within 200 feet, as measured on a horizontal plane, from the ordinary high water mark, or lands within 200 feet from floodways, whichever is greater; and b. Contiguous floodplain areas; and c. All marshes, bogs, swamps, and river deltas, associated with streams, lakes and tidal waters that are subject to the provisions of the State Shoreline Management Act. 3. Regulated Shoreline Segments: Approximately eighteen (18) miles of shoreline in the City of Renton are under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. These eighteen (18) miles of shoreline in the City of Renton are considered an extremely valuable resource not only to the City of Renton, but also to the State Metropolitan Area of which Renton is an integral part. In the City of Renton, the following bodies of water are regulated by the Act: a. Cedar River. b. Green River. The Green River itself is outside the City limits, but a portion of the 200 foot jurisdictional area lies within Renton City limits. The City is required as the permitting agency to apply the master program applicable to the Green River(Tukwila) if the 8 ORDINANCE NO. water body is outside the City of Renton, but the 200-foot jurisdictional area falls within Renton City limits. c. Lake Washington. d. May Creek from the intersection of May Creek and N.E. 31st Street in the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 32-24-5E WM downstream in a northeasterly direction to its mouth at Lake Washington. e. Springbrook Creek from the Black River on the north to SW 43rd Street on the south. f. Black River. F. THREE (3) ENVIRONMENTS DESIGNATED BY CITY: 1. Names of Environments: Three (3) environments, Natural, Conservancy, and Urban, are designated to provide a uniform basis to apply policies and use regulations within distinctively different shoreline areas. 2. Basis for Designation: The environmental designation to be given to an area shall be based on the existing development pattern, the biophysical capabilities and limitations of the area being considered for development and the goals and aspirations of local citizenry. Shorelines have been categorized according to the natural characteristics and use regulations have been designated herein. 3. Map of Environments: The above information is illustrated in the following map. 9 ORDINANCE NO. . _ _ . .7 ` JJ 3 hr .1 rMN , i _: -,rl '-F _ -_ - _ .E . (} -' r .:t�,^E,_ ,' ,V '� .� \r • • , • --%_.-,. dT '''r __-__17-4- �� -'',1, .:� , 1C .:=;-N - d • '' - t .7/,- ,_-,A,.2- ' - IfLi'r 't .i•- _ Ll '�; .^^ -- I ` �--��. 1 r'3�'('''''JL -i ,lt. ,�t:r"�'.., - -r..,l_ .'�� 4 r I 'if, \t'T-'?-: -:z. �.; ' 4sY,t . -- i'.=l �(,�• 1 i1 '-,r,:.1. ,,i-,-1,1:;,, ,-,.;-'�4.- L---. .�.4. 'Ir ir'. :_.irts,,...=1:.,� i1 -,`�'- P I`, �.�j.�'+i I'`'- '1 - �l'f ;" 'JI --� ` t-- t b,' ,'. , _ _ ',1: 0'-‘1,)1-,f; `.-[.gal i. - --- rm. - --,-,'Z'I L,, ( it .� +^ •42T+';,'--1:'_,,•,-61.* < 1.. , �r„. --,, ,. r .,10:---,7— i . �_ � f ,` ipr l- _ I' _ _ _ - `�f -7"I `•'e. � i161 Yllj i� ,..�;"' i .1..: t .0 rr. —7 ;;.••; :-=- - f €`-- LJ, IfJ`r'•>__�=----- .ti.rxlir,yf. ,.'�(� .r}_ ' i. ... --- S - - - I,.., �i • ' 7 - _ N rte is ', ,T •;.. ; .....� �r •I ,-.' i .. �aj _i .l i-- : ;' -"�.` LR'i_L7,-7' `',,1,'''''''''''\''',.\:\,, _,••('��,'1i:1 _ _,M,r-', t ii y n"1 .- ., .T,,-4-;,-A b�`,,`\,. 1 ., ,. _ _ '.4-•_e;}l,• •,,,J.,-'':*-' „,J.,- "I k==f'j - 1�; i}tlif��l' a i-j�,• yy...e 7 \�T`.^` ,----,..()-'4—• '�f"� i"•'i,.F- q 1 •�� ^I ,i k I` 1.tr 7 `vis e 1, I I, ,1I{,,,, :A-` i I f' w nrr .,7.'":1•U” �.,_—_ �'_' � T -yam 4v ..H.:e`.�ti•?.,-e-li` 'tr.,e f' ��,`` �`�` .'ra.+;4 3-~ ,"ti. i • ---i-----,i i X11 , 1-,,\1, , - ,. - -, -ti�ti. - , r' � • 1. ,� _ . ,t r T,0 t",-, ' \v„?-L •' I II _ �!`_ _'y} i mil r ;ti •O�` 4., -'1--...1� L :0-.-' -7d'' _ }.;.. '`(."%�.) -_=' .- _ -_- • 1-- A !i t i F'J, i 4. /; �`,-I;ter\. ?' t i-r = eI. e� �e.: Vr :I ii `.. x�}.;:,; City of Renton • rjI �' ShorelineS,.. { ( I -_ _:;,.T ; , ,, ,,, Environments Map • 1 ' ; There may be wetlands and tloodways associated with other Shorelees of ,1 .;.” ...', - the State within the City of Renton that are not shown on this map. Those ' associated wetlands and tloodways are also governed by the City's -- i , .• Shoreline regulations •• Urban Environment �Y o C,- Conservancy Environment . R,. ' ', F\'� Natural Environment O I I' November 2003; Water Class 1 ' F j I tl ��i!T 1i 1''' - Corrected April 2005 —— City Limits 10 ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM SPRINGBROOK CREEK SHORELINE BOUNDARY MAP 147 "...1.`'''.n 11,x° II ringi gip drogro, ��„ .rte Aii/ $Rant it ‘111 Iti � �� sw nxlr.!c psry ate ® _ bili. 061 '' iiiiikA, '0E16 1111 tiolt U Tilerri ra ilk 1 to, _-irla!gam wig cill iii : - F1111 P At th ttt with.. otrili-Eh iri �`7- a l�t•r :11. ^ � lir Y'., • 1 ,. -..-1 1 .-. 3 ,r"t r7 ' ' , t . - .M � .m+ '� �tia » . `� ,� --e',r. _ 4,1z ER'i) II J c:;;;, - ., War II . 911 ;ai-A ....?,st �tu—;x..11�'J i . a :a ra/1 jig w :, .ii,-,:tTii 'M Ilst SI. Al lirdigli SW 0151. j Slf 4Ist StT1 . 4111.>Aloud..".,,,c; .. ..0...,,„ j Moad jilIl �� iA-, !..-.,.:,g,...,.2pp1.1,. ± 4f 1 U Urban Envlronmeat bar C Conaarvancy "1"amant rlAtaaNe/BUILONOMIaU6 WORKS 0 1000 2000 a ,� it.lM..oal.,o.vl..Nc4 N.a.ta.o 1 11 1 Wetlands �lri" ismer/Ma ———— Shoreline Boundary 1:12000 —— City Unite Nile. This map depicts the approximate location of the Spnngbrook Creek shoreline boundary and associated wetlands governed by the Renton Shoreline Master Program.Application of the Renton Shoreline Master Program to a property is determined on a site-specific basis by the Development Seances Division utilizing the regulations and definitions in the Program and any site specific environmental analysis 11 ORDINANCE NO. 4. Extent of Classifications a. Aquatic Area: Shoreline Environment classifications extend from the centerline of the water body to the shorelands, or City limits as appropriate, if the opposite shoreland is not within the City limits. b. Associated Wetlands—Springbrook Creek: The Springbrook Creek Shoreline Boundary Map in Section 3 above identifies Use Environments for the Creek and associated wetlands as determined at the time of the map wetland inventory. The application of the Renton Shoreline Master Program to associated wetlands shall be based on the site-specific presence and extent of associated wetlands at the time of application as determined by the Development Services Division. G. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT: 1. Objective: The objective in designating a Natural environment is to protect and preserve unique and fragile shoreline or wetland environments in their natural state.The Natural environment is intended to provide areas of wildlife sanctuary and habitat preservation. 2. Areas to Be Designated as a Natural Environment: a. Areas that are unique or fragile. b. Floodway areas. 3. Extent of the Natural Environment: That portion of the north bank of the Black River lying east of Monster Road/68th Avenue S. and west of its confluence with Springbrook Creek is designated Natural (see the Shoreline Environment Map in subsection F of this Section). 4. Acceptable Activities and Uses: Acceptable activities and uses in the Natural Environment are limited to the following: 12 ORDINANCE NO. a. Flood control: Public flood control structures and operations; floodway drainage and storage activities. b. Dredging: Dredging necessary for public flood control activities. c. Public Access: Installation of public trails. i. Hard surface trails when located on existing rights of way; ii. Soft surface trails; iii. Public viewing platforms or areas. d. Local Service Utilities: Installation of necessary local service utilities subject to the standards of Subsection K.18, Utilities. e. Roads and Railroads: Necessary expansions or modifications of existing roads, railroads, and bridges subject to the standards of Subsection K.15, Roads and Railroads, of this Section. f. Other Activities: The following activities that are exempt from the permit system are allowed uses in the Natural Environment: RMC 4-9-197 i. C.3, Normal maintenance or repair; ii. C.5, Emergency construction; iii. C.11, Marking of property lines; iv. C.13, Site exploration and investigation activities towards preparation of an application; v. C.14, Removing or controlling an aquatic noxious weed; vi. C.15, Watershed restoration projects; vii. C.16, Improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage; and viii. C.17, Hazardous substance remedial actions. 13 ORDINANCE NO. 5. Dedication for Flood Storage: The City of Renton recognizes that preservation of Natural Environment shoreline areas can only be assured through public acquisition. Where private development is proposed in these areas, the City shall allow reasonable use of property, but shall require adequate long-term on-site flood storage. H. CONSERVANCY ENVIRONMENT: 1. Objective: The objective in designating a Conservancy environment is to protect, conserve, and manage existing areas with irreplaceable natural or aesthetic features in essentially their native state, while providing for limited use of the area. The Conservancy environment is intended to provide a pleasant break in the surrounding urban community. This environment shall seek to satisfy a portion of the present and future needs of Renton. 2. Areas to Be Designated as a Conservancy Environment: a. Areas of high scenic value. b. Valuable areas for wildlife habitat. c. Hazardous slope areas. d. Flood-prone areas. e. Areas which cannot provide adequate utilities for intense development. f. Areas with unique or fragile features. 3. Extent of the Conservancy Environment: The following segments are designated Conservancy: a.That portion of May Creek east of FAI-405 right-of-way; b.That portion of the south bank of the Cedar River, two thousand five hundred feet (2,500 )east of FAI-405 right-of-way, and south of Maple Valley Highway to the easternmost City limit boundary as of the effective date of these regulations; 14 • ORDINANCE NO. c. That portion of the north and south banks of the Cedar River lying north of Maple Valley Highway between 135th Avenue SE extended and the easternmost City limit boundary as of the effective date of these regulations; d. That portion of Springbrook Creek beginning from approximately S.W. 27th Street on the north to S.W. 31st Street on the south, abutting City-owned wetlands in this area, and for that portion of the west side of the Creek in the vicinity of S.W. 38th Street abutting the City's recently acquired Wetlands Mitigation Bank; (see the Shoreline Environment Map and the Springbrook Creek Shoreline Boundary Map in subsection F of this Section); and e. That portion of the south bank of the Black River lying east of Monster Road/68th Avenue S. and west of its confluence with Springbrook Creek (see the Shoreline Environment Map in Subsection F of this Section). 4. Acceptable Activities and Uses: Activities and uses considered to be acceptable in a Conservancy environment are those of a nonconsumptive nature which do not degrade the existing character of the area. Uses that are to be predominant in a Conservancy environment are low-density residential, passive agricultural uses such as pasture or range lands, and outdoor recreation. 5. Use Regulations in the Conservancy Environment: a. Commercial Uses: Commercial uses shall be limited to home occupations. b. Fish and Game Reserve and Breeding Operations: Any such activity shall be allowed only by the Land Use Hearing Examiner. c. Industrial Uses: All industrial activities are prohibited in a Conservancy environment. 15 ORDINANCE NO. d. Recreation Use: In the Conservancy environment, only the following recreation uses shall be permitted. i. Permitted Uses: Public hiking and bicycle trails, nonmotorized public fishing, public wading and swimming spots, public areas for nature study, public picnic areas, public outdoor recreation facilities authorized by the City Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan. ii. Conditional Uses Allowed by Hearing Examiner: Public overnight camping areas. e. Residential Uses: i. Permitted Uses: Low-density single family residences. ii. Prohibited Uses: Multi-family residences of two (2) units or more. f. Utilities: i. Local Service Utilities: The necessary local service utilities shall be permitted for approved activities and uses within the Conservancy environment when consistent with requirements in subsection K.18. ii. Major Utilities: Major utilities may be allowed only by approval of the Land Use Hearing Examiner and only if they cross the conservancy area in the shortest feasible route. g. Roads: Necessary roads are permitted subject to the regulations of subsection K.15, Roads and Railroads, of this Section. h. Educational Facilities: Installation of facilities by public agencies for public educational purposes such as, but not limited to, ecological or historical education when located outside of unique or fragile areas. 16 ORDINANCE NO. i. Flood control: Public flood control structures and operations; floodway drainage and storage activities. j. Dredging necessary for public flood control activities. k. Other Activities: The following activities that are exempt from the permit system are allowed uses in the Conservancy Environment: RMC 4-9-197 i. C.3, Normal maintenance and repair; ii. C.4, Bulkhead; iii. C.5, Emergency construction; iv. C.6, Farming, irrigation, and ranching activities; v. C.10, Canals, waterways, drains, and reservoirs; vi. C.11, Marking of property lines; vii. C.12, Maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, and drains; viii. C.13, Site exploration and investigation activities towards preparation of an application; ix. C.14, Removing or controlling noxious weeds; x. C.15, Watershed restoration projects; and xi. C.16,Fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage; and xii. C.17, Hazardous substance remedial actions. I. URBAN ENVIRONMENT: 1. Objective: The objective of the Urban environment is to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines within urbanized areas by providing for public use, especially access to and along the water's edge and by managing development so that it enhances and maintains shorelines for a multiplicity of viable and necessary urban uses. 17 ORDINANCE NO. 2. Areas to Be Designated as Urban Environment: a. Areas of High Intensity Land Use: The Urban environment is an area of high- intensity land use including residential, commercial, and industrial development. The environment does not necessarily include all shorelines within an incorporated city, but is particularly suitable to those areas presently subjected to extremely intensive use pressure, as well as areas planned to accommodate intensive urban expansion. On certain shorelines planned for future urban expansion, there should be limitations based on the physical aspects of the site. 3. Extent of the Urban Environment: All shorelines of the State regulated by the City which are not designated as Conservancy or Natural are designated as Urban (see the Shoreline Environment Map in subsection F of this Section). 4. Acceptable Use and Activities: All uses shall be allowed as indicated by subsection K of this Section, Specific Use Regulations. Also all uses in 4-9-197.C, Exemptions from Permit System, are allowed in the Urban Environment. 5. Use Regulations in the Urban Environment: a. Water-Oriented Activities: Because shorelines suitable for urban uses are a limited resource,emphasis shall be given to development within already developed areas and particularly to water-oriented industrial and commercial uses. b. Public Access: In this Master Program, priority is also given to planning for public visual and physical access to water in the Urban environment. Identifying needs and planning for the acquisition of urban land for permanent public access to the water in the Urban environment shall be accomplished through the Master Program. To enhance waterfront and ensure maximum public use, industrial and commercial facilities shall be designed to permit 18 ORDINANCE NO. pedestrian waterfront activities where practicable, and the various access points ought to be linked to nonmotorized transportation routes such as bicycle and hiking paths. J. GENERAL USE REGULATIONS FOR ALL SHORELINE USES: 1. Applicability and Exemptions: a. Applicability: i. General: The Renton Shoreline Master Program regulations apply to any use, activity, or development on the Shorelines of the State within the City. No authorization to conduct a use, activity or development shall be granted unless such use, activity, or development is found consistent with the Renton Shoreline Master Program. ii. Nonconforming uses: See RMC 4-10-095 regarding the extent to which Renton Shoreline Master Program standards apply to nonconforming uses and activities. b. Exemptions: i. Permit Exemptions: RMC 4-9-197.0 identifies developments or activities which are not required to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit, but which must otherwise comply with all applicable provisions of the Renton Shoreline Master Program. ii. Use or Activity Exemptions: Reserved. 2. Studies Required: a. When Standard Stream or Lake Study Is Required: If a proposed development site contains a Shoreline of the State or associated buffer area, or the project area is within one hundred feet (100')of the Shoreline of the State even if the water body is not located on the subject property but the Reviewing Official determines that alterations of the subject property could potentially impact the water body in question, then the applicant shall be required to conduct a Standard Stream or Lake Study per RMC 4-8-120. 19 ORDINANCE NO. b. When Supplemental Stream or Lake Study is Required: Changes to buffer requirements, or alterations of the Shoreline of the State requires a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study as identified in RMC 4-8-120. c. When Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan Required: A Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan shall be required per RMC 4-8-120.D., if impacts are identified within a required Supplemental Stream or Lake Study. The approval of the Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan by the Administrator shall be based on the criteria located in Subsection J.2.c.ii. below. i. Timing of Mitigation Plan —Final Submittal and Commencement: When a Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan is required, the applicant shall submit a final mitigation plan for the approval of the Administrator prior to the issuance of building or construction permits, whichever comes first. The applicant shall receive written approval of the final mitigation plan prior to commencement of any mitigation activity. ii. Criteria for Approval of Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan for Alterations of Shorelines and Associated Buffers: In order to approve a Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan the Administrator shall find that the Plan demonstrates compliance with the following criteria: (a)Mitigation Location: Mitigation location shall follow the preferences in (i) to (iv) below: (i) On-site mitigation: On-site mitigation is required unless the Reviewing Official finds that on-site mitigation is not feasible or desirable; (ii) Off-site mitigation within same drainage subbasin as subject site: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage subbasin as the subject site and if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions over mitigation on the subject site; 20 ORDINANCE NO. (iii) Off-site mitigation within same drainage basin within City limits: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions within the City over mitigation within the same drainage subbasin as the project; (iv)Off-site mitigation within the same drainage basin outside the City limits: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin outside the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions over mitigation within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits and it meets City goals. (b)Mitigation Type: Types of mitigation shall follow the preferences in (i) to (iv) below: (i)Daylighting(returning to open channel)of streams or removal of manmade salmonid migration barriers; (ii) Removal of impervious surfaces in buffer areas and improved biological function of the buffer; (iii) In stream or in-lake mitigation as part of an approved watershed basin restoration project; (iv) Other mitigation suitable for site and water body conditions that meet all other provisions for a mitigation plan. In all cases, mitigation shall provide for equivalent or greater biological functions per ii(e)below. (c) Contiguous Corridors: Mitigation sites shall be located to preserve or achieve contiguous riparian or wildlife corridors to minimize the isolating effects of 21 ORDINANCE NO. development on habitat areas, so long as mitigation of aquatic habitat is located within the same aquatic ecosystem as the area disturbed; and (d) Non-indigenous species: Wildlife, or fish species not indigenous to the region shall not be introduced into a riparian mitigation area unless authorized by a State or Federal permit or approval. Plantings shall be consistent with Section 4-3- 090.J.6.g.i; and (e) Equivalent or greater biological functions: The Administrator shall utilize the report "City of Renton Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommendations"by AC Kindig&Company and Cedarock Consultants, dated February 27, 2003, unless superceded with a City-adopted study, to determine the existing or potential ecological function of the stream or lake or riparian habitat that is being affected. Mitigation shall address each function affected by the alteration. Mitigation to compensate alterations to stream/lake areas and associated buffers shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic and hydrologic functions and shall include mitigation for adverse impacts upstream or downstream of the development proposal site. No-net-loss of riparian habitat or water body function shall be demonstrated; and (f) Minimum Mitigation Plan Performance Standards: For any required Stream or Lake Mitigation Plans, the applicant shall: (i) Demonstrate sufficient scientific expertise, the supervisory capability, and the financial resources to carry out the mitigation project; and (ii)Demonstrate the capability for monitoring the site and making corrections during the monitoring period if the mitigation project fails to meet projected goals; and 22 ORDINANCE NO. (iii) Protect and manage, or provide for the protection and management of the mitigation area to avoid further development or degradation and to provide for long-term persistence of the mitigation area; and (iv)Provide for project monitoring and allow City inspections; and (v) Avoid mitigation proposals that would result in additional future mitigation or regulatory requirements for adjacent properties, unless it is a result of a code requirement, or no other option is feasible or practical; and (vi)For onsite or offsite mitigation proposals, abutting or adjacent property owners shall be notified when wetland creation or restoration, stream relocation, critical area buffer increases,flood hazard mitigation, habitat conservation mitigation, or geologic hazard mitigation have the potential to considerably decrease the development potential of abutting or adjacent properties. For example, if a created wetland on a property would now result in a wetland buffer intruding onto a neighboring property, the neighboring property owner would be notified. Notification shall be given as follows: (a) For applications that are not subject to notices of application per RMC 4-8, notice of the mitigation proposal shall be given by posting the site and notifying abutting or adjacent property owners with the potential to be impacted. Written notification may be made prior to or at the time of the SEPA determination. (b)For applications that are subject to notices of application, the mitigation proposal shall be identified in the notice of application and mailed to abutting or adjacent property owners with the potential to be impacted; if the determination of the mitigation requirements is not known at the time of the notice of application, written notice 23 ORDINANCE NO. • to abutting or adjacent property owners shall be given instead at the time of the SEPA determination. (g)Additional Conditions of Approval: The Administrator shall condition approvals of activities allowed within or abutting a stream/lake or its buffers, as necessary to minimize or mitigate any potential adverse impacts. Conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: (i) Preservation of critically important vegetation and/or habitat features such as snags and downed wood; (ii) Limitation of access to the habitat area, including fencing to deter unauthorized access; (iii) Seasonal restriction of construction activities; and (iv)Establishment of a duration and timetable for periodic review of mitigation activities. (h)Based on Best Available Science: The applicant shall demonstrate that the mitigation is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iii. Performance Surety: The Administrator shall require a performance surety to ensure completion and success of proposed mitigation, per RMC 4-1-230.The surety device shall be sufficient to guarantee that structures, improvements, and mitigation required by permit condition perform satisfactorily for a minimum of 5 years after they have been completed. iv. Alternative Mitigation: The mitigation requirements set forth in this Subsection may be modified at the Administrator's discretion if the applicant demonstrates that 24 ORDINANCE NO. improved habitat functions, on a per function basis, can be obtained in the affected sub-drainage basin as a result of alternative mitigation measures. d. Studies Waived: i. Standard Stream or Lake Study: May only be waived by the Administrator when the applicant provides satisfactory evidence that: (a) A road, building or other barrier exists between the water body and the proposed activity, or (b)The water body or required buffer area does not intrude on the applicant's lot, and based on evidence submitted, the proposal will not result in significant adverse impacts to nearby water bodies regulated under this Section, or (c) Applicable data and analysis appropriate to the project proposed exists and an additional study is not necessary. ii. Supplemental Stream or Lake Study: May only be waived by the Administrator when: (a) No alterations or changes to the stream or lake, or its standard buffer are proposed; or (b) Applicable data and analysis appropriate to the project proposed exists and an additional study is not necessary. iii. Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan: May only be waived when no impacts have been identified through a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study. e. Independent Secondary Review: Studies may require secondary review pursuant to RMC 4-9-197.E.4. 25 ORDINANCE NO. 3. Disturbance Prohibited: Streams and lakes and their buffer areas shall be undisturbed, except where the buffer is to be enhanced or in conformance with allowances of Section J.4 or 5. 4. Shoreline Buffers: The following shoreline setbacks/buffers shall be required: a. Buffer Width: i. Standard Buffer Width: Shorelines shall have a minimum 100- foot buffer measured from the ordinary high water mark of the regulated shoreline of the state. Where streams enter or exit pipes, the buffer shall be measured perpendicular to the ordinary high water mark from the end of the pipe along the open channel section of the stream. 9o° Figure 4-3-090.J.4.a.i. Buffer measurement at pipe opening. ii. Piped Streams: (1) Building structures over a natural stream located in an underground pipe or culvert except as may be granted by a variance is prohibited. Roads, bridges, trail, or utility crossings or other alterations pursuant to Section K are allowed. Pavement over a pre-existing piped stream is allowed. Relocation of the piped stream system around structures is allowed. If structure locations are proposed to be changed or the piped 26 ORDINANCE NO. stream is being relocated around buildings, a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of existing piped stream systems will be required for any development project site that contains a piped stream to ensure it is sized to convey the 100-year runoff level from the total upstream tributary area based on future land use conditions. (2) No buffers are required along segments of piped or culverted streams. The City shall require easements and setbacks from pipes or culverts consistent with stormwater requirements in RMC 4-6-030 and the adopted drainage manual. iii. Alternative Buffer Width: Shoreline buffers may be increased or reduced as required or allowed in Subsections b through d. b. Use of Buffers: i. Natural or Partially Developed Shorelines: Buffers shall be maintained as stated in Subsections J.3,Disturbance Prohibited; J.6.e, Native Growth Protection Areas Required; and J.6.g., Revegetation Required. ii. Developed Shorelines: On sites predominantly containing impervious surfaces in the shoreline buffer areas the buffer widths shall be considered building setbacks, with the setback area to be managed in accordance with Subsection J.5.b, Sites with Developed Shorelines. c. Increased Buffer Width: i. Areas of High Blow-down Potential: Where the stream/lake area is in an area of high blow-down potential as determined by a qualified professional, the buffer width may be expanded up to an additional fifty feet (50') on the windward side, when determined appropriate to site circumstances and ecological function by the Responsible Official. 27 ORDINANCE NO. ii. Buffers Falling Within Protected Slopes or Very High Landslide Areas: When the required stream/lake buffer falls within a protected slope or very high landslide hazard area or buffer, the stream/lake buffer width shall extend to the boundary of the protected slope or the very high landslide hazard buffer. iii. Notification: Notification of an increased buffer width may be required pursuant to J.2.c.ii(f)(vi). d. Reduction of Buffer or Setback Width: i. Authority: Based upon an applicant's request, and the acceptance of a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study, the Administrator may approve a reduction in the standard buffer widths/setbacks where the applicant can demonstrate compliance with Subsections below and any mitigation requirements applied as conditions of approval. ii. Public Notice: Public notification of any buffer reduction determination shall be given as follows: (a) For applications that are not subject to notices of application per RMC 4-8, notice of the buffer determination shall be given by posting the site and notifying parties of record in accordance with RMC 4-8. (b)For applications that are subject to notices of application, per RMC 4-8, the buffer determination or request for determination shall be included with notice of application, and upon determination, notification of parties of record shall be made. iii. Criteria for Approval of Reduced Buffer Width: If a proposal meets Subsections (a) or(b) or(c)below and meets the environmental criteria of(d), minimum buffer widths may be reduced as stated in Subsection J.4.d.iv: 28 ORDINANCE NO. (a) Buffer condition: Either subsection i and iii through v shall be met or subsection ii through v shall be met: i. The abutting land is extensively vegetated with native species, including trees and shrubs, and has less than 5 percent non-native invasive species cover and has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes, or ii. The buffer can be enhanced with native vegetation and removal of non-native species per criteria (d)(i), and has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes; and iii. The width reduction will not reduce stream or lake functions, including those of anadromous fish or non-fish habitat; and iv. The width reduction will not degrade riparian habitat; and v. No direct or indirect, short-term or long-term, adverse impacts to regulated water bodies, as determined by the City, will result from a regulated activity. The City's determination shall be based on specific site studies by recognized experts, pursuant to Subsection J.2 and RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 4-9-197 E.4; or (b)The proposal includes daylighting of a stream through the entirety of its course through the property, or removal of a legally installed, as determined by the Administrator, salmonid passage barrier; or (c)The proposal includes priority uses pursuant to RCW 90.58.020, as interpreted in the adopted Renton Shoreline Master Program, which cannot be accommodated reasonably using standard buffers/setbacks; and 29 ORDINANCE NO. (d) Environmental Criteria: Proposals meeting Subsection (a)or (b) or(c) above shall also meet the following environmental criteria: (i) Buffer Enhancement: • The project includes a buffer enhancement plan using native vegetation and provides documentation that the enhanced buffer area will maintain or improve the functional attributes of the buffer; or • In the case of existing developed sites where a natural buffer is not possible, the proposal includes on- or off-site riparian/lakeshore or aquatic enhancement proportionate to its project specific or cumulative impact on shoreline ecological functions; or • In the case of construction activity connected with an existing single family residence and/or garage where the temporary or permanent construction work does not increase the footprint of the structure lying within the buffer and no portion of the new work occurs closer to the critical area or required buffers than the existing structure, enhancement is not required; and (ii) The proposal will result in, at minimum, no-net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and (iii) The proposal does not result in increased flood hazard risk; and (iv) The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposal is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. 30 • ORDINANCE NO. iv. Minimum Buffer Width Permissible by Administrator: If the criteria in Subsection J.4.d.iii are met, the reduced buffer or setback width shall not be less than the following minimum standards. (a) 75 feet for non-water-oriented development, unless otherwise listed below. (b) 50 feet for water related or water enjoyment development, unless otherwise listed below. (c) 50 feet for multi-family development in the Urban Environment along the Cedar River. (d) 25 feet for a single family residential dwelling on a pre-existing legal lot, where there is not enough developable area elsewhere on the site to reasonably accommodate building pads and off-street parking. The setback shall be equal to the existing structure setback in the case of construction activity connected with an existing single family residence and/or accessory garage where the work does not increase the footprint of the structure lying within the buffer and no portion of the new work occurs closer to the required buffers than the existing structure, unless the structure or addition can meet required buffers. (e) 25 feet for existing essential public facilities in the Urban Environment not otherwise considered water dependent. The appropriate buffer/setback shall be based on the facility type, conformance with adopted master plans, ability to provide for safe public access, or other legal or safety concerns. (f) 25 feet for water dependent development that does not require an abutting shoreline location. Ancillary water dependent or water enjoyment uses may be co- located with water dependent uses. 31 ORDINANCE NO. (g)0 feet for water dependent development if the use depends on an abutting shoreline location. Ancillary water dependent or water enjoyment uses may be co- located with water dependent uses. (h)0 feet for public access connections to the water's edge, or public access water body crossings, or public access segments connecting to existing trails where an alternate alignment is not practical, or where public access alignment avoids impacts to other critical areas, or where safety requires an abutting location; otherwise 25 feet for public access proposals paralleling the water. (i)0 feet for necessary roads, bridges, and railroads and utilities when consistent with the standards of Subsection K. (j)0 feet for piers, docks, marinas, boat launches, and bulkheads when consistent with applicable standards in Subsection K. Ancillary water dependent or water enjoyment uses may be co-located with water dependent uses. (k) As determined by the Administrator, for development proposed on sites separated from the shoreline by pre-existing, intervening, and lawfully created structures, roads, bulkheads/hard structural shoreline stabilization, or other substantial existing improvements. For the purposes of this section, the intervening lots/parcels, roads, bulkheads/hard structural shoreline stabilization,or other substantial improvements shall be found to: (i) Separate the subject upland property from the water body due to their height or width; and (ii) Substantially prevent or impair delivery of most riparian functions from the subject upland property to the water body. 32 ORDINANCE NO. The buffer width established shall reflect the riparian functions that can be delivered to the regulated stream/lake. v. Documentation: Reduced buffer width determinations and evidence shall be included in the application file. vi. Variance Required for Narrower Buffer Width: Greater buffer width or setback reductions require review as a shoreline variance by the Land Use Hearing Examiner per RMC 4-9-197. The setback provisions of the zoning district for the use must also be met unless a variance to the zoning code is achieved. e. Averaging of Buffer Width: i. Authority: Based upon an applicant's request, and the acceptance of a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study, the Administrator may approve buffer width averaging. ii. Criteria for Approval: Buffer width averaging may be allowed only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: (a)The water body and associated riparian area contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; and (b)Buffer width averaging will result in no-net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and (c)The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging; and (d)In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced to less than fifty feet (50'); and 33 ORDINANCE NO. • (e) The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iii. Buffer Enhancement May Be Required: Buffer enhancement in the areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required where appropriate to site conditions, habitat sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. iv. Variance Required for Narrower Buffer Width: Greater buffer width or setback reductions require review as a shoreline variance by the Land Use Hearing Examiner per RMC 4-9-197. The setback provisions of the zoning district for the use must also be met unless a variance to the zoning code is achieved. v. Notification: Notification may be required per Section J.2.c.ii.(f)(vi) f. Incentives for Restoration of Streams Located in an Underground Pipe or Culvert: Daylighting of culverted watercourses should be encouraged and allowed with the following incentives: i. Modified Standards: (a). Residential Zones: Setbacks, lot width and lot depth standards of RMC 4-2 may be reduced by the Reviewing Official without requirement of a variance for lots that abut the daylighted watercourse to accommodate the same number of lots as if the watercourse were not daylighted. (b). Mixed Use, Commercial, and Industrial Zones: (i.) Where greater lot coverage allowances are provided for structured parking in RMC 4-2, lot coverage may be increased to the limit allowed for structured 34 ORDINANCE NO. parking if instead a stream is daylighted. The increase in impervious surface allowed shall be equal to the area of stream restoration. (ii.)Density bonuses may be allowed pursuant to RMC 4-9- 065 where specified. ii. Standard buffers may be reduced per 4-3-090J.4.d. If reduced buffers in J.4.d along with other development standards of the zone would not allow the same development level as without the watercourse daylighting, the Administrator may approve a reduction consistent with the following criteria: (a) The buffer is lowered only to the amount necessary to achieve the same amount of development as without the daylighting. (b)The buffer width is no less than 50 feet. (c) The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iii. When designed consistent with the City's flood regulations in RMC 4- 3-050.1.6, portions of the daylighted stream/created buffer may be considered part of compensatory storage in flood hazard areas. iv. Stream relocation is permitted subject to RMC4-3-090.K. 5. Stream/Lake Buffer Standards: Any proposal subject to RMC 4-3-090 shall comply with the following standards within required buffer areas: a. Sites with Natural or Partially Developed Shorelines: Streams and lakes and their buffer areas shall be undisturbed, except where: 35 ORDINANCE NO. i. Buffer averaging or buffer reduction requests are evaluated in a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study and authorized pursuant to Subsections J.4.d, Reductions of Buffer or Setback Width and J.4.e, Averaging of Buffer Width, or ii. The activity consists of a habitat or watershed enhancement proposal exempt from the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit process, or iii. A variance has been approved for the use or activity. iv. Where impervious surfaces exist in buffer areas the proposal is additionally subject standards of 5.b. v. Specific criteria of Section K shall apply to the specific use or activity in addition to Subsection J. b. Sites with Developed Shorelines: Where the shoreline is largely in an unnatural state and the buffer predominantly contains impervious surfaces due to existing, legally permitted activities, the following standards shall apply: i. Streams and lakes shall be undisturbed. ii. No new buildings may be constructed within the required buffer. iii. Where impervious surfaces exist in buffer areas, such impervious surfaces shall not be increased or expanded within the buffer area. The extent of impervious surfaces within the buffer area may only be re-arranged if the reconfiguration of impervious surfaces and restoration of prior surfaced areas is part of an enhancement proposal that improves ecological function of the area protected by the buffer. iv. Existing native vegetation shall be preserved or enhanced to the extent possible, preferably in consolidated areas. 36 • ORDINANCE NO. v. The proposal will result in, at minimum, no-net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function;. vi. Specific criteria of Subsection K shall apply to the specific use or activity in addition to Subsection J. c. Proposed Activities Independent of a Use: Section K includes standards for practices or activities within waters or along the shoreline that can be unassociated with a land use, including but not limited to dredging, landfills, and stream alteration. Proposed activities or practices that are independent of a land use are subject to: i. Authorization in the Use Environment. ii. Evaluation in a Stream/Lake Reconnaissance and Supplemental Study. iii. Preparation of a Mitigation Plan consistent with subsection J.2 as appropriate. iv. Consistency with applicable specific criteria in subsection K in addition to Subsections J2, J5and J6. 6. Permit Evaluation Criteria for Shoreline Developments: a. Burden on Applicant: Applicants must explain to the satisfaction of the Administrator the methods that will be used to halt, avoid or otherwise control any harmful effects associated with the proposal. b. Erosion: Vegetation shall be used to control erosion rather than structural means where feasible. c. Geology: Important geological factors—such as possible slide areas—on a site must be considered. Whatever activity is planned under the application for the development permit must be safe and appropriate in view of the geological factors prevailing. 37 ORDINANCE NO. . d. No-Net-Loss of Functions: Shoreline uses or activities shall not adversely impact unique or fragile areas or stream/lake/riparian ecology function unless adequate mitigation measures are provided to ensure that there is no-net-loss of ecological functions as a result of the shoreline uses or activities. e. Native Growth Protection Areas Required: The Reviewing Official shall require the establishment of Native Growth Protection Areas consistent with RMC 4-3-050.E.4 to protect streams or lakes or riparian or lakeshore habitat where present. Where water body or buffer disturbance has occurred during construction or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation may be required as a condition of approval. f. Preservation of Existing Vegetation: Existing native vegetation shall be preserved to the extent possible, preferably in consolidated areas. g. Revegetation Required: Revegetation may be required in order to achieve reduced buffer widths; in cases where water body or buffer disturbance has occurred during construction or other activities; or as a result of findings addressed in required studies. When revegetation is required,it shall meet the following standards: i. Use of Native Species: When revegetation is required, native species, or other appropriate species naturalized to the Puget Sound region and approved by the Reviewing Official, shall be used. A variety of species shall be used which serve as food or shelter from climatic extremes and predators, and as structure and cover for reproduction and rearing of young. ii. Removal of Noxious Species: When required as a condition of approval, noxious or undesirable species of plants shall be removed or controlled so as to not compete with native vegetation. 38 ORDINANCE NO. h. Studies Required: All required studies shall be submitted in compliance with Subsection J.2. and RMC 4-8-120. i. Use Compatibility and Aesthetic Effects: The potential impact of any of the following on adjacent, abutting, and possibly distant land and shoreline users shall be considered in the design plans and efforts made to avoid or minimize detrimental aspects: i. View Obstruction: Buildings, smokestacks, machinery, fences, piers, poles, wires, signs, lights, and other structures. ii. Community Disturbances: Noise, odors, night lighting, water and land traffic, and other structures and activities. iii. Design Theme: Coordination and uniformity of architectural styles, exterior designs, landscaping patterns and other aspects of the overall design of a site. iv. Visually Unpleasant Areas: Landscaped screening shall be used to hide from public view any area that may negatively impact the visual quality of a site. v. Outdoor Activities: (a) Residential Areas: Work areas, storage, and other activities on a site in a residential area shall be in enclosed buildings, as is reasonably possible, to reduce distractions and other effects on surrounding areas. (b)Commercial and Industrial Areas: Outdoor activities of commercial and industrial operations shall be limited to those necessary for the operation of the enterprise. Outdoor areas shall not be used for storage of more than minimal amounts of equipment, parts, materials, products, or other objects. j. Public Access: 39 ORDINANCE NO. i. Where possible and consistent with this Section, space and right-of-way shall be left available on the immediate shoreline so that greater public use of the shoreline can be provided. ii. Trail systems shall be designed to avoid conflict with private residential property rights. iii. No property shall be acquired for public use without just compensation to the owner. k. Orientation: Where feasible, shoreline developments shall locate the water- dependent, water-related and water-enjoyment portions of their developments along the shoreline and place all other facilities inland. 1. Other Permit Criteria: Also see criteria in Section 4-9-197.F. K. SPECIFIC USE REGULATIONS: In addition to the General Use Regulations for All Shorelines Uses in Subsection J,the following Specific Use Regulations shall be met as applicable to the use or activity: 1. Airports and Seaplane Bases: a. Airport Location: A new airport shall not be allowed to locate within the shoreline. However, an airport already located within a shoreline shall be permitted to upgrade and expand its facilities provided such upgrading and expansion would not have a detrimental effect on the shoreline. b. Location of Seaplane Bases: i. Private Seaplane Bases: A single private seaplane is permitted per residence. 40 ORDINANCE NO. ii. Commercial Seaplane Bases: New commercial seaplane bases may be allowed in industrial areas provided such bases are not contiguous to residential areas. c. Airport Facilities: i. Future hangars shall be designed and spaced to allow viewing of airport activities from the area along the water's edge. d. Seaplane Bases (Commercial): i. Docks: Docks for the mooring of seaplanes are permitted. Seaplanes may be stored on the dock or ramps. ii. Tie-Down Areas: Tie-down areas may be provided on seaplane ramps. e. Landscaping: Landscaping shall be required around parking areas in accordance with City regulations. The landscaping shall be compatible with the activities and characteristics of aircraft in that it should be wind resistant, low profile, and able to survive under adverse conditions. f. Services: Services or aircraft shall conform to FAA standards, which include fuel, oil spill clean-up, safety and firefighting equipment, and vehicle and pedestrian separation. 2. Aquaculture: a. Location: Aquaculture operations may be located on streams and rivers, EXCEPT in Natural and Conservancy environments and along urban areas developed with residential uses. b. Time: Facilities shall be allowed on a temporary basis only. c. Design and Construction: All structures over or in the water shall meet the following restrictions: i. They shall be securely fastened to the shore. 41 ORDINANCE NO. ii. They shall be designed for a minimum of interference with the natural systems of the waterway including, for example, water flow and quality, fish circulation, and aquatic plant life. iii. They should not prohibit or restrict other human uses of the water, such as swimming and/or boating. iv. They shall be set back appropriate distances from other shoreline uses, if potential conflicts exist. 3. Boat-Launching Ramps: a. Site Appropriateness—Water Characteristics: Water depth should be deep enough off the shore to allow use by boats. Water currents and movement and normal wave action shall be suitable for ramp activity. b. Site Appropriateness—Topography: The proposed area should not present major geological or topographical obstacles to construction or operation of the ramp. Site adaptation such as dredging shall be minimized. c. Dimensions and Location: The ramp should be designed so as to allow for ease of access to the water with minimal impact on the shoreline and water surface. d. Ramp Surface Material: The surface of the ramp may be concrete,precast concrete, or other hard permanent substance. The material shall be permanent and noncontaminating to the water. Loose materials, such as gravel or cinders, will not be used. The material chosen shall be appropriate considering the following conditions: Soil characteristics, erosion, water currents, waterfront conditions, and usage of the ramp. e. Review Required: Engineering design and site location approval shall be obtained from the appropriate City department. 42 ORDINANCE NO. 4. Bulkheads: a. Applicability and Exemption: All bulkheads are subject to the regulations set forth in this Master Program, except that bulkheads common to a single family residence are exempted from the permit system set forth in this Master Program and Building Code. b. When Permitted: A bulkhead may be permitted only when: i. Required to protect upland areas or facilities. ii. Riprap cannot provide the necessary protection. iii. The bulkhead design has been engineered by an appropriately State licensed professional engineer, and the design has been approved by the Renton Department of Public Works. c. Associated Fill: A bulkhead for the purpose of creating land by filling behind the bulkhead shall be permitted only when the landfill has been approved. The application for a bulkhead shall be included in the application for the landfill in this case. (See subsection K.8 of this Section, Landfills.) d. General Design Requirements: i. The burden rests upon the applicant for the permit to propose a specific type of bulkhead design which has been engineered by an appropriately State licensed professional engineer. ii. All approved bulkheads are to be constructed in such a manner as to minimize damage to fish and shell fish habitat. In evaluating the application for a proposed bulkhead, the Development Services Division shall consider the effect of the bulkheads on public access to publicly owned shorelines. Where possible, bulkheads are to be designed so as not to detract from the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. 43 ORDINANCE NO. iii. Bulkheads are to be constructed in such a manner as to minimize alterations of the natural shoreline and to minimize adverse effects on nearby beaches. iv. In cases where bulkheading is permitted, scientific information suggests a rock riprap design is preferred. The cracks and openings in such a structure afford suitable habitats for certain forms of aquatic life. If there is determined to be a severe rate population, consideration must be given to construction of a solid bulkhead to eliminate cracks and openings typical to a riprap structure. 5. Commercial Developments: a. Location of Developments: i. New commercial developments are to be encouraged to locate in those areas where current commercial uses exist. ii. New commercial developments on Lake Washington which are neither water-dependent, nor water-related, nor water-enjoyment, nor which do not provide significant public access to and along the water's edge will not be permitted upon the shoreline. b. Incorporation of Public Recreational Opportunities: Commercial developments should incorporate recreational opportunities along the shoreline for the general public. c. View Impacts: The applicant for a shoreline development permit for a new commercial development must indicate in his application the effect which the proposed commercial development will have upon the scenic view prevailing in the given area. Specifically, the applicant must state in his permit what steps have been taken in the design of the proposed commercial development to reduce to a minimum interference with the scenic view enjoyed by any significant number of people in the area. 6. Dredging: 44 ORDINANCE NO. a. Definition: The removal of earth or sediment from the bottom or banks of a body of water. b. Permitted Dredging: Dredging is to be permitted only when: i. Dredging is necessary for flood control purposes, if a definite flood hazard would exist unless dredging were permitted. ii. Dredging is necessary to correct problems of material distribution and water quality, when such problems are adversely affecting aquatic life or recreational areas. iii. Dredging is necessary to obtain additional water area so as to decrease the intrusion into the lake of a public, private or marina dock. This type of dredging may only be allowed if the following conditions are met: The water of the dredged area shall not be stagnant or polluted; and the water of the dredged area shall be capable of supporting aquatic life. iv. Dredging may be permitted where necessary for the development and maintenance of public shoreline parks and of private shorelines to which the public is provided access. Dredging may be permitted where additional public access is provided and/or where there is anticipated to be a significant improvement to fish or wildlife habitat, provided there is no net reduction upon the surface waters of the lake. v. Dredging may be permitted to maintain water depth and navigability. vi. Dredging is performed pursuant to a remedial action plan, approved under authority of the Model Toxics Control Act or pursuant to other authorization by the Department of Ecology, U.S. Army Corps of Engineer or other agency with jurisdiction. c. Prohibited Dredging: i. Dredging is prohibited in unique or fragile areas (see RMC 4-11-210) except for the purposes identified in subsection K.6.b of this Section where appropriate Federal 45 ORDINANCE NO. and/or State authorization has been received, and any required environmental review and mitigation is conducted. ii. Dredging solely for the purpose of obtaining fill or construction material, which dredging is not directly related to those purposes permitted in subsection K.6.b of this Section, is prohibited. d. Regulations on Permitted Dredging: i. Report by Engineer Required: All proposed dredging operations shall be planned by an appropriate State licensed professional engineer. An approved engineering report shall be submitted to the Renton Development Services Division as part of the application for a shoreline permit. ii. Applicant's Responsibility: The responsibility rests solely with the applicant to demonstrate the necessity of the proposed dredging operation. iii. Minimal Adverse Effect: The responsibility further rests with the applicant to demonstrate that there will be a minimal adverse effect on aquatic life and/or on recreational areas. iv. Timing: The timing of any dredging operation shall be planned so that it has minimal impact or interference with fish migration. v. Abutting Bank Protection: When dredging bottom material of a body of water, the banks shall not be disturbed unless absolutely necessary. The responsibility rests with the applicant to propose and carry out practices to protect the banks. If it is absolutely necessary to disturb the abutting banks for access to the dredging area, the responsibility rests with the applicant to propose and carry out a method of restoration of the disturbed area to a condition minimizing erosion and siltation. 46 ORDINANCE NO. vi. Minimize Impacts: The responsibility rests with the applicant to demonstrate a method of eliminating or preventing conditions that may: (a) Create a nuisance to the public or nearby activity. (b) Damage property in or near the area. (c) Cause substantial adverse effect to plant, animal, aquatic or human life in or near the area. (d) Endanger public safety in or near the area. vii. Contamination: The applicant shall demonstrate a method to control contamination and pollution to water, air, and ground. viii. Disposal of dredged material: The applicant shall demonstrate a method of disposing of all dredged material. Dredged material shall not be deposited in a lake or stream except if the material is approved as part of a contamination remediation project approved by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies. In no instance shall dredged material be stockpiled in a shoreland area. If the dredged material is contaminant or pollutant in nature,the applicant shall propose and carry out a method of disposal that does not contaminate or pollute water,air,or ground. 7. Industrial Development: a. When Permitted: Industrial developments are to be permitted only when: i.They are water-dependent, water-related or they provide reasonable public access to and along the water's edge. New industrial developments on Lake Washington which are neither water-dependent, nor water-related shall provide significant public access. ii. They minimize and cluster those water-dependent and water-related portions of their development along the shoreline and place inland all facilities which are not water-dependent; and, 47 ORDINANCE NO. . iii. Any over-water portion is water-dependent, is limited to the smallest reasonable dimensions, and is approved by the Land Use Hearing Examiner; and, iv. They are designed in such manner as to enhance the scenic view; and, v. It has been demonstrated in the permit application that a capability exists to contain and clean up spills or discharges of pollutants associated with the industrial development. 8. Landfills: a. When Permitted: Landfills shall be permitted in the following cases: i. For detached single family residential uses, when the property is located between two (2)existing bulkheads, the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty five feet (125 ) in length along the ordinary high water mark and thirty five feet (35 ) into the water, and provided the provisions of RMC 4-9- 19714b(i) through 4-9-197I4b(vi) are satisfactorily met; or ii. When a bulkhead is built to protect the existing perimeter land, a landfill shall be approved to bring the contour up to the desired grade; or iii. When in a public use area, landfill would be advantageous to the general public; or iv. When repairs or modifications are required for existing bulkheads and fills; or v. When landfill is required for flood control purposes; or vi. When a landfill is part of a remedial action plan approved by the Department of Ecology pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act,or otherwise authorized by the Department of Ecology, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or other agency with jurisdiction. 48 • ORDINANCE NO. vii. Justification for landfill for any other purpose than those listed in subsections K.8.ai through vi of this Section will be allowed only with prior approval of the Land Use Hearing Examiner. 9. Marinas: a. When Permitted: Marinas shall be permitted only when: i. Adequate on-site parking is available commensurate with the moorage facilities provided. (See subsection K.9.b.vi of this Section.) ii. Adequate water area is available commensurate with the actual moorage facilities provided. iii. The location of the moorage facilities is convenient to public roads. b. Design Requirements: i. Marinas are to be designed in the manner that will minimize adverse effects on fish and shellfish resources and be aesthetically compatible with abutting and adjacent areas. ii. Marinas utilized to overnight and long-term moorage are not to be located in shallow-water embayments with poor flushing action. iii. Applications for permits for marina construction are to be evaluated for compliance with standards promulgated by Federal, State, and local agencies. iv. Marinas and other commercial boating activities are to be equipped with receptacles to receive and adequately dispose of sewage, waste, rubbish, and litter from patrons' boats. v. Applications for development permits for the construction of marinas must affirmatively indicate that the marina will be equipped to contain and clean up any spills or discharges of pollutants associated with boating activities. 49 ORDINANCE NO. vi. Parking should be provided in accordance with the following ratio: private and public marinas: two (2) per three (3) slips; private marina associated with residential complex: one per(3) slips. vii. Special designated loading areas should be provided near piers in the amount of one parking space per twenty five(25) slips; all other parking areas are to be located one hundred feet(100 ) from the ordinary high water mark. c. Location of Marinas: i. Marinas shall be permitted only upon Lake Washington. Marinas must provide adequate access,parking,and surface water area in relation to the number of moorage spaces provided. 10. Mining: a. All mining, including surface mining, shall be prohibited. b. Surface mining shall mean all or any part of the process involved in extraction of minerals by removing the overburden and mining directly from the mineral deposits thereby exposed, including open pit mining of minerals naturally exposed at the surface of the earth, mining by the auger method, and production of surface mining refuse. The surface mining shall not include reasonable excavation or grading conducted for farming, on-site road construction, or on-site building construction. 11. Parking: a. Public Parking: In order to encourage public use of the shoreline, public parking is to be provided at frequent locations. Public parking facilities should be discouraged along the water's edge. Public parking facilities are to be designed and landscaped to minimize adverse impact upon the shoreline and adjacent lands and upon the water view. b. Private Parking: Private parking facilities are to be located away from the water's edge where possible. 50 ORDINANCE NO. 12. Piers and Docks: a. Purpose: To establish approval and design criteria. b. Fees Prohibited: No fees or other compensation may be charged for use by nonresidents of piers or docks accessory to residences. c. General Design Requirements: i. Minimize Interference: Piers and docks shall be designed to minimize interference with the public use of the water surface and shoreline. ii. Floating Docks: The use of floating docks in lieu of other types of docks is to be encouraged in those areas where scenic values are high and where substantial conflicts with recreational boaters and fishermen will not be created. iii. Expansion Encouraged: The expansion of existing piers and docks is encouraged over the construction of new facilities. iv. General Criteria for Approval of Docks and Piers: The responsibility rests upon the applicant to affirmatively demonstrate the need for the proposed pier or dock in his application for a permit. The approval of a new dock or pier or a modification or extension of an existing dock or pier shall include a finding that the following criteria have been met: (a) The dock or pier length does not extend beyond a length necessary to provide reasonable and safe moorage. (b) The dock or pier does not interfere with the public use and enjoyment of the water nor create a hazard to navigation. (c) The dock or pier will not result in the unreasonable interference with the use of adjacent docks and/or piers; and 51 ORDINANCE NO. (d) The dock or pier must comply with the design criteria specified in the following sections. v. Construction Type: All piers and docks shall be built of open pile construction except that floating docks may be permitted where there is no danger of significant damage to an ecosystem, where scenic values are high, and where one or more of the following conditions exist: (a) Extreme water depth, beyond the range of normal length piling. (b) A soft bottom condition, providing little support for piling. (c) Ledge rock bottom that renders it not feasible to install piling. vi. Safety: All piers and docks shall be constructed and maintained in a safe and sound condition. vii. Protection from Toxic Materials: Applicants for the new construction or extension of piers and docks or the repair and maintenance of existing docks shall use materials and methods which prevent toxic materials, petrochemicals and other pollutants from entering surface water during and after construction. d. Allowable Types of Piers and Docks: Permits for the following construction of piers or docks will be allowed: i. Piers and docks which provide for public recreational access and use or marinas. ii. Community piers and docks in new major waterfront subdivisions. iii. Piers and docks which are constructed for private joint use by two (2) or more waterfront property owners. 52 ORDINANCE NO. iv. Private single family residence piers and docks. v. Community piers and docks for multi-family residence including apartments,condominiums, or similar developments. vi. Water-dependent commercial and industrial uses. e. Design Criteria for Single Family Docks and Piers: i. Number: There shall be no more than one pier per developed waterfront lot or ownership. ii. Dock Size Specifications: The following dock specifications shall be allowed: (a) Length: The dock may extend to a maximum of eighty feet (80 ) beyond the ordinary high water line into the water or until a depth of twelve feet (12 ) below the mean low water mark, whichever is reached first. However, in no case shall a dock of less than fifty feet (50) in length be required. (b) Width: The maximum width of a dock shall be eight feet (8 ). (c) Location: No portion of a pier or dock for the sole use of a private single family residence may lie closer than five feet(5 )to an abutting property line. (d) Extension: One extension of a dock parallel to the shoreline or one float may be allowed provided such extension is not located closer that five feet (5 ) from a side lot line or exceed one hundred (100) square feet in size. iii. Joint Use Piers and Docks: (a) Location: A joint use dock may be constructed for two(2) contiguous waterfront properties and may be located on a side property line or straddling a side property line, common to both properties. 53 ORDINANCE NO. (b) Agreement: A joint use ownership agreement or covenant shall be prepared with the appropriate signatures of the property owners in question and recorded with the King County Assessor's Office. A copy of the recorded agreement shall be provided to the City. Such document should specify ownership rights and maintenance provisions. (c) Dock Size Specifications: Joint use docks and piers may extend to eighty feet (80') beyond the ordinary high water mark or to a depth of twelve feet (12'), whichever is reached first. (d) Joint use docks and piers may not exceed a maximum width of twelve feet (12). (e) Joint use docks and piers may be allowed one pier extension or float a maximum of one hundred fifty(150) square feet in size for each owner. (f) Requests for greater dock length may only be submitted as specified below under subsection K.12.i of this Section once an individual has failed to work with an abutting property owner in establishing a joint use dock. f. Design Criteria for Multi-Family Residence Docks: i. Resident Moorage: Moorage at the docks shall be limited to residents or owner of the subdivision, apartments,condominiums or similar developments for which the dock was built. ii. Maximum Number of Berthing Spaces: The ratio of moorage berths to residential units shall be one berth for every two (2) dwelling units. iii. Length of Multiple Family Pier or Dock: Multiple family piers and docks shall not exceed a length of one hundred eighty feet(180 ) into the water beyond the ordinary high water mark, except as may be allowed under subsection K.12.i of this Section. 54 ORDINANCE NO. g. Design Criteria for Recreational, Commercial and Industrial Docks: The following dock specifications shall be allowed: i. Length and Depth: Unless otherwise determined or directed by any State agency having jurisdiction, the dock may extend into the water one hundred fifty feet (150 ); if the depth of thirty feet (30 ) is not reached, the dock may be extended until a depth of thirty(feet 30 )is reached, provided the dock does not exceed two hundred fifty feet (250 ); and in the case of a marina adjacent to a designated harbor area, docks and associated breakwaters may extend to the greater of(a) the distance determined pursuant to the foregoing criteria, (b) the inner harbor line,or(c) such point beyond the inner harbor line as is allowed by the terms of a lease, license or other formal authorization approved by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources or other agency with jurisdiction. ii. Width: The maximum width shall be twelve feet (I2 ). iii. Location: Docks shall be placed no closer than thirty feet (30 )to a side property line. iv. Piers or Docks Associated with City Trails: Docks or piers which are associated or linked with City trails shall be no greater than necessary to serve the intended purpose and will be determined by the City on a case-by-case basis. h. Use of Buoys and Floats: i. Buoys and Floats Encouraged: Where feasible, the use of buoys and floats for moorage, as permitted below under subsection K.12.h.ii of this Section, may be allowed as an alternative to the construction of piers and docks. Such buoys and floats are to be placed as close to shore as possible in order to minimize hazards to navigation, including reflectors for nighttime visibility. In no case shall a buoy be located further from the shoreline than the allowable length for docks. 55 ORDINANCE NO. . ii. Requirements: Floats shall be allowed under the following conditions: (a) Floats shall be anchored to allow clear passage on all sides by small watercraft. (b) Floats shall not exceed a maximum of one hundred (100) square feet in size. A float proposed for joint use between abutting property owners may not exceed one hundred fifty (150) square feet per residence. (c) A single family residence may only have one float. (d) Floats shall not exceed a length of fifty feet (50') into the water beyond the ordinary high water mark, except public recreation floats. i. Variance to Dock and Pier Dimensions: Requests for greater dock and pier dimensions than those specified above may be submitted as variance applications to the City's Land Use Hearing Examiner. Any greater dimension than those listed above may be allowed by the Land Use Hearing Examiner for good reason, which shall include, but is not limited to, conditions requiring greater dock dimensions. The Examiner, in approving a variance request, shall include a finding that a variance request compiles with: i. The criteria listed in subsection K.12.c of this Section when approving such requests; and ii. The criteria specified in RMC 4-9-19714. 56 ORDINANCE NO. 13. Recreation: a. Definition: The refreshment of body and mind through forms of play, amusement or relaxation. The recreational experience may be active, such as boating, fishing, and swimming, or may be passive, such as enjoying the natural beauty of the shoreline or its wildlife. b. Public Recreation: Public recreation uses shall be permitted within the shoreline only when the following criteria are considered: i. Accessibility to the water's edge is provided consistent with public safety needs and in consideration of natural features. ii. Recreational development shall be of such variety as to satisfy the diversity of demands of the local community; and iii. Just compensation is provided to the owner for property acquired for the public use; and iv. It is designed to avoid conflicts with owner's legal property rights and create minimum detrimental impact on the adjoining property; and v. It provides parking spaces to handle the designed public use, and it will be designed to have a minimum impact on the environment. c. Private Recreation: Private recreational uses open to the public shall be permitted only when the following standards are met: i. There is reasonable public access to the recreational uses, including access along the water's edge where appropriate. In the case of Lake Washington, significant public access shall be provided. 57 ORDINANCE NO. ii. The proposed facility will have no significant detrimental effects on abutting parcels; and iii. Adequate, screened, and landscaped parking facilities that are separated from pedestrian paths are provided. 14. Residential Development: Floating residences are prohibited. Residential developments shall be allowed only when: a. Adequate public utilities are available; and b. New residential developments shall be encouraged to provide public access. Unless deemed inappropriate due to health, safety or environmental concerns, new multi-family, condominium, planned unit developments, and subdivisions except short plats, shall provide public access along the water's edge; in the case of Lake Washington, significant public access shall be provided. 15. Roads and Railroads: a. Scenic Boulevards: Shoreline roadways should be scenic boulevards where possible. b. Sensitive Design: Roadways and Railroads located in shoreland areas shall be limited and allowed only if the following conditions are met: i.The proposed route is determined to have the least impact on the environment, while meeting City Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element requirements and standards in RMC 4-6-060; and ii. The facility is designed and maintained to prevent soil erosion and to permit natural movement of groundwater. iii. The crossing minimizes interruption of downstream movement of 58 ORDINANCE NO. wood and gravel; and iv. Roads and railroads in buffer areas shall not run parallel to the water body; and v. Crossings occur as near to perpendicular with the water body as possible; and vi. Crossings are designed according to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Passage Design at Road Culverts, 1999, and the National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings, 2000, as may be updated, or equivalent manuals as determined by the Responsible Official; and vii. Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and viii. Mitigation for impacts is provided pursuant to an approved mitigation plan per Subsection J.2. c. Debris Disposal: All debris and other waste materials from construction are to be disposed of in such a way as to prevent their entry by erosion into any water body. 16. Stream Alteration: a. Definition: Stream alteration is the relocation or change in the flow of a river, stream or creek. A river, stream or creek is surface water runoff flowing in a natural or modified channel. b. Permitted Stream Alteration: i. Unless otherwise prohibited by subsection K.16.c of this Section, stream alteration may be allowed subject to the regulations in subsection K.16.d of this Section. 59 ORDINANCE NO. ii. Stream alteration may be permitted if it is part of a public flood hazard reduction/habitat enhancement project approved by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies. c. Prohibited Stream Alteration: i. Stream alteration is prohibited in unique and fragile areas,except if the stream alteration is part of a public flood hazard reduction/habitat enhancement project approved by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies. ii. Stream alteration solely for the purpose of enlarging the developable portion of a parcel of land or increasing the economic potential of a parcel of land is prohibited. iii. Stream alteration is prohibited if it would be significantly detrimental to abutting or adjacent parcels. d. Regulations on Stream Alteration: i. Engineering: All proposed stream alterations shall be designed by an appropriately State licensed professional engineer. The design shall be submitted to the Development Services Division as part of the application. ii. Applicant's Responsibility: The responsibility rests solely with the applicant to demonstrate the necessity of the proposal. iii. Timing: The timing and the methods employed will have minimal adverse effects on aquatic life. iv. Pollution: Pollution is to be minimized during and after construction. v. Low Flow Maintenance:The project must be designed so that the low flow is maintained and the escape of fish at low water is possible. vi. Over-Water Cover: No permanent over-water cover or structure shall be allowed unless it is in the public interest. 60 ORDINANCE NO. 17. Trails: a. Definition: For the purposes of the Shoreline Master Program, trails are a nonmotorized transportation route designed primarily for pedestrians and bicyclists. b. Permitted Uses: Trail uses shall be permitted within the shoreline, when the following standards are met: i. Provisions for maintenance operation and emergency access have been provided. ii. They link water access points along the shoreline, or they link water access points along the shoreline with upland community facilities. iii. They are designed to avoid conflict with private property rights and to create the minimum objectionable impact on abutting property owners. iv. Just compensation is provided to the owner for property to be acquired by the public. v. They insure the rights and privacy of the abutting property owners. vi. Over-water structures required by the trails are determined to be in the public interest. vii. They are designed with a surface material which will carry the actual user loads and will have a minimum impact on the environment. viii. Additional Standards Applicable within the Natural Environment: (1) Within unique and fragile areas, only public soft surface trails and/or public viewing platforms or areas may be allowed and must comply with all of the following: 61 ORDINANCE NO. (a) The trail is authorized by the Renton Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan; (b) City permit authorization is granted indicating compliance with City Critical Area Regulations in RMC 4-3-050. (c) The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife has been consulted in design; (d) The trail is seasonally restricted in public use as necessary to protect Federal, State, or locally listed wildlife and fish species; (e) Trail widths shall be a maximum width of twelve (12) feet. (2) Hard surface trails when located on existing rights of way, and outside of unique and fragile areas, and meeting the remaining provisions of this subsection, 4-3-090.K.17, Trails. 18. Utilities: a. Native Vegetation: The native vegetation shall be maintained whenever possible. When utility projects are completed in the water or shoreland, the disturbed area shall be restored and landscaped as nearly as possible to the original condition, unless new landscaping is determined to be more desirable. b. Landscaping: All vegetation and screening shall be hardy enough to withstand the travel of service trucks and similar traffic in areas where such activity occurs. c. Screening of Public Utilities: When a public utility building, telephone exchange, sewage pumping operation or a public utility is built in the shoreline area, the requirements of this Master Program shall be met and the following screening requirements shall 62 ORDINANCE NO. be met. If the requirements of subsection K.18.a of this Section, Native Vegetation, and the requirements of this subsection are in disagreement, the requirements of this subsection shall take precedence. i. If the installation is housed in a building, the building shall conform architecturally with the surrounding buildings and area, or with the type of building that will develop due to the zoning district. ii. An unhoused installation on the ground or a housed installation that does not conform with subsection K.18.c.i of this Section shall be sight screened with evergreen trees, shrubs, and landscaping planted in sufficient depth to form an effective and actual sight barrier within five (5) years. iii. An unhoused installation of a dangerous nature, such as an electrical distribution substation, shall be enclosed with an eight foot (8') high open wire fence. Such installations shall be sight screened with evergreen trees, shrubs, and landscaping planted in sufficient depth to form an effective and actual sight barrier except at entrance gate(s), within five (5) years. d. Special Considerations for Pipelines: Installation and operation of pipelines shall protect the natural conditions of abutting watercourses and shorelines. i. Water quality is not to be degraded to the detriment of marine life nor shall water quality standards be violated. ii. Native soils shall be protected from erosion and natural conditions restored. Watercourse banks and bottoms shall be protected, where necessary, with suitable surface treatment. 63 ORDINANCE NO. iii. Petro-chemical or toxic material pipelines shall have automatically controlled shutoff valves at each side of the water crossing. iv. All petro-chemical or toxic material pipelines shall be constructed in accordance with the regulations of the Washington State Transportation Commission and subject to review by the City Public Works Department. e. Major Utilities—Specifications: i. Overhead High Voltage Power Lines: Structure of overhead power lines should be single-pole type or other aesthetically compatible design. Joint use docks and piers may extend to eighty feet (80 ) beyond the ordinary high water mark or to a depth of twelve feet (12 ), whichever is reached first. ii. Electrical Distribution Substations: Electrical distribution substations shall be at a shoreland location only when the applicant proves there exists no other site out of the shoreland area and when the screening requirements of subsection K.18.c of this Section are met. iii. Communications: This Section applies to telephone exchanges including radar transmission installations, receiving antennas for cable television and/or radio, and any other facility for the transmission of communication systems. Communications installations may be permitted in the shoreline area only when there exists no feasible site out of the shoreline and water area and when the screening requirements of subsection K.18.c of this Section are met. In an aesthetic interest, such installations shall be located as far as possible from residential, recreational, and commercial activities. iv. Pipeline Utilities: All pipeline utilities shall be underground. When underground projects are completed on the bank of a water body or in the shoreland or a 64 ORDINANCE NO. shoreline, the disturbed area shall be restored to the original configuration. Underground utility installations shall be permitted only when the finished installation shall not impair the appearance of such areas. v. Public Access: All utility companies shall be asked to provide pedestrian public access to utility owned shorelines when such areas are not potentially hazardous to the public. Where utility rights-of-way are located near recreational or public use areas, utility companies shall be encouraged to provide said rights-of-way as parking or other public use areas for the abutting public use area. f. Local Service Utilities, Specifications: i. Waterlines: Sizes and specifications shall be determined by the Public Works Department in accordance with City standards. ii. Sanitary Sewer: The existence or use of outhouses or privies is prohibited. All uses shall hook to the municipal sewer system. There shall be no septic tanks or other on-site sewage disposal systems. Storm drainage and pollutant drainage shall not enter the sanitary sewer system. During construction phases, commercial sanitary chemical toilets may be allowed only until proper plumbing facilities are completed. All sanitary sewer pipe sizes and materials shall be approved by the Renton Planning/Building/Public Works Department and METRO. iii. Storm Sewers: A storm sewer drainage system shall be required. Pretreatment of storm runoff or diversion to sanitary sewers may be required to keep deleterious substances out of neighboring watercourses. Storm sewer sizes and specifications shall be determined by the Public Works Department in accordance with City standards. iv. Discharges of Pollutants and Petroleum Products: 65 ORDINANCE NO. (a) Agency Review: Discharges of pollutants into watercourses and groundwater shall be subject to the Washington State Department of Ecology, Corps of Engineers, and the Environmental Protection Agency for review of permits for discharge. (b) Oil Separations: These units shall be required at sites that have oil waste disposal into sanitary or storm sewer. These units shall be built to Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO) or State of Washington Department of Public Health specifications. (c) Petroleum Bulk Storage and Distribution: Petroleum facilities shall hereafter not be allowed. g. Local and Major Utilities—Location and Crossings: Local and Major Utilities shall be designed and developed according to the following criteria and meeting mitigation criteria of J.2: i. Fish and wildlife habitat areas shall be avoided to the maximum extent possible; and ii. The Utility is designed consistent with one or more of the following methods: (a) Installation shall be accomplished by boring beneath the scour depth and hyporheic zone of the water body and channel migration zone; or (b)The utilities shall cross at an angle greater than sixty (60) degrees to the centerline of the channel in streams or perpendicular to the channel centerline; or (c)Crossings shall be contained within the footprint of an existing road or utility crossing ; and iii. New utility routes shall avoid paralleling the stream or following a 66 ORDINANCE NO. down-valley course near the channel; and iv. The utility installation shall not increase or decrease the natural rate of shore migration or channel migration; and v. Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and vi. Mitigation for impacts is provided pursuant to an approved mitigation plan per Subsection J.2. L. VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USES: See RMC 4-9-197I. M. VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES: See RMC 1-3-2. N. APPEALS: See RMC 4-8-110H. SECTION IV. The definitions of"Shoreline Conditional Use Justification," "Shoreline Variance Justification," and "Site Plan, Shoreline" of Section 4-8-120.D.19, Definitions S, of Chapter 8, Permits—General and Appeals, 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: Shoreline Conditional Use Justification: A written statement setting forth the reasons in favor of the shoreline conditional use permit application and addressing the criteria listed in RMC 4-9-197I5b, and used by the Hearing Examiner in reviewing the permit request. Shoreline Variance Justification: A written statement setting forth the reasons in favor of the shoreline variance application and addressing the criteria listed in RMC 4-9-197I4b, and used 67 ORDINANCE NO. by the Hearing Examiner when reviewing the variance request. Site Plan, Shoreline: A single fully dimensioned plan sheet drawn at a scale of one inch equals twenty feet (1" = 20') (or other scale approved by the Development Services Division Director)clearly indicating the information requested by the "Site Plan" with the following additional information: a. Ordinary high water mark, existing and proposed, b. Name of water body, c. Material stockpiles or similar/related activities, d. Quantity, source and composition of any fill material that is placed on the site whether temporary or permanent, e. Quantity, composition and destination of any excavated or dredged material, and f. Where applicable, a depiction of the impacts to views from existing residential uses and public areas. SECTION V. Section 4-9-190, Shoreline Permits, of Chapter 9, Permits - Specific, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby renumbered as Section 4-9- 197, and is hereby amended to read as follows: 4-9-197 SHORELINE PERMITS A. PURPOSE: (Reserved) B. APPLICABILITY: (Reserved) C. EXEMPTIONS FROM PERMIT SYSTEM: 68 ORDINANCE NO. The following shall not be considered substantial developments for the purpose of this Master Program. 1. Any project with a certification from the Governor pursuant to chapter 80.50 RCW. 2. Any development of which the total cost or fair market value does not exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), if such development does not materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the State. 3. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire or elements. a. "Normal maintenance" includes those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully established condition. b. "Normal repair" means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition, including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, within a reasonable period after decay or partial destruction, except where repair causes substantial adverse effects to the shoreline resource or environment. c. Replacement of a structure or development may be authorized as repair where such replacement is the common method of repair for the type of structure or development and the replacement structure or development is comparable to the original structure or development including, but not limited to, its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance and the replacement does not cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline resources or environment. 4. Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single family residences. A "normal protective" bulkhead includes those structural and nonstructural developments installed at or near, and parallel to, the ordinary high water mark for the sole purpose of protecting an existing single family residence and appurtenant structures from loss or damage by 69 ORDINANCE NO. erosion. A normal protective bulkhead is not exempt if it is constructed for the purpose of creating additional dry land. Additional construction requirements are found in WAC 173-27- 040(2)(c). 5. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. a. An "emergency" is an unanticipated and imminent threat to public health, safety, or the environment which requires immediate action within a time too short to allow for full compliance with this program. b. Emergency construction does not include development of new permanent protective structures where none previously existed. Where new protective structures are deemed to be the appropriate means to address the emergency situation, upon abatement of the emergency situation, the new structure shall be removed or any permit which would have been required, absent an emergency, pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW, chapter 17-27 WAC or this Shoreline Program shall be obtained. c. All emergency construction shall be consistent with the policies of chapter 90.58 RCW and this Program. d. In general, flooding or other seasonal events that can be anticipated and may occur, but that are not imminent are not an emergency. 6. Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, and the construction and maintenance of irrigation structures,including, but not limited to, head gates, pumping facilities, and irrigation channels. A feedlot of any size, all processing plants, other activities of a commercial nature, alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or filling, other than that which results from normal cultivation, shall not be considered normal or necessary farming 70 ORDINANCE NO. or ranching activities. A feedlot shall be an enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock hay, grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include land for growing crops or vegetation for livestock feeding and/or grazing, nor shall it include normal livestock wintering operations. 7. Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single family residence for his own use or for the use of his family, which residence does not exceed a height of thirty five feet (35') above average grade level as defined in WAC 173-27-030 and which meets all requirements of the State agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this Section. a. "Single family"residence means a detached dwelling designed for and occupied by one family including those structures and developments within a contiguous ownership which are a normal appurtenance. An "appurtenance" is necessarily connected to the use and enjoyment of a single family residence and is located landward of the ordinary high water mark and the perimeter of a wetland. b. Construction authorized under this exemption shall be located landward of the ordinary high water mark. 8. Construction of a dock including a community dock designed for pleasure craft only, for the private noncommercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single and multi- family residences. a. This exception applies if either: i. In salt waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00). 71 ORDINANCE NO. ii. In fresh waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00); however, if subsequent construction having a fair market value exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00) occurs within five (5) years of completion of the prior construction, the subsequent construction shall be considered a substantial development permit. b. A dock is a landing and moorage facility for watercraft and does not include recreational decks, storage facilities or other appurtenances. 9. Construction or modification, by or under the authority of the Coast Guard or a designated port management authority, of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys. 10. Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as part of an irrigation system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow and artificially stored groundwater for the irrigation of lands. 11. The marking of property lines or corners on State-owned lands when such marking does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface of the water. 12. Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other facilities existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed, or utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural drainage or diking system. 13. Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisites to preparation of an application for development authorization under this program, if: a. The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters. 72 ORDINANCE NO. b. The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including, but not limited to, fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values. c. The activity does not involve the installation of a structure, and upon completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the activity. d. A private entity seeking development authorization under this program first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the Development Services Division to ensure that the site is restored to pre-existing conditions. e. The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550. 14. The process of removing or controlling an aquatic noxious weed, as defined in RCW 17.26.020, through the use of a herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the Department of Agriculture or the Department of Ecology jointly with other State agencies under chapter 43.2IC RCW. 15. Watershed restoration projects as defined below: a. "Watershed restoration project" means a public or private project authorized by the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan that implements the plan or a part of the plan and consists of one or more of the following activities: i. A project that involves less than ten (10) miles of streamreach, in which less than twenty five (25)cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil is removed, imported, disturbed or discharged, and in which no existing vegetation is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional plantings. 73 ORDINANCE NO. ii. A project for the restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank that employs the principles of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water. iii. A project primarily designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat, remove or reduce impediments to migration of fish, or enhance the fishery resource available for use by all of the citizens of the State, provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culvert or instream habitat enhancement structure associated with the project, is less than two hundred (200) square feet in floor area and is located above the ordinary high water mark of the stream. b. "Watershed restoration plan" means a plan, developed or sponsored by a State department, a federally recognized Indian Tribe, a city, a county or a conservation district, for which agency and public review has been conducted pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW, the State Environmental Policy Act. The watershed restoration plan generally contains a general program and implementation measures or actions for the preservation, restoration, re-creation, or enhancement of the natural resources,character, and ecology of a stream, stream segment, drainage area, or watershed. 16. A public or private project, the primary purpose of which is to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage, when all of the following apply: a. The project has been approved in writing by the Department of Fish and Wildlife as necessary for the improvement of the habitat or passage and appropriately designed and sited to accomplish the intended purpose. b. The project has received hydraulic project approval by the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to chapter 75.20 RCW. 74 ORDINANCE NO. c. The Development Services Division has determined that the project is consistent with this Master Program. 17. Hazardous substance remedial actions pursuant to WAC 173-27-040(3). D. EXEMPTION CERTIFICATE PROCEDURES: 1. Any person claiming exemption from the permit requirements of this Master Program as a result of the exemptions specified in this Section shall make application for a no-fee exemption certificate to the Development Services Division in the manner prescribed by that division. 2. Any development which occurs within the regulated shorelines of the State under Renton's jurisdiction, whether it requires a permit or not, must be consistent with the intent of the State law. 3. The City may attach conditions to the approval of exempted developments and/or uses as necessary to assure consistency of the project with the Shoreline Management Act and this Program. 4. If any part of a proposed development is not eligible for exemption, then a shoreline permit is required for the entire proposed development project. E. SHORELINE PERMIT APPLICATION PROCEDURES: 1. Information Prior to Submitting a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Application: Prior to submitting an application for a shoreline permit or an exemption from a shoreline permit, the applicant should informally discuss a proposed development with the Development Services Division. This will enable the applicant to become familiar with the requirements of this Master Program, Building and Zoning procedures, and enforcement procedures. 75 ORDINANCE NO. 2. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Required: No shoreline development shall be undertaken on shorelines of the City without first obtaining a "substantial development permit" from the Development Services Division. 3. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Application Forms and Fees: Submittal requirements and fees shall be as listed in RMC 4-3-090.J.2, Studies Required, and RMC 4-8- 120C, Land Use Applications and 4-1-170, Land Use Review Fees. 4. Secondary Review By Independent Qualified Professionals: When appropriate due to the type of critical areas, habitat, or species present, or project area conditions, the Reviewing Official may require the applicant to prepare or fund analyses or activities conducted by third party or parties selected by the Reviewing Official and paid for by the applicant. Analyses and/or activities conducted under this Subsection include,but are not limited to: a. Evaluation by an independent qualified professional of the applicant's analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, to include any recommendations as appropriate; and b. A request for consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Department of Ecology, or the local Native American Indian Tribe or other appropriate agency; and/or c. Analysis of detailed surface and subsurface hydrologic features both on and adjacent or abutting to the site. 5. Public Notice: Three (3)copies of a notice of development application shall be posted prominently on the property concerned and in conspicuous public places within three hundred (300) feet thereof. The notice of development application shall also be mailed to property owners within three hundred(300) feet of the boundaries of the subject property. The required contents 76 ORDINANCE NO. of the notice of development application are detailed in RMC 4-8-090B, Public Notice Requirements. 6. Standard Public Comment Time: Each notice of development application shall include a statement that persons desiring to present their views to the Development Services Division with regard to said application may do so in writing to that Division and persons interested in the Development Services Division's action on an application for a permit may submit their views in writing or notify the Development Services Division in writing of their interest within thirty (30) days from the date of the notice of application. 7. Special Public Comment Time: Notice of development application for a substantial development permit regarding a limited utility extension as defined in RCW 90.58.140 (11)(b) or for the construction of a bulkhead or other measures to protect a single family residence and its appurtenant structures from shoreline erosion shall include a twenty (20) day comment period. Such notification or submission of views to the Development Services Division shall entitle those persons to a copy of the action taken on the application. 8. Review Guidelines: Unless exempted or authorized through the variance or conditional use permit provisions of this Master Program, no substantial development permit and no other permit shall be granted unless the proposed development is consistent with the provisions of this Master Program, the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and the rules and regulations adopted by the Department of Ecology thereunder. 9. Conditional Approval: Should the Development Services Division Director or his/her designee find that any application does not substantially comply with criteria imposed by the Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, he may deny such application or 77 ORDINANCE NO. attach any terms or condition which he deems suitable and reasonable to effect the purpose and objective of this Master Program. 10. Notification of City Departments: It shall be the duty of the Development Services Division to timely furnish copies of all applications and actions taken by said division unto such other officials or departments whose jurisdiction may extend to all or any part of the proposed development. F. REVIEW CRITERIA: 1. General: The Development Services Division shall review an application for a permit based on the following: a.The application. b. The environmental impact statement, if one is required. c. Written comments from interested persons. d. Information and comments from all affected City departments. e.Evidence presented at a public hearing. f. No authorization to undertake use or development on shorelines of the state shall be granted by the Responsible Official unless upon review the use or development is determined to be consistent with the policy and provisions of the Shoreline Management Act and the Renton Shoreline Master Program. g. No permit shall be issued for any new or expanded building or structure of a height inconsistent with Renton Shoreline Master Program Public Access Policies. High-rise structures in the shoreline jurisdiction generally should not be permitted, but could be permitted in the shoreline jurisdiction if the Responsible Official determines: i. Views of the shoreline would not be substantially obstructed due to topographic conditions, and 78 ORDINANCE NO. ii. Some overriding considerations of the public interest would be served. Shoreline low-rise development should provide substantial grade level views of the water from public shoreline roads running generally parallel to the water's edge. 2. Additional Information: The Development Services Division may require an applicant to furnish information and data in addition to that contained or required in the application forms prescribed. Unless an adequate environmental statement has previously been prepared for the proposed development by another agency, the City's Environmental Review committee shall cause to be prepared such a statement, prior to granting a permit, when the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 would require such a statement. 3. Procedural Amendments: In addition to the criteria hereinabove set forth in this Section, the Planning/Building/Public Works Department may from time-to-time promulgate additional procedures or criteria and such shall become effective, when reduced to writing, and filed with the City Clerk and as approved by the City Council and the Department of Ecology. 4. Burden of Proof on Applicant: The burden of proving that the proposed substantial development is consistent with the criteria which must be met before a permit is granted shall be on the applicant. G. BONDS: The Development Services Division may require the applicant to post a bond in favor of the City of Renton to assure full compliance with any terms and conditions imposed by said department on any shoreline permit. Said bond shall be in an amount to reasonably assure the City that any deferred improvement will be carried out within the time stipulated. H. ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS: 79 ORDINANCE NO. . The Planning/Building/Public Works Department shall have the final authority to interpret the Master Program for the City of Renton. Where an application is denied or changed, per subsection E6 of this Section, an applicant may appeal the decision denying or changing a "substantial development permit"to the Shoreline Hearings Board for an open record appeal in accordance with RMC 4-8-110. See RMC 4-8-110H for appeal procedures to the Shoreline Hearings Board. I. VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USES: 1. Purpose: The power to grant variances and conditional use permits should be utilized in a manner which, while protecting the environment, will assure that a person will be able to utilize his property in a fair and equitable manner. 2. Authority: a. City Hearing Examiner: The Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner shall have authority to grant conditional use permits and variances in the administration of the Renton Master Program. b. State Department of Ecology Decision: Both variances and conditional use permits are forwarded to the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General's office for approval or denial. c. Time Limit, Permit Validity, and Appeals: Conditional permits and variances shall be deemed to be approved within thirty (30)calendar days from the date of receipt by the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General's office unless written communication is received by the applicant and the City indicating otherwise. i. Conditional use permits and variances shall be filed with the State in accordance with RCW 90.58.140(6) and WAC 173-27-130. 80 ORDINANCE NO. ii. Permit validity requirements of subsection J of this Section shall apply to conditional use and variance permits. iii. Appeals of conditional use or variance permits shall be made in accordance with RMC 4-8-110H. 3. Interpretation: It shall be recognized that a lawful use at the time the Master Program is adopted is to be considered a permitted use, and maintenance and restoration shall not require a variance or a conditional use permit. 4. Variances: a. Purpose: Upon proper application, a substantial development permit may be granted which is at variance with the criteria established in the Renton Master Program where, owing to special conditions pertaining to the specific piece of property, the literal interpretation and strict application of the criteria established in the Renton Master Program would cause undue and unnecessary hardship or practical difficulties. b. Decision Criteria: The fact that the applicant might make a greater profit by using his property in a manner contrary to the intent of the Master Program is not, by itself, sufficient reason for a variance. The Land Use Hearing Examiner must find each of the following: i. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the subject property, or to the intended use thereof, that do not apply generally to other properties on shorelines in the same vicinity. ii. The variance permit is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant possessed by the owners of other properties on shorelines in the same vicinity. 81 ORDINANCE NO. iii. The variance permit will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property on the shorelines in the same vicinity. iv. The variance granted will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Master Program. v. The public welfare and interest will be preserved; if more harm will be done to the area by granting the variance than would be done to the applicant by denying it, the variance will be denied, but each property owner shall be entitled to the reasonable use and development of his lands as long as such use and development is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and the provisions of this Master Program. vi. The proposal meets the variance criteria in WAC 173-27-170. 5. Conditional Use: a. Purpose: Upon proper application, a conditional use permit may be granted. The objective of a conditional use provision is to provide more control and flexibility for implementing the regulations of the Master Program. With provisions to control undesirable effects, the scope of uses can be expanded to include many uses. b. Decision Criteria: Uses classified as conditional uses can be permitted only after consideration and by meeting such performance standards that make the use compatible with other permitted uses within that area. A conditional use permit will be granted subject to each of the following conditions: i.The use must be compatible with other permitted uses within that area. ii. The use will not interfere with the public use of public shorelines. 82 ORDINANCE NO. iii. Design of the site will be compatible with the surroundings and the City's Master Program. iv. The use shall be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City's Master Program. v. The use meets the conditional use criteria in WAC 173-27-160. J. TIME REQUIREMENTS FOR SHORELINE PERMITS: 1. Applicability and Modification at Time of Approval: a. The time requirements of this Section shall apply to all substantial development permits and to any development authorized pursuant to a variance or conditional use permit authorized under this Program. b. If it is determined that standard time requirements of subsections J2 and J3 of this Section should not be applied, the Development Services Division shall adopt appropriate time limits as a part of action on a substantial development permit upon a finding of good cause, based on the requirements and circumstances of the project proposed and consistent with the policy and provisions of this Master Program and RCW 90.58.143. If it is determined that standard time requirements of subsections J2 and J3 of this Section should not be applied, the Hearing Examiner, upon a finding of good cause and with the approval of the Department of Ecology, shall establish appropriate time limits as a part of action on a conditional use or variance permit. "Good cause" means that the time limits established are reasonably related to the time actually necessary to perform the development on the ground and complete the project that is being permitted. 83 ORDINANCE NO. c. Where specific provisions are not included to establish time limits on a permit as part of action on a permit by the City or the Department of Ecology, the time limits in subsections J2 and J3 of this Section apply. d. Requests for permit extension shall be made in accordance with subsections J2 and J3 of this Section. 2. Construction Commencement: a. Unless a different time period is specified in the shoreline permit as authorized by RCW 90.58.143 and subsection J1 of this Section,construction activities, or a use or activity, for which a permit has been granted pursuant to this Master Program must be commenced within two (2) years of the effective date of a shoreline permit, or the shoreline permit shall terminate, and a new permit shall be necessary. However, the Development Services Division may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable factors,if a request for extension has been filed with the Division before the expiration date, and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Department of Ecology. b. Construction activities or commencement of construction referenced in subsection J2a of this Section means that construction applications must be submitted, permits must be issued, and foundation inspections must be completed before the end of the two(2) year period. 3. Construction Completion: A permit authorizing construction shall extend for a term of no more than five (5) years after the effective date of a shoreline permit, unless a longer period has been specified pursuant to RCW 90.58.143 and subsection J1 of this Section. If an applicant files a request for an extension prior to expiration of the shoreline permit the Development Services Division shall review the permit and upon a showing of good cause may authorize a 84 ORDINANCE NO. single extension of the shoreline permit for a period of up to one year. Otherwise said permit shall terminate. Notice of the proposed permit extension shall be given to parties of record and the Department of Ecology. To maintain the validity of a shoreline permit, it is the applicant's responsibility to maintain valid construction permits in accordance with adopted Building Codes. 4. Effective Date: a. For purposes of determining the life of a shoreline permit, the effective date of a substantial development permit, shoreline conditional use permit, or shoreline variance permit shall be the date of filing as provided in RCW 90.58.140(6). The permit time periods in subsections J2 and J3 of this Section do not include the time during which a use or activity was not actually pursued due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal actions, or due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the development that authorize the development to proceed, including all reasonably related administrative or legal actions on any such permits or approvals. b. It is the responsibility of the applicant to inform the Development Services Division of the pendency of other permit applications filed with agencies other than the City, and of any related administrative or legal actions on any permit or approval. If no notice of the pendency of other permits or approvals is given to the Division prior to the expiration date established by the shoreline permit or the provisions of this Section, the expiration of a permit shall be based on the effective date of the shoreline permit. c. The City shall issue permits within applicable time limits specified in the Type III and Type VI review processes in RMC 4-8-080H. Substantial development permits for a limited utility extension as defined in RCW 90.58.140(11)(b) or for the construction of a bulkhead or other measures to protect a single family residence and its appurtenant structures 85 ORDINANCE NO. from shoreline erosion shall be issued within twenty one (21) days of the last day of the comment period specified in RMC 4-9-197E3. 5. Review Period—Construction Authorization: a. No construction pursuant to such permit shall begin or be authorized and no building, grading or other construction permits or use permits shall be issued by the City until twenty one (21) days from the date the permit was filed with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General, or until all review proceedings are completed as were initiated within the twenty one (21)days of the date of filing. Filing shall occur in accordance with RCW 90.58.140(6) and WAC 173-27-130. b. If the granting of a shoreline permit by the City is appealed to the Shoreline Hearings Board, and the Shoreline Hearings Board has approved the granting of the permit, and an appeal for judicial review of the Shoreline Hearings Board decision is filed, construction authorization may occur subject to the conditions,time periods, and other provisions of RCW 90.58.140(5)(b). K. RULINGS TO STATE: Any ruling on an application for a substantial development permit under authority of this Master Program, whether it is an approval or denial, shall, with the transmittal of the ruling to the applicant, be filed concurrently with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General by the Development Services Division. Filing shall occur in accordance with RCW 90.58.140(6) and WAC 173-27-130. L. TRANSFERABILITY OF PERMIT: If a parcel which has a valid shoreline permit is sold to another person or firm, such permit may be transferred to the new owner. 86 ORDINANCE NO. M. ENFORCEMENT: All provisions of this Master Program shall be enforced by the Development Services Division. For such purposes, the Director or his duly authorized representative shall have the power of a police officer. N. RESCISSION OF PERMITS: 1. Noncompliance with Permit: Any shoreline permit issued under the terms of this Master Program may be rescinded or suspended by the Development Services Division of the City upon a finding that a permittee has not complied with conditions of the permit. 2. Notice of Noncompliance: Such rescission and/or modification of an issued permit shall be initiated by serving written notice of noncompliance on the permittee, which notice shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the address listed on the application or to such other address as the applicant or permittee may have advised the City; or such notice may be served on the applicant or permittee in person or his agent in the same manner as service of summons as provided by law. 3. Posting: In addition to such notice, the Development Services Division shall cause to have notice posted in three (3)public places of which one posting shall be at or within the area described in the permit. 4. Public Hearing: Before any such permit can be rescinded, a public hearing shall be held by the Land Use Hearing Examiner. Notice of the public hearing shall be made in accordance with RMC 4-8-090D, Public Notice Requirements. 5. Final Decision: The decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner shall be the final decision of the City on all rescinded applications. A written decision shall be transmitted to the 87 ORDINANCE NO. Department of Ecology, the Attorney General's office, the applicant, and such other departments or boards of the City as are affected thereby and the legislative body of the City. O. APPEALS: See RMC 4-8-110H. P. VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES: 1. Prosecution: Every person violating any of the provisions of this Master Program or the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 shall be punishable under conviction by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by imprisonment not exceeding ninety (90)days, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and each day's violation shall constitute a separate punishable offense. 2. Injunction: The City Attorney may bring such injunctive, declaratory or other actions as are necessary to insure that no uses are made of the shorelines of the State the City's jurisdiction which are in conflict with the provisions and programs of this Master Program or the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and to otherwise enforce provisions of this Section and the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. 3. Public and Private Redress: Any person subject to the regulatory program of this Master Program who violates any provision of this Master Program or the provisions of a permit issued pursuant thereto shall be liable for all damages to public or private property arising from such violation, including the cost of restoring the affected area to its condition prior to such violation. The City Attorney may bring suit for damages under this subsection on behalf of the City. Private persons shall have the right to bring suit for damages under this subsection on their own behalf and on behalf of all persons similarly situated. If liability has been established for the cost of restoring an area affected by violation, the Court shall make provision to assure that 88 ORDINANCE NO. restoration will be accomplished within a reasonable time at the expense of the violator. In addition to such relief, including monetary damages, the Court in its discretion may award attorney's fees and costs of the suit to the prevailing party. SECTION VI. A new Section,4-10-095, Shoreline Master Program— Nonconforming Uses, Activities, and Structures, of Chapter 10, Legal Nonconforming Structures, Uses and Lots, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby added, to read as follows: 4-10-095 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM — NONCONFORMING USES, ACTIVITIES, AND STRUCTURES: A shoreline use or development which was lawfully constructed or established prior to the effective date of the applicable Shoreline Master Program, or amendments thereto, but which does not conform to present regulations or standards of the program, may be continued provided that: A. Nonconforming Structures: Nonconforming structures shall be governed by RMC 4-10-050. B. Nonconforming Uses. Nonconforming uses shall be governed by RMC 4-10-060. C. Pre-Existing Legal Lot: Reserved. SECTION VII. The following definitions in Chapter 11,Definitions, 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: ACT, SHORELINE MANAGEMENT: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.)The Shoreline Management Act of 1971, chapter 90.58 RCW as amended. 89 ORDINANCE NO. BUFFER, SHORELINES: A strip of land that is designated to permanently remain vegetated in an undisturbed and natural condition to protect an adjacent aquatic, riparian, or wetland site from upland impacts, to provide habitat for wildlife and to afford limited public access. CIRCULATION: The movement of passengers or goods to, from, over, or along a transportation corridor. FLOOD CONTROL: Any undertaking for the conveyance, control, storage, and dispersal of flood waters. HIGH RISE: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) A structure exceeding seventy-five(75) feet in height. LOCAL SERVICE UTILITIES: Public or private utilities normally servicing a neighborhood or defined subarea in the City, i.e., telephone exchanges; sewer, both storm and sanitary; distribution lines, electrical less than fifty five (55) kv, telephone,cable TV, etc. MULTIPLE-USE: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.)The combining of compatible uses within one development, of which the major use or activity is water-oriented. All uses or activities other than the major one are directly related and necessary to the major use or activity. ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK: On lakes and streams, that mark found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland,in respect to vegetation as that condition exists as of the effective date of regulations, as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may change in accordance with permits issued by the City or State. The following criteria clarify this mark on lakes and streams: 90 ORDINANCE NO. A. Lakes. Where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, it shall be the line of mean high water. B. Streams. Where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, it shall be the line of mean high water. For braided streams, the ordinary high water mark is found on the banks forming the outer limits of the depression within which the braiding occurs. PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) Special contractual agreement between the developer and a governmental body governing development of land. PUBLIC ACCESS: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) A means of physical approach to and along the shoreline available to the general public. This may also include visual approach. RECREATION: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.)The refreshment of body and mind through forms of play, amusement or relaxation. The recreational experience may be active, such as boating, fishing, and swimming, or may be passive such as enjoying the natural beauty of the shoreline or its wildlife. STRUCTURE: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) A permanent or temporary edifice or building, or any piece of work artificially built or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner, whether installed on, above, or below the surface of the ground or water, except for vessels. SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT: Any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds five thousand dollars ($5,000) or any development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shoreline of the State. Exemptions in RCW 90.58.030(3)(e) and in RMC 4-9-190C are not considered substantial developments. 91 ORDINANCE NO. UNIQUE AND FRAGILE AREAS: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) Those portions of the shoreline which (1)contain or substantially contribute to the maintenance of endangered or valuable forms of life and(2) have unstable or potentially hazardous topographic, geologic or hydrologic features (such as steep slopes, marshes). SECTION VIII. The following new definitions in Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" are hereby added, to read as follows: BREAKWATER: A protective structure, usually built off-shore for the purpose of protecting the shoreline or harbor area from wave action. CONDITIONAL USE, SHORELINE: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) A use, development, or substantial development which is classified as a conditional use or is not classified within the applicable master program. FAIR MARKET VALUE: The open market bid price for conducting the work, using the equipment and facilities, and purchase of the goods, services and materials necessary to accomplish the development. This would normally equate to the cost of hiring a contractor to undertake the development from start to finish, including the cost of labor, materials,equipment and facility usage, transportation and contractor overhead and profit. The fair market value of the development shall include the fair market value of any donated, contributed or found labor, equipment or materials PARTY OF RECORD: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) All persons, agencies or organizations who have submitted written comments in response to a notice of application; made oral comments in a formal public hearing 92 ORDINANCE NO. conducted on the application; or notified local government of their desire to receive a copy of the final decision on a permit and who have provided an address for delivery of such notice by mail. PERMIT, SHORELINE: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) Any substantial development, variance, conditional use permit, or revision authorized under chapter 90.58 RCW. PUBLIC INTEREST: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) The interest shared by the citizens of the state or community at large in the affairs of government, or some interest by which their rights or liabilities are affected including, but not limited to, an effect on public property or on health, safety, or general welfare resulting from a use or development. VESSEL: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) Ships, boats, barges, or any other floating craft which are designed and used for navigation and do not interfere with the normal public use of the water. SECTION IX. The Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department is authorized to prepare a submittal package to the State of Washington Department of Ecology, who has approval authority for the Shoreline Master Program amendments. SECTION X. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five days after its publication, and after approval by the State of Washington Department of Ecology as consistent with State Shoreline laws and rules. 93 ORDINANCE NO. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2005. Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD.!178:4/21/05:ma 94 Exhibit A Documents Prepared in Support of City of Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration Project • "Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration,"Jones&Stokes,July 13, 2004. • "City of Renton Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommendations," prepared by AC Kindig&Company and Cedarock Consultants, Inc. on February 27, 2003. • Stream/lake classification results in the Renton Water Classes Map prepared by AC Kindig& Company and Cedarock, in conjunction with Renton City staff, as most recently issued January 26, 2005. • "Transmittal of Parametrix Review of Wetlands Regulations,"Jones &Stokes,July 13, 2004; together with "Best Available Science Ordinance Review"by Jim Kelly, PhD, Parametrix,June 28, 2004. • "Overview and Comparison of Aquifer,Flood Hazard,Geologic Hazard,and Habitat Conservation Regulations to State Example Critical Areas Code,"Jones &Stokes,July 13, 2004. • "Proposed Renton Comprehensive Plan and Shoreline Master Program Policy Amendments,"Jones & Stokes,January 26, 2005. • "Proposed Renton Shoreline Master Program Use Environment Amendments,"Jones&Stokes, March 8,2004 together with the updated Shoreline Environment Map transmitted January 26, 2004. • "Revised Review Draft--Renton Critical Area Ordinance and Shoreline Master Program Regulation Amendments,"Jones & Stokes,January 26, 2005. Includes proposed draft Best Available Science Regulation Amendments,January 26, 2005. • "Agency Comments March 2004 to December 2004,"Jones& Stokes,January 26, 2005. • "Stream and Lake Code Amendments and Updates: Edits to July 13, 2004 Best Available Science Regulation Amendments,"Jones &Stokes,January 26, 2005. • "Staff Recommended Adjustments to January 26, 2005 Revised Review Drat Critical Areas Ordinance and Shoreline Master Program Regulation Amendments,"Jones& Stokes,March 2, 2005 together with "City of Renton Wetland Rating System—Field Review,"Parametrix,March 2,2005. • "Frequently Asked Questions: Single Family Homes and new Stream/Lake/Shoreline Buffers," March 8, 2005,prepared by Jones&Stokes for the City of Renton. • "Responses to Planning Commission Hearing Comments: Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration"Jones&Stokes,dated March 9, 2005. Includes ERC Report and Decision dated August 17, 2004, as well as the March 2, 2005 memo above. • "Meeting with Richard Robohm,State Department of Ecology,"Jones&Stokes,March 15, 2005. • "Planning Commission Follow-Up Questions,"prepared by Jones &Stokes,March 15, 2005. • "Updated Responses to City Council Hearing Comments: Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration,"Jones&Stokes,March 31, 2005; together with a letter"Critical Areas and Shoreline Master Plan Update: Response to Livable Communities Coalition Letter,March 21, 2005,"by AC Kindig& Co. CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE Copy of the 229-page Critical Areas Ordinance can be found on the Council Liaison's desk and in the City Clerk office. If you would like your own copy, please contact the City Clerk Office at x6510. 31-1 67 as boos CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 573 7 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 3, ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND OVERLAY DISTRICTS; CHAPTER 4, CITYWIDE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; CHAPTER 8, PERMITS — GENERAL AND APPEALS; CHAPTER 9, PERMITS — SPECIFIC; CHAPTER 10, LEGAL NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES, USES AND LOTS; AND CHAPTER 11, DEFINITIONS; OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" TO AMEND CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS. WHEREAS,the Growth Management Act mandates an update of the Critical Areas Ordinance based on Best Available Science; and WHEREAS,the City conducted a Best Available Science review of all existing and proposed critical areas regulations as set forth in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS,the City considered functions and values of its shorelines of the state in the "City of Renton Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommendations"report dated February 27, 2003, prepared by AC Kindig &Company and Cedarock Consultants, Inc. on behalf of the City of Renton; and WHEREAS, the City's stream regulation amendments focus primarily on new buffers, which are designed to develop standard stream buffer widths that would result in no net loss of functions and values. Further, to provide incentives to restore degraded buffer conditions, the City's amendments allow for both standard and flexible review processes, so that applications ORDINANCE NO. proposing to substantially improve functions and values may be allowed to reduce buffer widths with added site-specific studies and mitigation; and WHEREAS, the City considered a best available science review of its wetlands regulations in "Transmittal of Parametrix Review of Wetlands Regulations," Jones & Stokes, dated July 13, 2004, together with "Best Available Science Ordinance Review" by Jim Kelly, PhD,Parametrix, dated June 28, 2004; as well as the memo "City of Renton Wetland Rating System—Field Review" dated March 2, 2005, by Jim Kelly, PhD, Parametrix; and WHEREAS,in most cases, the City expects that the standard wetland buffers will be sufficient to protect the functions and values of wetlands. However, the City Council also recognizes: 1)This ordinance would widen buffers as needed to preserve all functions and values, including wildlife. 2)Renton has performed reconnaissance of its wetlands and streams and does understand the functions and values and categories of streams and wetlands in its jurisdiction, increasing confidence in its code structure to protect functions and values by lowering risk. 3) Renton's areas of linked wildlife habitat are limited to those areas where the City has been active in its purchases of wetlands and wetland banks and property along Springbrook Creek, May Creek, and the Black River. The City continues to be active in habitat protection and restoration as evidenced in its Capital Improvement Program 2005 to 2010. 4) Another concentration of higher value wetlands is found in the Soos Creek vicinity outside of the City limits. Renton has added a policy to do cooperative basin planning for the Soos Creek watershed should annexation be imminent and will include such policy in its Year 2005 Comprehensive Plan policy amendments; and WHEREAS, the City participates in Water Resource Inventory Areas 8 and 9 planning processes which are expected to be completed in 2005; and 2 ` ORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS, the City's protection of shorelines and critical areas is multifaceted and includes City ownership of environmentally sensitive sites, regional collaboration, City capital improvement programming that involves habitat restoration, as well as shoreline and critical area regulations; and WHEREAS, the City notified State and local governments and tribal agencies and parties of record of the work program through a notice of application and SEPA determination; and WHEREAS, the City issued a SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance in August 2004, which Determination was timely appealed and which was upheld on appeal by the City's Hearing Examiner on December 16, 2004; and WHEREAS,the City reviewed wetland policy and regulation comments provided by the Washington State Department of Ecology submitted in May 2004 and December 2004 and met with a representative of the State of Washington Department of Ecology on March 23, 2004 and March 14, 2005 and proposed some amendments in responses to comments dated July 13, 2004 and March 2, March 9, and March 15, 2005; and WHEREAS,the City contacted the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) to request early agency comment in March 2004, received comments in May 2005, and responded to comments on July 13, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City established a public participation program pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(2) and provided notice of the update process pursuant to RCW 36.70A.035, provided for early and continuous public participation pursuant to RCW 36.70A.140 by publishing a meeting schedule, provided updates to the schedule on public television, and the City web site; and 3 ORDINANCE NO. ' WHEREAS,the City held periodic public meetings with the Planning Commission between Spring 2003 and Spring 2005 and City Council Planning and Development Committee meetings between Spring 2004 and Spring 2005, as well as televised workshop sessions with the Council Committee of the Whole between January 2004 and September, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City conducted a public open house on July 27, 2004, a focus of which was the proposed critical area related regulation amendments, and a workshop with Seattle/King County Master Builders and neighboring jurisdictions on August 16, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City has provided opportunity for the public to comment on the review and suggest needed revisions of the plan and regulations, and held a public hearings March 2, 2005, and March 21, 2005, on this matter; WHEREAS, the City considered and responded to government agency and public comments as compiled and documented in "Responses to Planning Commission Hearing Comments: Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration" dated March 9, 2005 and "Updated Responses to City Council Hearing Comments Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration" dated March 31, 2005,both prepared on behalf of the City; and WHEREAS, the proposed critical area regulation and related amendments were made available in public review drafts dated July 13, 2004 and January 26, 2005 together with Planning Commission and Planning and Development Committee amendments in response to comments received by the City through March 31, 2005; and WHEREAS, such Best Available Science and Critical Areas Regulations are in the best interest of the public; 4 ORDINANCE NO. NOW, THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. This ordinance is also supported by the following conclusions based on the adopted findings: 1) The City followed its established public participation program; 2) Revisions are needed to the Critical Areas Regulations; 3) The City has conducted its seven-year update requirement under RCW 36.70A.130 for all portions of the Comprehensive Plan and implementing regulations by completing the portions of the work program needed to implement the Critical Areas, Shorelines and Best Available Science review; and 4) All development standards within these sections were reviewed and those that remained without amendment are found to be in compliance with the Growth Management Act, as amended. All modified, revised or new development regulations are internally consistent and found to be in compliance with the Growth Management Act. SECTION II. Section 4-3-050 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, 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, EXCEPT for the figures in 4-3-050.Q, which are not amended here: 4-3-050 CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS: A. PURPOSE: 1. General: The purposes of this section are to: a. Manage development activities to protect environmental quality; 5 • ORDINANCE NO. b. Assist or further the implementation of the policies of the Growth Management Act, the State Environmental Policy Act, chapter 43.21C RCW, and the City Comprehensive Plan; c. Provide City officials with information to evaluate, approve, condition or deny public or private development proposals with regard to critical area impacts; d. Protect the public life, health, safety, welfare, and property by minimizing and managing the adverse environmental impacts of development within and abutting critical areas; and e. Protect the public from: i. Preventable maintenance and replacement of public facilities needed when critical area functioning is impaired; ii. Unnecessary costs for public emergency rescue and relief operations; and iii. Potential litigation on improper construction practices occurring in critical areas. 2. Aquifer Protection: The overall purpose of the aquifer protection regulations is to protect aquifers used as potable water supply sources by the City from contamination by hazardous materials. Other specific purposes include: a. Protect the groundwater resources of the City; b. Provide a means of regulating specific land uses within aquifer protection areas; c. Provide a means of establishing safe construction practices for projects built within an aquifer protection area; and 6 ORDINANCE NO. f 1 d. Protect the City's drinking water supply from impacts by facilities that store, handle, treat, use, or produce substances that pose a hazard to groundwater quality. 3. Flood Hazards: It is the purpose of the flood hazard regulations to: a. Minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas; and b. Minimize expenditure of public money and costly flood control projects; and c. Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally undertaken at the expense of the general public; and d. Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains, electric, telephone and sewer lines, streets, and bridges located in areas of special flood hazard; and e. Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of areas of special flood hazard so as to minimize future flood blight areas; and f. Ensure that those who occupy the areas of special flood hazard assume responsibility for their actions. 4. Geologic Hazards: The purposes of the geologic hazard regulations are to: a. Minimize damage due to landslide, subsidence or erosion through the control of development; and b. Protect the public against avoidable losses due to maintenance and replacement of public facilities, property damage, subsidy cost of public mitigation of avoidable impacts, and costs for public emergency rescue and relief operations; and 7 ORDINANCE NO. , c. Reduce the risks to the City and its citizens from development occurring on unstable slopes; and d. Control erosion and sediment run-off from development. 5. Habitat Conservation: The primary purpose of habitat conservation regulations is to minimize impacts to critical habitats and to restore and enhance degraded or lower quality habitat in order to: a. Maintain and promote diversity of species and habitat within the City; and b. Coordinate habitat protection with the City's open space system, whenever possible, to maintain and provide habitat connections; and c. Help maintain air and water quality, and control erosion; and d. Serve as areas for recreation, education, scientific study, and aesthetic appreciation. 6. Streams and Lakes: The purposes of the stream and lake regulations are to: a. Protect riparian habitat in order to provide for bank and channel stability, sustained water supply, flood storage, recruitment of woody debris, leaf litter, nutrients, sediment and pollutant filtering, shade, shelter, and other functions that are important to both fish and wildlife; and b. Prevent the loss of riparian acreage and functions and strive for a net gain over present conditions through restoration where feasible; and, c. Protect aquatic habitat for salmonid species. Other fish/aquatic species are addressed through Habitat Conservation regulations (see Subsection A.5. above). 7. Wetlands: The purposes of the wetland regulations are to: 8 ORDINANCE NO. a. Ensure that activities in or affecting wetlands not threaten public safety, cause nuisances, or destroy or degrade natural wetland functions and values; and b. Preserve,protect and restore wetlands by regulating development within them and around them; and c. Protect the public from costs associated with repair of downstream properties resulting from erosion and flooding due to the loss of water storage capacity provided by wetlands; and d. Prevent the loss of wetland acreage and functions and strive for a net gain over present conditions. B. APPLICABILITY—CRITICAL AREAS DESIGNATIONS/MAPPING: 1. Lands to Which These Regulations Apply: The following critical areas, classified in subsections H.1 through M.1 of this Section, are regulated by this section: a. Aquifer Protection Areas. b. Areas of Special Flood Hazard. c. Sensitive Slopes, twenty five percent (25%) to forty percent(40%) and Protected Slopes, forty percent (40%) or greater. d. Medium,High, and Very High Landslide Hazard Areas. e. High Erosion Hazards. f. High Seismic Hazards. g. Medium and High Coal Mine Hazards. h. Volcanic Hazard Areas. i. Critical Habitats. ' j. Streams and Lakes.: 9 ORDINANCE NO. , i. All applicable requirements of this Section, RMC 4-3-050 apply to Class 2 to 4 water bodies, as classified in RMC 4-3-050.L.1. ii. Class 5 water bodies, classified in RMC 4-3-050.L.1, are exempt from all provisions of this section, RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas. iii. Class 1 water bodies, defined in RMC 4-3-050.L.1 are not subject to this section, RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations, and are regulated in RMC 4-3- 090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, and RMC 4-9-197, Shoreline Permits. k. Wetlands, Categories 1, 2 and 3. 2. Mapping—General: a. The exact boundary of each critical area depicted on maps referenced herein is approximate and is intended only to provide an indication of the presence of a critical area on a particular site. Additional critical areas may be present on a site. The actual presence of critical areas and the applicability of these regulations shall be based upon the classification criteria for each critical area. b. The Planning/Building/Public Works Department shall provide an annual docket process to update the maps. As of the effective date of this section (April 4, 2005), critical area reports prepared for permit applications shall be incorporated into critical area mapping as part of the annual docket process. As a result of studies prepared through the permit application process, where the City required increased buffers rather than standard buffers, it shall be noted on the map. 3. Reports and Submittal Requirements: Study requirements and submittal requirements are required in each regulated critical area as follows: 10 ORDINANCE NO. a. General Submittal Requirements—All Critical Areas: See RMC 4-3- 050.F, Submittal Requirements and Fees, and RMC 4-8-120, Submittal Requirements Specific to Application Type. b. Exempt Activities, Study Requirements: See RMC 4-3-050.C.4.c, Reports and Mitigation Plans Required. c. Aquifer Protection Area Permit Submittal Requirements: See RMC 4- 3-050.H.1.e and 4-9-015.E. d. Flood Hazard Data: Flood hazard data is to be applied pursuant to RMC 4-3-050.I.1.b, Mapping and Documentation. e. Geologic Hazards Special Studies Required: See RMC 4-3-050.J.2, Special Studies Required. f. Habitat Conservation Assessment Required: See RMC 4-3-050.K.2, Habitat Assessment Required. g. Streams and Lakes Studies Required: See RMC 4-3-050.L.3, Study Required. h. Wetlands Studies Required: See RMC 4-3-050.M.3, Study Required. C. APPLICABILITY—EXEMPT, PROHIBITED AND NONCONFORMING ACTIVITIES: 1. Applicability: Unless determined to be exempt from permitting and standards, all proposed development, fill, and activities in regulated critical areas and their buffers shall comply with the requirements of this Section. Expansion or alteration of existing activities shall also comply with the requirements of this Section. Any person seeking to determine whether a proposed activity or land area is subject to this Section may request in writing a determination 11 ORDINANCE NO. from the City. Such a request for determination shall contain the information requirements specified by the Department Administrator. a. Aquifer Protection Areas—Compliance with Regulations: The following developments, facilities, uses and activities shall comply with the applicable provisions and restrictions of this Section and chapters 4-4,4-5,4-6, 4-9, and 5-5 RMC for the APA zone in which the developments, facilities, uses and activities are located, except as preempted by Federal or State law: i. Development Permits: Development permits shall be reviewed for compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section. ii. Facilities: Facilities, as defined in RMC 4-11-060,Definitions F, which are existing, new, or to be closed are subject to this Section as specified below: (a) Existing Facilities: All owners of facilities which store, handle, treat, use, or produce hazardous materials or have done so in the past, must comply with the permit requirements, release reporting requirements, and closure requirements as set forth in this Section; (b)Existing Facilities—Limitation on Material Increase: In Zone 1 of an APA, no change in operations at a facility shall be allowed that increases the quantities of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or produced in excess of quantities reported in the initial aquifer protection area operating permit with the following exception: An increase in the quantity of hazardous materials is allowed up to the amount allowed for a new facility in Zone 1 as provided by subsection C.8.d(i) of this Section, Prohibited Activities—Aquifer Protection Areas, Zone 1; 12 ORDINANCE NO. • (c)New Facilities: All proposals for new facilities within any zone of an aquifer protection area must be reviewed for compliance with this Section prior to issuance of any development permits for uses in which hazardous materials are stored, handled, treated, used or produced or which increase the quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or produced; (d) Abandonment: No person, persons,corporation or other legal entity shall temporarily or permanently abandon, close, sell, or otherwise transfer a facility in an APA without complying with the requirements of RMC 4-9-015.F, Closure Permits, and permit conditions of this Section; iii. Hazardous Materials—Use, Production, Storage,Treatment, Disposal, or Management: Persons that store, handle, treat, use, or produce a hazardous material as defined by chapter 4-11 RMC,Definitions, shall be subject to the requirements of this Section, and as further specified below: (a) All applications for development permits for uses in which hazardous materials are stored, handled, treated, used or produced or which increase the quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or produced at a location in the APA must be reviewed for compliance with this Chapter by the Department prior to approval. (b)The focus of review for all permits will be on the hazardous materials that will be stored, handled, treated, used, or produced; and the potential for these substances to degrade groundwater quality. (c) An inventory of hazardous materials on forms provided by the Department shall be submitted to the Department upon application for a development permit. 13 ORDINANCE NO. (d) Where required by the Department, plans and specifications for secondary containment shall be submitted and shall comply with subsection H.2.d(i)of this Section, Secondary Containment—Zones 1 and 2. Development permits shall not be issued until plans and specifications for secondary containment, if required, have been approved by the Department. (e)The Generic Hazardous Materials List attached and incorporated as subsection R of this Section is provided for informational purposes. iv. Application of Pesticides and Nitrates: Persons who apply pesticides and/or fertilizer containing nitrate in the APA,except for homeowners applying only to their own property, shall comply with subsection H.3 of this Section, Use of Pesticides and Nitrates—APA Zones 1 and 2. v. Construction Activities: Persons engaged in construction activities as defined in RMC 4-11-030,Definitions C, shall comply with subsection H.7 of this Section, Construction Activity Standards—Zones 1 and 2, and RMC 4-4-030.C.7, Construction Activity Standards—APA Zones 1 and 2; vi. Fill Material: Persons placing fill material on sites within the APA shall comply with subsection H.8 of this Section, Fill Material, and RMC 4-4-060.L.4, Fill Material; vii. Fuel Oil Heating Systems: Owners of facilities and structures shall comply with subsection C.8.e(i)(9) and C.8.e(ii)(6) of this Section, Prohibited Activities— Aquifer Protection Areas,Zones 1 and 2, relating to conversion of heating systems to fuel oil and installation of new fuel oil heating systems. 14 ORDINANCE NO. • viii. Pipelines: Owners of pipelines as defined in RMC 4-11-160 shall comply with subsection H.6 of this Section, Pipeline Requirements; ix. Solid Waste Landfills: Owners of existing solid waste landfills shall comply with subsection H.9 of this Section, Regulations for Existing Solid Waste Landfills —Zones 1 and 2; x. Surface Water Systems: Surface water systems shall meet the requirements of subsection H.5 of this Section, Surface Water Requirements,and RMC 4-6- 030.E, Drainage Plan Requirements and Methods of Analysis; xi. Unauthorized Release: All persons shall comply with subsection H.10 of this Section,Hazardous Materials—Release Restrictions—Zones 1 and 2, and RMC 4-9-015.G, Unauthorized Releases; xii. Wastewater Disposal Systems: Owners of structures that are connected to existing on-site sewage disposal systems and proposed wastewater disposal systems shall comply with subsection H.4 of this Section, Wastewater Disposal Requirements, and RMC 4-6-040.J, Sanitary Sewer Standards, Additional Requirements that Apply within Zones 1 and 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area. 2. Permit Required: a. Permit Required—Development or Alteration: Prior to any development or alteration of a property containing a critical area as defined in subsection B of this Section, Applicability—Critical Areas Designations/Mapping, the owner or designee must obtain a development permit, critical area permit, and/or letter of exemption. No separate critical area permit is required for a development proposal which requires development permits or which has received a letter of exemption. If a proposed activity is not exempt and does not otherwise 15 ORDINANCE NO. , require a development permit,but is subject to this Section, the Department Administrator shall determine whether to grant or deny a separate critical areas permit based upon compliance with applicable standards and regulations of this Section. b. Aquifer Protection Area—Operating and Closure Permits: Aquifer protection area operating permit and closure permit requirements are contained in RMC 4-9-015, Aquifer Protection Area Permits. 3. Finding of Conformance Required: a. General: Conformance with these critical area regulations shall be a finding in any approval of a development permit or aquifer protection area permit, and such finding shall be documented in writing in the project file. b. Aquifer Protection Areas: No changes in land use shall be allowed nor shall permits for development be issued if the Department finds that the proposed land use, activity, or business is likely to impact the long-term, short-term or cumulative quality of the aquifer. The finding shall be based on the present or past activities conducted at the site; hazardous materials that will be stored, handled, treated, used or produced; and the potential for the land use, activity, or business to degrade groundwater quality. 4. Letter of Exemption: a. Aquifer Protection, Flood Hazards, Geologic Hazards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, Wetlands: Except in the case of public emergencies, all exemptions in subsections C5, C6 and C7 of this Section require that a letter of exemption be obtained from the Department Administrator prior to construction or initiation of activities. b. Applicability of Section Requirements to Exempt Activities: Exempt activities provided with a letter of exemption may intrude into the critical area or required buffer 16 k ORDINANCE NO. subject to any listed conditions or requirements. Exempt activities do not need to comply with mitigation ratios of subsection Ml l of this Section, Wetlands Creation and Restoration, or subsection M12 of this Section, Wetland Enhancement, unless required in exemption criteria. c. Reports and Mitigation Plans Required: A report for the specific critical area affected, and/or enhancement or mitigation plan shall be required pursuant to subsections H to M, unless otherwise waived by the Department Administrator. d. Administrator Findings: In determining whether to issue a letter of exemption for activities listed in subsections C5, C6, and C7 of this Section, the Administrator shall find that: i. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or State or Federal law or regulation; ii. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles; iii. Impacts are minimized and, where applicable, disturbed areas are immediately restored, unless the exemption is a wetland below the size thresholds pursuant to subsection C.5.f.i. iv. Where water body or buffer disturbance has occurred in accordance with an exemption during construction or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation shall be required. v. If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection 17 MEW ORDINANCE NO. requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material, activity, and/or facility. Such determinations will be based upon site and/or chemical-specific data. 5. Specific Exemptions—Critical Areas and Buffers: Specific exempt activities are listed in the following table. If an "X" appears in a box, the listed exemption applies in the specified critical area and required buffer. If an "X" does not appear in a box, then the exemption does not apply in the particular critical area or required buffer. Where utilized in the following table the term "restoration" means returning the subject area back at a minimum to its original state following the performance of the exempt activity. Activities taking place in critical areas and their associated buffers and listed in the following table are exempt from the applicable provisions of this Section, provided a letter of exemption has been issued per subsection C4 of this Section,Letter of Exemption. Whether the exempted activities are also exempt from permits will be determined based upon application of chapters 4-8 and 4-9 RMC, or other applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. 18 ORDINANCE NO. EXEMPT ACTIVITIES—PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class 2 to Wetlands — -- Area Area Area Area 4 a.Conservation,Enhancement,Education and Related Activities: i.Natural Resource/Habitat Conservation or Preservation: Conservation or preservation of Xl X X X X X soil,water,vegetation,fish and `other wildlife. i ' ii.Enhancement activities as X X X X X defined in chapter 4-11 RMC. iii. Approved Restoration/Mitigation: Any critical area and/or buffer XI X X X X X restoration or other mitigation activities that have been approved by the City. b.Research and Site Investigation: i.Education and Research: Nondestructive education and Xi X X X X X research. ii.Site Investigative Work: Site investigative work necessary for land use application submittals such as surveys,soil logs, percolation tests and other related activities.Investigative work shall not disturb any more XI ( X X X X X than five percent(5%)of the critical area and required buffer. In every case,impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be immediately restored at a 1:1 ratio. 1 c.Agricultural,Harvesting,Vegetation Management: i.Harvesting Wild Foods:The harvesting of wild foods in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of such XI X X X X X foods and provided the harvesting does not require tilling of soil,planting of crops or alteration of the critical area. ii.Existing/Ongoing Agricultural Activities:Existing X X X X X and ongoing agricultural activities including farming. 19 .1r► • ORDINANCE NO. EXEMPT ACTIVITIES—PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class 2 to Wetlands Area Area Area Area 4 horticulture,aquaculture and/or maintenance of existing irrigation systems. Activities on areas lying fallow as part of a conventional rotational cycle are part of an ongoing operation, provided that the agricultural activity must have been conducted within the last five years. Activities that bring a critical area into agricultural use are not part of an ongoing operation. Maintenance of existing legally installed irrigation,ditch and pipe systems is allowed;new or expanded irrigation,ditch, outfall or other systems are not exempt. If it is necessary to reduce the impacts of agricultural practices to critical areas,the Responsible Official may require a farm management plan based on the King County Conservation District's Farm Conservation and Practice Standards,or other best management practices. iii.Dead or Diseased Trees: Removal of dead,terminally X: X: diseased,damaged,or dangerous Limited to Tree cutting of ground cover or hazard trees cutting of hazard hazard trees or which have been certified as trees;such other woody 1 X X X be retained as accomplished hazard trees shall vegetation such by a forester,registered landscape architect,or certified X arborist,selection of which to be large woody such that trees approved by the City based on debris in the are retained in stream/buffer the wetland and the type of information required, corridor, where buffer where or the City prior to their removal. feasible. feasible. d. Surface Water: i.New Surface Water Discharges:New surface water discharges to wetland Categories 1,2 and 3,or buffers of X X X Categories 1,2 and 3,and to • streams or lakes from detention s facilities.oresettlement ponds or 20 ORDINANCE NO. , • EXEMPT ACTIVITIES—PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes:Class 2 to Wetlands Area Area Area Area 4 other surface water management structures;provided,the discharge meets the requirements of the Storm and Surface Water Drainage Regulations(RMC 4-6-030); will not result in significant adverse changes in the water temperature or chemical characteristics of the wetland or stream/lake water sources;and there is no increase in the existing rate of flow unless it can be demonstrated that the change in hydrologic regime would result in equal or j c improved wetland or stream/lake) functions and values.Where differences exist between these regulations and RMC 4-6-030, these regulations will take precedence. ii.New or modified Regional Stormwater Facilities:Regional stormwater management facilities to be operated and maintained under the direction of the City Surface Water Utility that are proposed and designed consistent with the Washington X X X State Department of Ecology Wetlands and Stormwater Management Guidelines or meeting equivalent objectives. For habitat conservation areas, this exemption applies only to Category 1 wetlands. iii.Flood Hazard Reduction: Implementation of public flood hazard reduction and public surface water projects,where habitat enhancement and X X restoration at a 1:1 ratio are provided,and appropriate Federal and/or State authorization has been received. 21 ORDINANCE NO. EXEMPT ACTIVITIES—PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class 2 to Wetlands Area Area Area Area 4 {e.Roads,Parks,Public and Private Utilities: i.Relocation of Existing Utilities out of Critical Area and Buffer:Relocation out of critical areas and required buffers of natural gas,cable, communication,telephone and electric facilities,lines,pipes, mains,equipment and appurtenances,(not including X' X X X X X substations),with an associated voltage of fifty five thousand (55,000)volts or less,only when required by a local governmental agency,and with the approval of the City. Disturbed areas shall be restored. ii.Existing Parks,Trails,Roads, 1 Facilities,and Utilities— Maintenance,Operation,Repair: Normal and routine maintenance,operation and repair of existing parks and trails,streets,roads,rights-of- way and associated appurtenances,facilities and utilities where no alteration or additional fill materials will be placed other than the minimum alteration and/or fill needed to restore those facilities to meet X X X X established safety standards.The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine maintenance and repair of existing utility structures and rights-of-way. In every case, critical area and required buffer impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment. 22 ORDINANCE NO. , • EXEMPT ACTIVITIES—PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class 2 to Wetlands Area Area Area Area 4 iii.Utilities,Traffic Control, Walkways,Bikeways Within Existing,Improved Right-of- Way or Easements:Within existing improved public road rights-of-way or easements, installation,construction, replacement,operation, overbuilding,or alteration of all natural gas,cable, communication,telephone and X X X X electric facilities,lines pipes, mains,equipment or appurtenances,traffic control devices,illumination, walkways and bikeways.If activities exceed the existing improved area or the public right-of-way, this exemption does not apply. Where applicable,restoration of disturbed areas shall be completed. • iv. Modification of Existing Utilities and Streets by Ten Percent(10%)or Less: Overbuilding(enlargement beyond existing project needs) or replacement of existing utility systems and replacement and/or rehabilitation of existing streets, provided: (1)The work does not increase the footprint of the structure, line or street by more than ten X: X: percent(10%) within the critical Exemption is Exemption is area and/or buffer areas,and X not allowed in not allowed in occurs in the existing right-of- Category 1 Category 1 way boundary or easement wetlands. wetlands. boundary. (2)Restoration shall be conducted where feasible. Compensation for impacts to buffers shall include enhancement of the remaining buffer area along the impacted area where there is enhancement opportunity. (3)The Administrator determines that based on best 23 1111111.. ORDINANCE NO. ' EXEMPT ACTIVITIES–PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class 2 to Wetlands Area Area Area Area 4 judgment,a person would not: (a)be able to meaningfully measure,detect,or evaluate insignificant effects;or(b) expect discountable effects to occur. (4)This exemption allows for 10%maximum expansion total, life of the project. After the 10%expansion cap is reached, future improvements are subject to all applicable provisions of RMC 4-3-050. ---1— v. –.1_._.v.Vegetation Management/Essential Tree Removal for Public or Private Utilities,Roads,and Public X:Tree cutting Parks:Maintenance activities, and vegetation including routine vegetation X: Trees shall be management retained as large management and essential tree woody debris in accomplished removal,and removal of non- X X X ! such that trees the stream/buffer native invasive vegetation or ! are retained in weeds listed by the King County corridor,where the wetland and Noxious Weed Board or other feasible. buffer where government agency,for public feasible. and private utilities,road rights- of-way and easements,and parks. f.Wetland Disturbance,Modification and Removal: i.Any Activity in Small Category 3 Wetlands: Any activity affecting hydrologically isolated Category 3 wetland no greater than two thousand two hundred(2,200) square feet when consistent with all of the following criteria: (1)Standing water is not present in sufficient amounts,i.e. X approximately 12 inches to 18 inches in depth from approximately December I through May,to support breeding amphibians; (2)Species listed by Federal or State government as endangered or threatened,or the presence of essential habitat for those 24 ORDINANCE NO. EXEMPT ACTIVITIES—PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes:Class 2 to Wetlands Area Area Area Area 4 species,are not present; (3)Some form of mitigation is provided for hydrologic and water quality functions,for example,stormwater treatment or landscaping or other mitigation;and (4)A wetland assessment is prepared by a qualified professional demonstrating the criteria of the exemption are met. The wetland assessment shall be subject to independent secondary review at the expense of the applicant consistent with Section 4-3-050.F.7. ii.Temporary Wetland Impacts: Temporary disturbances of a wetland due to construction activities that do not include permanent filling may be permitted;provided,that there are no permanent adverse impacts to the critical area or required buffer,and areas X X temporarily disturbed are restored at a 1:1 ratio. Category 1 wetlands and Category 2 forested wetlands shall be enhanced at a 2:1 ratio in addition to being restored.For habitat conservation areas,this exemption applies only to Category 1 wetlands. g.Maintenance and Construction—Existing Uses and Facilities: i.Remodeling,Replacing, —� -- Removing Existing Structures, Facilities,and Improvements: Remodeling,restoring,replacing or removing structures,facilities and other improvements in existence on the date this section X X X X becomes effective and that do not meet the setback or buffer requirements of this section provided the work complies with the criteria in RMC 4-10- 010G.Nonconformine� - 25 ORDINANCE NO. EXEMPT ACTIVITIES—PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS ' Aquifer Flood Geologic' Habitat Streams and • EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes:Class 2 to Wetlands Area j Area Area Area 4 Activities. ii.Maintenance and Repair— Any Existing Public or Private Use:Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or private uses and facilities where no alteration of the critical area and required buffer or additional fill materials will be placed.The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public X X X X agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine maintenance and repair of existing utility or public structures and rights-of-way.In every case,critical area and required buffer impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment. iii.Modification of an Existing Single Family Residence: Construction activity connected with an existing single family residence and/or garage; provided,that the work does not increase the footprint of the structure lying within the critical area or buffer;and provided, that no portion of the new work occurs closer to the critical area or required buffers than the f } i existing structure unless the X X X X structure or addition can meet required buffers.Existing or rebuilt accessory structures associated with single-family lots such as fences,gazebos, storage sheds,playhouses are exempt from this Section.New accessory structures may be allowed when associated with single family lots such as fences, gazebos,storage sheds,play houses and when built on and located in a previously legally 26 ORDINANCE NO. • EXEMPT ACTIVITIES—PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes:Class 2 to Wetlands Area Area Area Area 4 altered area. i iv.Existing Activities:Existing i activities which have not been changed,expanded or altered, X X X X X provided they comply with the applicable requirements of chapter 4-10 RMC. h.Emergency Activities: i.Emergency Activities: Emergency activities are those which are undertaken to correct emergencies that threaten the public health,safety and welfare pursuant to the criteria in subsection C9b of this Section. An emergency means that an action must be undertaken immediately or within a time X' X X X X X frame too short to allow full compliance with this section,to avoid an immediate threat to public health or safety,to prevent an imminent danger to public or private property,or to prevent an imminent threat of serious environmental degradation. ii.Emergency Tree/Ground Cover Cutting or Removal by X:Tree cutting Agency or Utility:Removal of X and vegetation trees and/or ground cover by any Downed hazard management City department or agency trees shall be accomplished and/or public or private utility in X' X X X retained as large such that trees ' emergency situations involving woody debris in are retained in immediate danger to life or the the wetland and property,substantial fire stream/buffer. buffer where hazards,or interruption of feasible. services provided by a utility. iii.Emergency Activities in Aquifer Protection Area:Public interest emergency use,storage, X' and handling of hazardous materials by governmental organizations. i. Hazardous Materials: i.Federal or State Pre-emption: X1 Cleanups.monitorine and/or 27 ORDINANCE NO. L EXEMPT ACTIVITIES—PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class 2 to Wetlands Area Area Area Area 4 studies undertaken under supervision of the Washington Department of Ecology or the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. j 'ii.Use of Materials with No � R I Risk:Use,storage,and handling of specific hazardous materials XI that do not present a risk to the aquifer as determined and listed by the Department. 'If a hazardous material,activity,and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality,then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. 6. Limited Exemptions: Activities that are exempt from some, but not all provisions of this Section are listed in the following table. If an "X" appears in a box, the listed exemption applies in the specified critical area and required buffer. If an "X" does not appear in a box, then the exemption does not apply in the particular critical area or required buffer. Whether the exempted activities are also exempt from permits will be determined based upon application of RMC Chapters 4-8 and 4-9, or other applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. 28 Ye ORDINANCE NO. , • LIMITED EXEMPTIONS—WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS EXEMPT ACTIVITY Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Wetlands Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes:Class 2 Area Area _ Area Area to 4 Hazardous Materials: � i.Materials for Sale in Original l X1 I Small Containers: Hazardous materials offered for sale in their original containers of five (5) gallons or less shall be exempt from requirements in i subsections H.2.d(i)through (vi)of this Section and the requirements pertaining to removal of existing facilities in subsection H.2.a(i). ii. Activities Exempt from Xl Specified Aquifer Protection Area Requirements:The following are exempt from equirements in subsections I .2.d(i)through(vi)of this Section,the requirements ertaining to review of I•roposed facilities in subsection C.8.e of this Section,Prohibited Activities— Aquifer Protection Areas,and the requirements pertaining to emoval of existing facilities in subsection______ __ (1)Hazardous materials use, X1 storage,and handling in de- minimus amounts(aggregate •uantities totaling twenty(20) gallons or less at the facility or onstruction site). Weights of solid hazardous materials will •e converted to volumes for •urposes of determining whether de-minimus amounts are exceeded.Ten(10)pounds shall be considered equal to •ne gallon.) (2)Noncommercial residential X1 use,storage,and handling of hazardous materials provided that no home occupation business(as defined by chapter -11 RMC)that uses,stores,or handles more than twenty(20) 29 ORDINANCE NO. LIMITED EXEMPTIONS—WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS EXEMPT ACTIVITY Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Wetlands Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes:Class 2 Area Area Area Area to 4 gallons of hazardous material is I operated on the premises. IL (3)Hazardous materials in fuel X1 anks and fluid reservoirs .ttached to a private or ommercial motor vehicle and used directly in the operation .f that vehicle. (4)Fuel oil used in existing X1 heating systems. (5)Hazardous materials used, Xl stored,and handled by the City f Renton in water treatment i rocesses and water system Aerations. 1 (6)Fueling of equipment not X1 licensed for street use; provided,that such fueling activities are conducted in a containment area that is designed and maintained to prevent hazardous materials from coming into contact with soil,surface water,or groundwater except for refueling associated with construction activity regulated by subsection H.7 of this Section,Construction Activity Standards—Zones 1 and 2. 1 (7)Hazardous materials XI ontained in properly operating sealed units(transformers, efrigeration units,etc.)that are not opened as part of routine se. (8)Hazardous materials in fuel X1 anks and fluid reservoirs attached to private or ommercial equipment and used directly in the operation .f that equipment. (9)Hazardous materials in X1 aerosol cans. ? j (10)Hazardous materials at X1 multi-family dwellings, hotels, motels,retirement homes, convalescent center/nursing 30 ORDINANCE NO. • LIMITED EXEMPTIONS—WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS EXEMPT ACTIVITY Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Wetlands Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes :Class 2 Area Area J— Area Area to 4 omes,mobile or manufactured ome parks,group homes,and aycare family homes or enters when used by owners and/or operators of such acilities for on-site operation nd maintenance •u •oses. (11)Hazardous materials used X1 for janitorial purposes at the facility where the products are stored. (12)Hazardous materials used t X1 for personal care by workers or occupants of the facility at which the products are stored including but not limited to ; oaps,hair treatments, grooming aids,health aids,and edicines. iii.Uses,Facilities,and X1 ctivities in Zone 1 Modified Aquifer Protection Area I xempt from Specified Aquifer Protection Area Requirements: I acilities located in the Zone 1 I odified Aquifer Protection Area in Figure 4-3-050.Q.1are -xempt from the following: 1)Removal requirements in X1 subsection H.2.a(i)of this Section except that the storage, andling,use,treatment,and I•roduction of tetrachloroethylene(e.g.dry- leaning fluid)shall continue to1.1 e prohibited; 2)Additional facility X1 requirements in subsection H.2.d(vi)of this Section; 3)Wastewater requirements in X1 ubsection 4-6-040.J.1.a but hall be subject to Zone 2 e•uirements in 4-6-040.J.2; 4)The prohibition of septic X1 systems contained in 4-3- 050.C.8.d(i)(2);and I_ 1 5)Surface water management I X1 requirements of 4-6-030.E • 31 ORDINANCE NO. LIMITED EXEMPTIONS—WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS EXEMPT ACTIVITY Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Wetlands Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes :Class 2 Area Area rt Area Area to 4 except that—Zone 2 requirements contained in 4-6- 030.E shall apply. lIf a hazardous material,activity,and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality,then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. 7.Exemptions in Buffers: The activities listed in the following table are allowed within critical area buffers, and are exempt from the applicable provisions of this Section, provided a letter of exemption has been issued per subsection C4 of this Section, Letter of Exemption. If an "X" appears in a box, the listed exemption applies in the specified buffer. If an "X" does not appear in a box, then the exemption does not apply in the required buffer. Whether the exempted activities are also exempt from permits will be determined based upon application of chapters 4-8 and 4-9 RMC, or other applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. 32 ORDINANCE NO. EXEMPTIONS WITHIN CRITICAL AREA BUFFERS Streams Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Wetlands Area Area Area Area Class 2 to 4 la.Activities in Critical Area Buffers: ______ __—__^� i.Trails and Open Space: Walkways and trails,and associated open space in critical area buffers located on public property,or X X X X where easements or agreements have been granted for such purposes on private property. All of the following criteria shall be met. (1)The trail,walkway,and associated open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Parks,Recreation,and Open Space Master Plan.The City may allow private trails as part of the approval of a site plan,subdivision or other land use permit approvals. 2)Trails and walkways shall be located in the outer 25%of the buffer,i.e.the portion of the buffer that is farther away from the critical area.Exceptions to this requirement may be made for: ITrail segments connecting to existing trails where an alternate alignment is not practical. Public access points to water bodies spaced periodically along the trail. (3)Enhancement of the buffer area is required where trails are located in the buffer.Where enhancement of the buffer area adjacent to a trail is not feasible due to existing high quality vegetation,additional buffer area or other mitigation may be required. (4)Trail widths shall be a maximum width of twelve(12)feet. Trails shall be constructed of permeable materials.Impervious materials may be allowed if pavement is required for handicapped or emergency access,or safety, or is a designated nonmotorized transportation route or makes a connection to an already dedicated trail,or reduces potential for other environmental impacts. ii. Stormwater Management Facilities in Buffer:Stormwater management facilities in ( I critical area buffers including stormwater I X X X dispersion outfall systems designed to minimize impacts to the buffer and critical 33 ORDINANCE NO. L EXEMPTIONS WITHIN CRITICAL AREA BUFFERS Streams Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat and EXEMPT ACTIVITY Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Wetlands Area Area Area Area Class 2 to 4 area,where the site topography requires their location within the buffer to allow hydraulic function,provided the standard buffer zone area associated with the critical area classification is retained pursuant to RMC 4- 3-050.M.6.c.or RMC 4-3-050,L,and is sited to reduce impacts between the critical area and surrounding activities.For Habitat Conservation Areas,this exemption applies only to Category 1 wetlands.Stormwater management facilities located in wetland buffers shall require buffer enhancement or buffer averaging when they are sited in areas of forest vegetation. 8. Prohibited Activities: Prohibited activities are identified below for each critical area governed by this Section. a. General —All Critical Areas: No action shall be taken by any person, company, agency, or applicant which results in any alteration of a critical area except as consistent with the purpose, objectives, and requirements of this section. b. Prohibited Activities—Floodways: Encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within designated floodways, unless it meets the provisions of subsection I.4 of this Section, Additional Restrictions within Floodways. c. Prohibited Activities—Streams/Lakes and Wetlands: Grazing of animals is not allowed within a stream, lake, wetland or their associated buffers. d. Prohibited Changes in Land Use and Types of New Facilities—Aquifer Protection Areas: i. Zone 1: 34 ORDINANCE NO. (1)Changes in land use and types of new facilities in which any of the following will be on the premises: (a)More than five hundred (500) gallons of hazardous material; (b) More than one hundred fifty (150) gallons of hazardous material in containers that are opened and handled; (c)Containers exceeding five (5) gallons in size; or (d)Tetrachloroethylene (e.g. dry-cleaning fluid). (2) Surface impoundments (as defined in chapters 173-303 and 173-304 WAC); (3)Hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities; (4) All types of landfills, including solid waste landfills; (5)Transfer stations; (6) Septic systems; (7)Recycling facilities that handle hazardous materials; (8)Underground hazardous material storage and/or distribution facilities; (9)New heating systems using fuel oil except for commercial uses when the source of fuel oil is an existing above-ground waste oil storage tank; and (10)Petroleum product pipelines. ii. Zone 2: 35 ORDINANCE NO. (1) Surface impoundments (as defined in chapters 173-303 and 173-304 WAC); (2)Recycling facilities that handle hazardous materials; (3) Hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities; (4) Solid waste landfills; (5)Transfer stations; (6)New heating systems using fuel oil stored in underground storage tanks; and (7) Petroleum product pipelines. 9. Temporary Emergency Exemption Procedure: a. Temporary Emergency Exemption Purpose: Temporary emergency exemptions shall be used only in extreme cases and not to justify poor planning by an agency or applicant. b. Temporary Emergency Exemption Review Authority and Decision Criteria: Issuance of an emergency permit by the City does not preclude the necessity to obtain necessary approvals from appropriate Federal and State authorities. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section or any other City laws to the contrary, the Department Administrator may issue a temporary emergency exemption letter if the action meets the following requirements: i. An unacceptable threat to life or severe loss of property will occur if an emergency permit is not granted; 36 ORDINANCE NO. ii. The anticipated threat or loss may occur before a permit can be issued or modified under the procedures otherwise required by this section and other applicable laws; iii. Any emergency exemption letter granted shall incorporate, to the greatest extent practicable and feasible but not inconsistent with the emergency situation, the standards and criteria required for nonemergency activities under this Section. c. Temporary Emergency Exemption Letter Process and Timing: The emergency exemption shall be consistent with the following procedural and time requirements: i. Time Limits: The emergency shall be limited in duration to the time required to complete the authorized emergency activity; provided, that no emergency permit be granted for a period exceeding ninety (90) days except as specified in subsection C9c(ii) of this Section. ii. Restoration Required: Require, within the ninety (90) day period, the restoration of any critical area altered as a result of the emergency activity, except that if more than ninety (90) days from the issuance of the emergency permit is required to complete restoration, the emergency permit may be extended to complete this restoration. For the purposes of this paragraph, restoration means returning the affected area to its state prior to the performance of the emergency activity. iii. Public Notice Required: Notice of the issuance of the emergency permit and request for public comments shall be posted at the affected site(s) and City Hall no later than ten (10) days after the issuance of the emergency permit. If significant comments are received, the City may reconsider the permit. 37 ORDINANCE NO. iv. Expiration of Exemption Authorization: The emergency exemption authorization may be terminated at any time without process upon a determination by the Department Administrator that the action was not or is no longer necessary to protect human health or the environment. 10. Nonconforming Activities or Structures: Regulated activities legally in existence prior to the passage of this Section,but which are not in conformity with the provisions of this Section are subject to the provisions of RMC 4-10-090 Nonconforming Activities. D. ADMINISTRATION AND INTERPRETATION: 1. General Provisions—All Critical Areas: a. Duties of Administrator: The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator(the Department Administrator) or his/her duly authorized representative, shall have the power and authority to enforce the provisions of this Section. For such purposes he/she shall have the power of a law enforcement officer. b. Interpretation: The Department Administrator shall have the power to render interpretations of this Section and to adopt and enforce rules and regulations supplemental to this Section as he/she may deem necessary in order to clarify the application of the provisions of this Code. Such interpretations, rules and regulations shall be in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Section. c. Compliance: Unless specifically exempted by this Section, the City shall not grant any approval or permit any regulated activity in a critical area or associated buffer prior to fulfilling the requirements of this Section. 38 r ORDINANCE NO. d. Reviewing Official: Wherever referenced in this Section, Reviewing Official refers to the decision-making official or body authorized to grant permit approval for an activity. 2. Aquifer Protection: a. Inspections Authorized: The Department Administrator or his/her designee shall have the right to conduct inspections of facilities at all reasonable times to determine compliance with this Section. i. Annual Inspections: All permitted facilities in an APA will be subject to a minimum of one inspection per year by a Department inspector or designee. ii. Monthly Inspections: All permitted facilities in Zone 1 of the aquifer protection area will be subject to monthly inspections to determine compliance with the provisions of the Section. b. Potential to Degrade Groundwater—Zone 2: i. Potential for Impacts Equal to Facility in Zone 1: If the Department determines that an existing or proposed facility located in Zone 2 of an APA has a potential to degrade groundwater quality which equals or exceeds that of a permitted facility in Zone 1, then the Department may require that facility to fully comply with requirements for Zone 1 contained in subsections H2,Facilities, H4, Wastewater Disposal Requirements, H6, Pipeline Requirements, C8e(ii), Prohibited Activities—APA Zone 1, and Cla(i), Aquifer Protection Areas, Compliance with Section, Development Permits. ii. Criteria: Criteria used to make the determination in subsection D2b(i)of this Section, Potential for Impacts Equal to Facility in Zone 1, shall include but not be limited to the present and past activities conducted at the facility; types and quantities of 39 • ORDINANCE NO. hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used or produced; the potential for the activities or hazardous materials to degrade groundwater quality; history of spills at the site, and presence of contamination on site. 3. Flood Hazards: a. Duties and Responsibilities of the Department Administrator or Designee: The duties of the Department Administrator or his/her designee shall include, but not be limited to: i. Review all development permits to determine that the permit requirements of this Section have been satisfied; and ii. Review all development permits to determine that all necessary permits have been obtained from those Federal, State or local governmental agencies from which prior approval is required; and iii. Review all development permits to determine if the proposed development is located in the floodway. If located in the floodway, assure that the encroachment provisions of subsection I4 of this Section, Additional Restrictions within Floodways, are met; and iv. Obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from a Federal, State or other source, when base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with subsection Ilbi of this Section in order to administer subsection I3, Specific Standards, and subsection I4, Additional Restrictions Within Floodways. b. Information to Be Obtained and Maintained: The Department Administrator or his/her designee shall obtain and maintain the following information: 40 ORDINANCE NO. i. Record Required: Where base flood elevation data is provided through the flood insurance study or required as in subsection D3a(iv) of this Section, Use of Other Base Flood Data, the applicant shall obtain and record the actual elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest floor(including basement) of all new or substantially improved structures, and whether or not the structure contains a basement. ii. Elevations and Certificates: For all new or substantially improved floodproofed structures: (1)The applicant shall verify and record the actual elevation (in relation to mean sea level); and (2)The Department Administrator or his/her designee shall maintain the floodproofing certifications required in subsection D6 of this Section,Flood Hazard Data; and (3)Flood elevation certificates shall be submitted by an applicant to the Development Services Division prior to the building finished floor construction. Finished floor elevation should be verified by a preconstruction elevation certificate at the time of construction of a substantial structural element of the finished floor(i.e., foundation form for the concrete floor). An as-built elevation certificate will be provided prior to issuance of final occupancy, and the certificates shall be maintained by the Department Administrator or designee. iii. Public Records: The Department Administrator or his/her designee shall maintain for public inspection all records pertaining to the provisions of the flood hazard regulations (e.g., elevation certificates, notification of alteration/relocation of watercourses, flood hazard regulation variances). 41 ORDINANCE NO. c. Alteration of Watercourses: The Department Administrator, or his/her designee shall: i. Notice Required: Notify abutting communities and the State of Washington Department of Ecology prior to any alteration or relocation of a watercourse, and submit evidence of such notification to the Federal Insurance Administration. ii. Maintenance: Require that maintenance is provided within the altered or relocated portion of said watercourse so that the flood-carrying capacity is not diminished. The City may require covenants, or other mechanisms to ensure maintenance. d. Interpretation of FIRM Boundaries: The Department Administrator, or his/her designee, shall make interpretations where needed, as to exact location of the boundaries of the areas of special flood hazard(for example, where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field conditions). The person contesting the location of the boundary shall be given a reasonable opportunity to appeal the interpretation as provided in RMC 4-1-050F, Hearing Examiner, and RMC 4-8-110, Appeals). e. Record Required: The Department Administrator, or his/her designee, shall maintain the records of all appeal actions and report any variances to the Federal Insurance Administration upon request. 4. Review Authority: a. Review Authority—General: The Department Administrator or his/her designee is authorized to make the following administrative allowances and determinations: i. Issue a critical areas permit for proposals not otherwise requiring a development permit per subsection C3 of this Section, Finding of Conformance Required. 42 ORDINANCE NO. ii. Issue written letters of exemption pursuant to subsection C4 of this Section. iii. Allow temporary emergency exemptions per subsection C7 of this Section. iv. Interpret critical areas regulations per subsection Dlb of this Section. v. Approve the use of alternates in accordance with subsection N1 of this Section and RMC 4-9-250E. vi. Waive report content or submittal requirements per subsection F6 of this Section. vii. Grant administrative variances to those specified code sections listed in RMC 4-9-250B and per Subsection N of this Section. viii. Require tests for proof of compliance per RMC 1-3-1E7. ix. Grant modifications per subsection N of this Section. b. Review Authority—Geologic Hazards,Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands: The Department Administrator is authorized to make the following administrative allowances and determinations: i. Geologic Hazards: (1) Waive independent review of geotechnical reports per subsection F.7 of this Section. (2) Increase or decrease required buffer for very high landslide hazard areas per subsection J7b of this Section. 43 ORDINANCE NO. (3) Waive coal mine hazard reports per subsection J8 of this Section. (4) Grant a modification for created slopes per subsection N2 of this Section. ii. Habitat Conservation: Waive habitat/wildlife assessment reports per subsection K2 of this Section. iii. Streams and Lakes: (1) Waive water body study requirement per subsection L.3 of this Section. (2) Approve proposals for buffer width reductions in accordance with the review criteria stated in subsection L.5.c of this Section. (3) Approve proposals for buffer width averaging pursuant to the standards and criteria stated in subsection L.5.d of this Section. iv. Wetlands: (1) Waive wetland assessment requirement per subsection M3b of this Section. (2) Determine whether wetlands are unregulated per subsections Mla and Mlb of this Section. (3) Extend the valid period of a wetland delineation pursuant to subsection M4d of this Section. (4) Approve proposals for buffer width reductions of up to twenty five percent (25%) in accordance with the review criteria stated in subsection M6e of this Section. 44 • ' ORDINANCE NO. (5) Approve proposals for buffer width averaging pursuant to the standards and criteria stated in subsection M6f of this Section. (6) Authorize other category level for created or restored wetlands per subsection Ml lc of this Section. (7) Waive requirements of this Section upon determination that all impacts on wetlands would be mitigated as part of an approved area-wide wetlands plan that, when taken as a whole over an approved schedule or staging of plan implementation, will meet or exceed the requirements of this section (see subsection M9 of this Section). c. Review Authority—Aquifer Protection Areas: The Department Administrator is authorized to make the following administrative allowances and determinations: i. Issue operating and closure permits. ii. Determine pipeline requirements per subsection H5a(iii) and H5b. iii. Determine if Zone 1 requirements should apply in Zone 2 of an APA per subsection D2b, Potential to Degrade Groundwater—Zone 2, and C8e(iii), Prohibited Activities—Aquifer Protection Areas, Zone 2. 5. Authority to Approve, Condition, or Deny—General: Based upon site specific review and analysis, the Reviewing Official or his/her designee may approve, condition, or deny a proposal. 6. Relationship to Other Agencies and Regulations: Compliance with the provisions of this Title does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, and/or other local agency regulations and permit requirements that may be required. The applicant is responsible for complying with these requirements, apart from the process established in this Title. 45 e . ORDINANCE NO. E. GENERAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, AND ALLOWED ALTERATIONS: 1. Performance Standards: The performance standards for each critical area are specified in subsections G to M of this Section. The standards are minimum standards. • 2. Protection of Critical Areas: Critical areas and any associated buffers shall be avoided, and undisturbed, unless alterations are permitted in accordance with the requirements of this Section. 3. Allowed Alterations: Critical areas may be altered by authorized exempt activities, alterations specifically allowed in subsections H to M of this Section and subject to listed criteria, or through approval of modifications or variances. 4. Native Growth Protection Areas: a. Applicability: i. Required: A native growth protection area shall be instituted when required by subsections H to M of this Section in order to protect a critical area from any proposed development for a non-exempt activity as follows: (a) Protected slopes per subsection 4-3-050.J.5.e. (b) Very high landslide hazard areas per subsection 4-3- 050.J.7.c. (c) Class 2 to 4 streams or lakes and their associated buffers per subsection 4-3-050.L.7. (d) Wetlands and their associated buffers per subsection 4- 3-050.M.7. 46 ORDINANCE NO. ii. Applied with Discretion: Native growth protection areas may be required for very high landslide hazard area buffers, or for critical habitats and their buffers pursuant to subsections 4-3-050.J.7 and 4-3-050.K.3. iii. Application as Condition of Approval When Otherwise Not Required: Where subsections H to M do not require a native growth protection area, the Reviewing Official may condition a proposal to provide for native growth protection areas. b. Standards: i. Trees and ground cover shall be retained in designated native growth protection areas. ii. Activities allowed in a native growth protection areas shall be consistent with applicable critical area regulations. iii. The City may require enhancement of native growth protection areas to improve functions and values, reduce erosion or landslide potential, or to meet another identified purpose of this section or of critical area regulations. c. Method of Creation: Native growth protection areas shall be established by one of the following methods, in order of preference: i. Conservation Easement: The permit holder shall, subject to the City's approval, convey to the City or other public or nonprofit entity specified by the City, a recorded easement for the protection of the critical area and/or its buffer. ii. Protective Easement: The permit holder shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable easement on the property title of a parcel or tract of land containing a critical area and/or its buffer created as a condition of a permit. Such protective easement shall be held by the current and future property owner, shall run with the land, and 47 ORDINANCE NO. shall prohibit development, alteration, or disturbance within the easement except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City, and from any other agency with jurisdiction over such activity. iii. Tract and Deed Restriction: The permit holder shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable deed restriction on the property title of any critical area management tract or tracts created as a condition of a permit. Such deed restriction(s) shall prohibit development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City, and from any other agency with jurisdiction over such activity. A covenant shall be placed on the tract restricting its separate sale. Each abutting lot owner or the homeowners' association shall have an undivided interest in the tract. d. Marking During Construction: The location of the outer extent of the critical area buffer and areas not to be disturbed pursuant to an approved permit shall be marked with barriers easily visible in the field to prevent unnecessary disturbance by individuals and equipment during the development or construction of the approved activity. e. Fencing: The City shall require permanent fencing of the native growth protection area containing critical area and buffers when there is a substantial likelihood of human or domesticated animal intrusion, and such fencing will not adversely impact habitat connectivity. f. Signage Required: The common boundary between a native growth protection area and the abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include permanent wood or metal signs on treated or metal posts. Sign locations and size 48 ORDINANCE NO. specifications shall be approved by the City. Suggested wording is as follows: "Protection of this natural area is in your care. Alteration or disturbance is prohibited by law." g. Responsibility for Maintenance: Responsibility for maintaining the native growth protection easements or tracts shall be held by a homeowners' association, abutting lot owners, the permit applicant or designee, or other appropriate entity, as approved by the City. h. Maintenance Covenant and Note Required: The following note shall appear on the face of all plats, short plats, PUDs, or other approved site plans containing separate native growth protection easements or tracts, and shall also be recorded as a covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created by or benefiting from this City action abutting or including a native growth protection easement [tract] are responsible for maintenance and protection of the easement [tract]. Maintenance includes insuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been received." 5. Discretionary—Building or Development Setbacks: The Reviewing Official may require a building or activity setback from a critical area or buffer to ensure adequate protection of the critical area/buffer during construction and on-going maintenance of the activity. A requirement for a setback shall be based on the findings of a critical area report or a peer review required for the activity. F. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS AND FEES: 1. Applicability: When a regulated critical area or associated buffer is identified, the following procedures apply. 49 • ORDINANCE NO. " 2. Preapplication Consultation: Any person intending to develop properties known or suspected to have critical areas present is strongly encouraged to meet with the appropriate City department representative during the earliest possible stages of project planning before major commitments have been made to a particular land use and/or project design. Effort put into a preapplication consultation and planning will help applicants create projects which will be more quickly and easily processed due to a better understanding on the part of applicants of regulatory requirements. 3. Plans and Studies Required: When an application is submitted for any building permit or land use review and/or to obtain approval of a use, development or construction, the location of the critical areas and buffers on the site shall be indicated on the plans submitted based upon an inventory provided by a qualified specialist. 4. Submittal Requirements: See chapter 4-8 RMC. 5. Fees: See RMC 4-1-170. 6. Waiver of Submittal or Procedural Requirements: The Department Administrator may waive any of the requirements of this subsection if the size and complexity of the project does not warrant a step in the proceeding and provided criteria to waive studies are met in subsections H to M. 7. Independent Secondary Review: The City may require independent review of an applicant's report as follows: a. Aquifer Protection Areas, Flood Hazards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, Wetlands: When appropriate due to the type of critical areas, habitat, or species present, or project area conditions, the Reviewing Official may require the applicant to prepare and/or fund analyses or activities, including, but not limited to: 50 ORDINANCE NO. i. An evaluation by an independent qualified professional regarding the applicant's analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, to include any recommendations as appropriate. This shall be paid at the applicant's expense, and the Reviewing Official shall select the third party review professional; and/or ii. A request for consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Department of Ecology, or the local Native American Tribe or other appropriate agency; and/or iii. Detailed surface and subsurface hydrologic features both on and abutting to the site. b. Geologic Hazards: Independent Secondary Review shall be conducted in accordance with the following: i. Required—Sensitive and Protected Slopes, and Medium, High, or Very High Landslide Hazards: All geotechnical reports submitted in accordance with subsection J2 of this Section, Special Studies Required, and chapter 4-8 RMC, Permits —General and Appeals, shall be independently reviewed by qualified specialists selected by the City, at the applicant's expense. An applicant may request that independent review be waived by the Department Administrator in accordance with subsection D4b of this Section, Review Authority —Geologic Hazards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands. ii. Required for Critical Facilities in Volcanic, High Erosion, High Seismic, Medium Coal Mine, or High Coal Mine Hazards: The City shall require independent review of a geotechnical report addressing a critical facility by qualified specialists selected by the City, at the applicant's expense. An applicant may request that independent review be 51 ORDINANCE NO. waived by the Department Administrator in accordance with subsection D4b of this Section, Review Authority—Geologic Hazards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands. iii. At City's Discretion—Volcanic, High Erosion, High Seismic, Medium Coal Mine, or High Coal Mine Hazards: For any proposal except critical facilities, the City may require independent review of an applicant's geotechnical report by qualified specialists selected by the City, at the applicant's expense. 8. Mitigation Plan Required: a. Criteria: For any mitigation plans required through the application of subsections H to M, the applicant shall: i. Demonstrate sufficient scientific expertise, the supervisory capability, and the financial resources to carry out the mitigation project; and ii. Demonstrate the capability for monitoring the site and to make corrections during the monitoring period if the mitigation project fails to meet projected goals; and iii. Protect and manage, or provide for the protection and management, of the mitigation area to avoid further development or degradation and to provide for long-term persistence of the mitigation area; and iv. Provide for project monitoring and allow City inspections; and v. Avoid mitigation proposals that would result in additional future mitigation or regulatory requirements for adjacent properties, unless it is a result of a code requirement, or no other option is feasible or practical; and vi. For onsite or offsite mitigation proposals, abutting or adjacent property owners shall be notified when wetland creation or restoration, stream relocation, critical 52 ORDINANCE NO. area buffer increases, flood hazard mitigation, habitat conservation mitigation, or geologic hazard mitigation have the potential to considerably decrease the development potential of abutting or adjacent properties. For example, if a created wetland on a property would now result in a wetland buffer intruding onto a neighboring property, the neighboring property owner would be notified. Notification shall be given as follows: (a) For applications that are not subject to notices of application per RMC 4-8, notice of the mitigation proposal shall be given by posting the site and notifying abutting or adjacent property owners with the potential to be impacted. Written notification may be made prior to or at the time of the SEPA determination. (b)For applications that are subject to notices of application, the mitigation proposal shall be identified in the notice of application and mailed to abutting or adjacent property owners with the potential to be impacted; if the determination of the mitigation requirements is not known at the time of the notice of application, written notice to abutting or adjacent property owners shall be given instead at the time of the SEPA determination. b. Timing of Mitigation Plan—Final Submittal and Commencement: When a mitigation plan is required, the proponent shall submit a final mitigation plan for the approval of the Administrator prior to the issuance of building or construction permits for development. The proponent shall receive written approval of the mitigation plan prior to commencement of any mitigation activity. G. SURETY DEVICES: 53 ORDINANCE NO. 1.Required for Mitigation Plans: For any mitigation plans required as a result of the application of these regulations, the Responsible Official shall require a surety device to ensure performance consistent with RMC 4-1-230. 2.Time Period—Wetlands, Streams, and Lakes: For wetland and/or stream/lake mitigation plans,the surety device shall be sufficient to guarantee that structures, improvements, and mitigation required by permit condition perform satisfactorily for a minimum of 5 years after they have been completed. H. AQUIFER PROTECTION: 1. Applicability: The aquifer protection regulations apply to uses, activities, and facilities located within an aquifer protection area(APA) as classified below. a. Aquifer Protection Area(APA): Aquifer protection areas are the portion of an aquifer within the zone of capture and recharge area for a well or well field owned or operated by the City, as depicted in subsection Q.1 of this Section, Maps. b. Aquifer Protection Zones: Zones of an APA are designated to provide graduated levels of aquifer protection. Zone boundaries are determined using best available science documented in the City of Renton Wellhead Protection Plan, an appendix of the City of Renton Water System Plan, as periodically updated. The following zones may be designated: i. Zone 1: The land area situated between a well or well field owned by the City and the three hundred sixty five (365) day groundwater travel time contour. ii. Zone 1 Modified: The same land area described for Zone 1 but for the purpose of protecting a high-priority well, wellfield, or spring withdrawing from an aquifer that is partially protected by overlying geologic strata. Uses, activities, and facilities 54 ORDINANCE NO. located in this area are regulated as if located within Zone 1 except as provided by C.6(a)(iii) of this section. iii. Zone 2: The land area situated between the three hundred sixty five (365) day groundwater travel time contour and the boundary of the zone of potential capture for a well or well field owned or operated by the City. If the aquifer supplying water to a well, well field, or spring is naturally protected by overlying geologic strata, the City may choose not to subdivide an APA into two (2) zones. In such a case, the entire APA will be designated as Zone 2. c. Mapping: i. Determination of Location within a Zone of an Aquifer Protection Area: In determining the location of facilities within the zones defined by subsection Q.1 of this Section, the following rules shall apply. (a)Facilities located wholly within an APA zone shall be governed by the restrictions applicable to that zone. (b)Facilities having parts lying within more than one zone of an APA shall be governed as follows: Each part of the facility shall be reviewed and regulated by the requirements set forth in this Section for the zone in which that part of the facility is actually located. (c) Facilities having parts lying both in and out of an APA shall be governed as follows: That portion which is within an APA shall be governed by the applicable restrictions in this Section; and 55 ORDINANCE NO. That portion which is not in an APA shall not be governed by this Section. ii. Zone Maps: The locations of aquifer protection areas (APA) in the City are depicted by the map in subsection Q.1 of this Section, Maps. d. Performance Standards: In addition to the general standards of subsection E of this Section, the following performance standards, subsections H2 to H10, apply to all non-exempt uses, activities, and facilities on sites located within an aquifer protection area per subsection H1, Applicability. e. Authority to Require Hydrogeologic Assessment: The City may require an applicant to prepare a hydrogeologic study if the proposal has the potential to significantly impact groundwater quantity or quality, and sufficient information is not readily available. Such a report shall be prepared by a qualified professional at the applicant's expense. Report content requirements may be specified by the City in accordance with State or Federal guidelines or tailored to the particular development application. Peer review of the applicant's report may be required in accordance with 4-3-050.F.7. 2. Facilities: a. Removal of Existing Facilities—Zone 1: i. The storage, handling, use, treatment or production of hazardous materials in aggregate quantities greater than five hundred(500) gallons shall not be allowed within Zone 1 of an APA after October 14, 2002. The storage, handling, use, treatment or production of tetrachloroethylene (e.g. dry-cleaning fluid) shall not be allowed within Zone 1 of an APA after March 31, 1999. 56 w ORDINANCE NO. ii. Once a facility in Zone 1 is closed, relocated, or the use of hazardous materials is terminated,reinstatement of the use of hazardous materials on the site in quantities greater than that allowed for new facilities locating in Zone 1 as described in subsection C.8.e(ii),Prohibited Activities, Zone 1, shall be prohibited. iii. Closure of a facility or termination of any or all facility activities shall be conducted in accordance with the closure requirements in RMC 4-9-015.F, Closure Permit. b. Existing Facilities Change in Quantities—Zone 1: In Zone 1 of an APA, no change in operations at a facility shall be allowed that increases the aggregate quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or produced with the following exception: The aggregate quantity of hazardous materials may be increased not to exceed 500 gallons. c. Existing Facilities—Allowances in Zone 2: The storage, handling, treatment, use or production of hazardous materials at existing facilities shall be allowed within Zone 2 of an APA upon compliance with the provisions of this Section. d. Requirements for Facilities—Zones 1 and 2: The following conditions in subsections H.2.d(i) to (vi) of this Section will be required as part of any operating permit issued for facilities in Zone 1 of an APA. Conditions in subsections H.2.d(i) to (v) shall apply to facilities in Zone 2 of an APA. i. Secondary Containment—Zones 1 and 2: (1)Materials Stored in Tanks subject to DOE—Zones 1 and 2: Hazardous materials stored in tanks that are subject to regulation by the Washington Department of Ecology under chapter 173-360 WAC are exempt from containment requirements 57 ORDINANCE NO. in subsection H.2.d(i), Secondary Containment—Zones 1 and 2, but are subject to applicable requirements in RMC 4-5-120, Underground Storage Tank Secondary Containment Regulations. (2) Secondary Containment Devices and Requirements— Zones 1 and 2: Every owner of a facility shall provide secondary containment devices adequate in size to contain on-site any unauthorized release of hazardous materials from any area where these substances are either stored, handled, treated, used, or produced. Secondary containment devices shall prevent hazardous materials from contacting soil, surface water, and groundwater and shall prevent hazardous materials from entering storm drains and, except for authorized and permitted discharges, the sanitary sewer. Design requirements for secondary containment devices are as follows: (A)The secondary containment device shall be large enough to contain the volume of the primary container in cases where a single container is used to store, handle, treat, use, or produce a hazardous material. In cases where multiple containers are used, the secondary containment device shall be large enough to contain the volume of the largest container. Volumes specified are in addition to the design flow rate of the automatic fire extinguishing system, if present, to which the secondary containment device is subjected. The secondary containment device shall be capable of containing the fire flow for a period of twenty (20) minutes or more. (B) All secondary containment devices shall be constructed of materials of sufficient thickness, density, and composition to prevent structural weakening of the containment device as a result of contact with any hazardous material. If coatings are used to provide chemical resistance for secondary containment devices, they shall also be resistant to the expected abrasion and impact conditions. Secondary containment devices 58 ORDINANCE NO. shall be capable of containing any unauthorized release for at least the maximum anticipated period sufficient to allow detection and removal of the release. (C) Hazardous materials stored outdoors and their attendant secondary containment devices shall be covered to preclude precipitation with the exception of hazardous materials stored in tanks that have been approved by and are under permit from the City of Renton Fire Prevention Bureau. Secondary containment for such tanks, if uncovered, shall be able to accommodate the volume of precipitation that could enter the containment device during a twenty four(24) hour, twenty five (25) year storm, in addition to the volume of the hazardous material stored in the tank. Storage of hazardous materials, both indoors and outdoors, shall, at all times, meet both the requirements of this Section and the Uniform Fire Code. (D) Secondary containment devices shall include monitoring procedures or technology capable of detecting the presence of a hazardous material within twenty four(24) hours following a release. Hazardous materials shall be removed from the secondary containment device within twenty four(24) hours of detection and shall be legally stored or disposed. (E) Areas in which there are floor drains, catchbasins, or other conveyance piping that does not discharge into a secondary containment device that meets the requirements of this Chapter shall not be used for secondary containment of hazardous materials. Closure of existing piping shall be according to procedures and designs approved by the Department. 59 ORDINANCE NO. (F)Primary containers shall be impervious to the contents stored therein, properly labeled, and fitted with a tight cover which is kept closed except when substances are being withdrawn or used. (G)Hazardous materials stored outdoors when the facility is left unsupervised must be inaccessible to the public. Such techniques as locked storage sheds, locked fencing, or other techniques may be used if they will effectively preclude access. (H) Stored hazardous materials shall be protected and secured, as needed, against impact and earthquake to prevent damage to the primary container that would result in release of hazardous materials that would escape the secondary containment area. ii. Hazardous Material Monitoring Requirements for Existing Facilities—Zones 1 and 2: (1) The owners of all existing facilities shall implement hazardous materials monitoring. (2) All hazardous material monitoring activities shall include the following: (A) A written routine monitoring procedure which includes,when applicable: the frequency of performing the monitoring method, the methods and equipment to be used for performing the monitoring, the location(s) from which the monitoring will be performed, the name(s) or title(s) of the person(s) responsible for performing the monitoring and/or maintaining the equipment, and the reporting format. (B) Written records of all monitoring performed shall be maintained on-site by the operator for a period of three (3) years from the date the 60 ORDINANCE NO. monitoring was performed. The Department may require the submittal of the monitoring records or a summary at a frequency that the Department may establish. The written records of all monitoring performed in the past three (3) years shall be shown to the Department upon demand during any site inspection. Monitoring records shall include but not be limited to: •The date and time of all monitoring or sampling; • Monitoring equipment calibration and maintenance records; •The results of any visual observations; •The results of all sample analysis performed in the laboratory or in the field, including laboratory data sheets; •The logs of all readings of gauges or other monitoring equipment, groundwater elevations or other test results; and •The results of inventory readings and reconciliations. (C) Visual monitoring must be implemented unless it is determined by the Department to be infeasible to visually monitor. (3)On every day of operation, a responsible person designated by the permittee shall check for breakage or leakage of any container holding hazardous materials. Electronic sensing devices approved by the Department may be employed as part of the inspection process, provided that the system is checked daily for malfunctions. iii. Emergency Collection Devices—Zones 1 and 2: Vacuum suction devices, absorbent scavenger materials, or other devices approved by the Department 61 ORDINANCE NO. shall be present on site (or available within an hour by contract with a cleanup company approved by the Department), in sufficient quantity to control and collect the total quantity of hazardous materials plus absorbent material. The presence of such emergency collection devices and/or cleanup contract are the responsibility and at the expense of the owner and shall be documented in the operating permit. iv. Inspection of Containment and Emergency Equipment—Zones 1 and 2: Owners shall establish procedures for monthly in-house inspection and routine maintenance of containment and emergency equipment. Such procedures shall be in writing, a regular checklist and schedule of maintenance activity shall be established, and a log shall be kept of inspections and maintenance activities. Such logs and records shall be made available at all reasonable times to the Department for examination. v. Employee Training—Zones 1 and 2: Operators shall schedule training for all new employees upon hiring and once per year thereafter to explain the conditions of the operating permit such as emergency response procedures, proper hazardous waste disposal, monitoring and reporting requirements, record keeping requirements, and the types and quantities of hazardous materials on site.These training sessions will be documented and recorded and the names of those in attendance will be recorded. These records shall be made available at all reasonable times to the Department for inspection. vi. Additional Facility Requirements for Zone 1: Owners shall complete the following: (1) Site Monitoring: For facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA, an owner of a facility may, at their own expense, be required to institute a program to monitor groundwater, surface water runoff, and/or site soils. The Department may require that 62 ORDINANCE NO. the owner of a facility install one or more groundwater monitoring wells in a manner approved by the Department in order to accommodate the required groundwater monitoring. Criteria used to determine the need for site monitoring shall include, but not be limited to, the proximity of the facility to the City's production or monitoring wells, the type and quantity of hazardous materials on site, and whether or not the hazardous materials are stored in underground vessels. Every owner required to monitor groundwater, surface water runoff, and/or soils shall perform such monitoring semi-annually and obtain independent analytical results of the presence and concentration of those chemicals requiring monitoring (including breakdown and transformation products) as identified by the Department in the operating permit. The analytical results shall be obtained through the use of Department of Ecology-approved methods for water and/or soils. The results shall be filed within ten (10) days with the Department. If a facility is required to perform site monitoring pursuant to subsection H.2.d(vi) of this Section, Additional Facility Requirements for Zone 1, Site Monitoring, then a site monitoring plan will be required. This plan must indicate procedures to be followed to assess groundwater, surface water runoff, and/or soil for concentrations of those chemicals requiring monitoring as identified by the Department in the operating permit. If a groundwater monitoring program is in effect per the requirements of 40 CFR 264 or 265, and this program includes all of the chemicals identified in the operating permit, then it shall be incorporated into the site monitoring plan which shall also include provisions to address the groundwater monitoring requirements of subsection H.2.d(vi) of this Section, Additional Facility Requirements for Zone 1, Site Monitoring, and RMC 4-9-015.G.3, Unauthorized Releases, Monitoring Results. 63 ORDINANCE NO. (2) Site Improvements: (A)For facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA, the owner may be required to pave all currently unpaved areas of their facility that are subject to any vehicular use or storage, use, handling, or production of hazardous materials. (B) For those facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA in which the nature of the business involves the use of hazardous materials outside of fully enclosed structures, the City shall evaluate the existing storm water collection and conveyance system, and reserves the right to require the owner to upgrade the system to meet the provisions of RMC 4-6-030.E.3, Additional Requirements in Aquifer Protection Areas—Amendments to King County Surface Water Design Manual. (C) For those facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA, the City may require the owner to test interior wastewater plumbing and the building side sewer for tightness according to subsection H.6.a(ii), Pipeline Requirements—Zone 1, and reserves the right to require that such wastewater conveyance be repaired or replaced according to subsection H.6.a(i), Pipeline Requirements—Zone 1. (3) Capital Cost Reimbursement for Additional Operating Permit Requirements: The City shall pay fifty percent (50%) of documented capital costs up to twenty five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) for required installation and construction of monitoring wells, site paving, wastewater conveyance, and storm water improvements as required in subsections H.2.d(vi)(1) and (2), Site Monitoring and Site Improvements. Payment by the City shall be made according to adopted administrative rules. 3. Use of Pesticides and Nitrates —APA Zones 1 and 2: 64 ORDINANCE NO. a. Use of Pesticides: The application of hazardous materials such as pesticides shall be allowed in an APA, except within one hundred feet(109) of a well or two hundred feet (209) of a spring,provided that: i. The application is in strict conformity with the use requirements as set forth by the EPA and as indicated on the containers in which the substances are sold. ii. Persons who are required to keep pesticide application records by RCW 17.21.100.1 and WAC 16-228-190 shall provide a copy of the required records to the Department within seventy two (72)hours of the application. b. Nitrate-Containing Materials: The application of fertilizers containing nitrates shall be allowed in an APA except within one hundred feet (109) of a well or two hundred feet (209) of a spring; provided, that: i. No application of nitrate-containing materials shall exceed one- half(0.5) pound of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet per single application and a total yearly application of five (5)pounds of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet; except that an approved slow-release nitrogen may be applied in quantities of up to nine-tenths (0.9) pound of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet per single application and eight (8) pounds of nitrogen per one thousand(1,000) square feet per year; and ii. Persons who apply fertilizer containing nitrates to more than one contiguous acre of land located in the APA either in one or multiple application(s) per year shall provide to the Department within seventy two (72) hours of any application the following information: (1)The name, address, and telephone number of the person applying the fertilizer; 65 ORDINANCE NO. (2)The location and land area of the application; (3)The date and time of the application; (4)The product name and formulation; (5)The application rate. 4. Wastewater Disposal Requirements—Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-6-040J, Sanitary Sewer Standards, Additional Requirements that Apply within Zones 1 and 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area. 5. Surface Water Requirements—Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-6-030E, Drainage Plan Requirements and Methods of Analysis for additional surface water requirements applicable within Zones 1 and 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area. 6. Pipeline Requirements: a. Pipeline Requirements—Zone 1: i. All new and existing pipelines in Zone 1 shall be constructed or repaired in accordance with material specifications contained in subsection S of this Section, Pipeline Material. All existing product pipelines in Zone 1 shall be repaired and maintained in accordance with best management practices and best available technology. ii. All new pipelines constructed in Zone 1 shall be tested for leakage in conformance with the following provisions prior to being placed into service. (1) Pipeline leakage testing shall be conducted in accordance with best available technology, to the satisfaction of the Department. (2) Pipeline leakage testing methods shall be submitted to the Department for review prior to testing and shall include: a detailed description of the testing methods and technical assumptions; accuracy and precision of the test; proposed testing 66 ORDINANCE NO. durations, pressures, and lengths of pipeline to be tested; and scale drawings of the pipeline(s)to be tested. (3) Upon completion of testing, pipeline leakage testing results shall be submitted to the Department and shall include: record of testing durations, pressures, and lengths of pipeline tested; and weather conditions at the time of testing. (4) Routine leakage testing of new pipelines constructed in Zone 1 may be required by the Department. iii. If the Department has reason to believe that the operation or proposed operation of an existing pipeline in Zone 1 of an APA may degrade ground water quality, the Department may require leakage testing of the existing pipeline in accordance with subsection H6a(ii)of this Section; and installation, sampling, and sample analysis of monitoring wells. Routine leakage testing of existing pipelines in Zone 1 may be required by the Department. Criteria for this determination is specified under subsection D2b(ii), Potential to Degrade Groundwater—Zone 2, Criteria. iv. Should pipeline leakage testing reveal any leakage at any level then the Department shall require immediate repairs to the pipeline to the satisfaction of the Department such that no infiltration of water into the pipeline or exfiltration of substances conveyed in the pipeline shall occur. Any repairs which are made shall be tested for leakage pursuant to subsection H6a(ii) of this Section. b. Pipeline Requirements—Zone 2: If the Department has reason to believe that the operation or proposed operation of an existing pipeline in Zone 2 of an APA may degrade groundwater quality, the Department may require: leakage testing in accordance with subsection H6a(ii) of this Section; installation, sampling, and sample analysis of groundwater 67 • ORDINANCE NO. monitoring wells; repair of the pipeline to the satisfaction of the Department such that degradation of groundwater quality is minimized or eliminated. Criteria for this determination is specified under subsection D2b(ii), Potential to Degrade Groundwater—Zone 2, Criteria. 7. Construction Activity Standards—Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-4-030.C.7, Construction Activity Standards—APA Zones 1 and 2. 8.Fill Material Requirements—Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-4-060L4,Fill Material, regarding quality of fill and fill material source statement requirements within aquifer protection areas. 9. Regulations for Existing Solid Waste Landfills—Zones 1 and 2: a. Materials: Earth materials used as fill or cover at a solid waste landfill shall meet the requirements of RMC 4-4-060L4, Fill Material. b. Groundwater Monitoring: The Department shall have the authority to require an owner of a solid waste landfill to implement a groundwater monitoring program equal to that described by King County Board of Health Title 10 (King County Solid Waste Regulations) Section 10.72.020 and a corrective action program equal to that described by Section 10.72.030. The Department shall have the authority ascribed to the health officer in said regulations. Quarterly reports shall be provided to the Department detailing groundwater monitoring activity during the preceding three (3) months. Reports detailing corrective action required by the Department shall be submitted according to a written schedule approved by the Department. 10. Hazardous Materials—Release Restrictions —Zones 1 and 2: Hazardous materials shall not be spilled, leaked, emitted, discharged, disposed, or allowed to escape or leach into the air, into groundwater, surface water, surface soils or subsurface soils. Exception: 68 ORDINANCE NO. Intentional withdrawals of hazardous materials for the purpose of legitimate sale, use, or disposal and discharges permitted under federal, state, or local law. Any unauthorized releases shall be subject to the procedural requirements of RMC 4-9-015G, Unauthorized Releases. I. FLOOD HAZARDS: 1. Applicability: Flood hazard regulations shall apply to all areas of special flood hazards within the jurisdiction of the City. In addition, all other applicable critical area or Shoreline Master Program regulations shall apply within flood hazard areas. See RMC 4-3- 090.E for a description of Shoreline Master Program jurisdictional areas. a. Areas of Special Flood Hazard: Areas of special flood hazard are defined as the land in the floodplain subject to one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Designation on flood maps always include the letters A or V. b. Mapping and Documentation: i. Basic Map and Documentation Identifying Hazards: The areas of special flood hazard are identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a scientific and engineering report entitled the Flood Insurance Study for the City of Renton, dated September 29, 1989, and any subsequent revision, with accompanying flood insurance maps which are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this section. The flood insurance study is on file at the Planning/Building/Public Works Department. ii. When Federal Insurance Study is Not Available: When base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with subsection Ilbi of this Section the Department Administrator shall obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from a Federal, State or other source in order to administer subsection 13, Specific Standards, and subsection I4, Additional Restrictions Within Floodways. 69 ORDINANCE NO. The best available information for flood hazard area identification shall be the basis for regulation until a new Flood Insurance Rate Map is issued which incorporates the data utilized under subsection D3a(iv)of this Section. iii. Interpretation of FIRM Boundaries: Per RMC 4-3-050.D.3.d, the Department Administrator, or his/her designee, shall make interpretations where needed, as to exact location of the boundaries of the areas of special flood hazard (for example, where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field conditions). The best available information for flood hazard area identification shall be the basis for regulation. iv. Data to be Used for Existing and Future Flow Conditions: The City shall determine the components of the flood hazard area after obtaining, reviewing and utilizing base flood elevations and available floodplain data for a flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year, often referred to as the "one-hundred- year flood." The City may require projections of future flow conditions for proposals in unmapped potential flood hazard areas. In mapped or unmapped flood hazard areas, future flow conditions shall be considered for proposed bridge proposals crossing floodways. c. Performance Standards: In addition to general standards of subsection E of this Section, the following regulations, subsections I.2 through I.4, apply in all areas of special flood hazard. 2. General Standards: In all areas of special flood hazards, the following standards are required: a. Anchoring—All New Construction: All new construction and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure. 70 ORDINANCE NO. b. Anchoring—Manufactured Homes: All manufactured homes must likewise be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement, and shall be installed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. Anchoring methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to ground anchors (Reference FbMA's Manufactured Home Installation in Flood Hazard Areas guidebook for additional techniques). c. Construction Materials and Methods: i. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. ii. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. iii. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air-conditioning equipment and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. d. Utilities: i. Water: All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the system. The proposed water well shall be located on high ground that is not in the floodway (WAC 173-160-171). ii. Sewer: New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharge from the systems into flood waters. iii. Waste Disposal: On-site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding. 71 ORDINANCE NO. e. Subdivision Proposals: i. All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage; ii. All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage; iii. All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood damage; and iv. All subdivision proposals shall show the flood hazard information and boundary on the subdivision drawing including the nature, location, dimensions, and elevations of the subdivided area. f. Project Review: i. Building Permits: Where elevation data is not available either through the flood insurance study or from another authoritative source, i.e., subsection D3a(iv) of this Section, applications for building permits shall be reviewed to assure that proposed construction will be reasonably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness is a local judgment and includes use of historical data, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, etc., where available. Failure to elevate at least two feet (2) above grade in these zones may result in higher insurance rates. ii. Land Use Applications: Where base flood elevation data has not been provided or is not available from another authoritative source, it shall be generated for subdivision proposals and other proposed developments which contain at least fifty (50) lots or five (5) acres (whichever is less). 72 ORDINANCE NO. 3. Specific Standards: In all areas of special flood hazards where base flood elevation data has been provided as set forth in subsection Ilb of this Section, Mapping and Documentation, or subsection D3a(iv), Use of Other Base Flood Data, where such data provides flood elevations that exceed the regulatory standards in the FEMA flood insurance study, the following provisions are required: a. Residential Construction: i. New construction and substantial improvement of any residential structure shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated a minimum of one foot above base flood elevation. ii. Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding are prohibited, or shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of flood waters. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect or must meet or exceed the following minimum criteria: (1) A minimum of two (2) openings having a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be provided; and (2)The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade; and (3) Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or devices; provided, that they permit the automatic entry and exit of flood waters. b. Manufactured Homes: 73 ORDINANCE NO. i. All manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved within Zones Al-A30, AH, and AE on the community's Flood Insurance Rate Map, on sites outside of a manufactured home park or subdivision, in a new manufactured home park or subdivision, in an expansion to an existing manufactured home park or subdivision, or in an existing manufactured home park or subdivision on which a manufactured home has incurred "substantial damage" as the result of a flood, shall be elevated on a permanent foundation such that the lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated a minimum of one foot above the base flood elevation and be securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system to resist flotation, collapse and lateral movement. ii. Manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved on sites in an existing manufactured home park or subdivision within Zones A1-30, AH, and AE on the community's Flood Insurance Rate Map that are not subject to the above manufactured home provisions shall be elevated so that either the lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated a minimum of one foot above the base flood elevation or the manufactured home chassis is supported by reinforced piers or other foundation elements of at least equivalent strength that are no less than thirty six inches (36") in height above grade and be securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system to resist flotation,collapse, and lateral movement. c. Nonresidential Construction: New construction of any commercial, industrial or other nonresidential structure shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated a minimum of one foot above the level of the base flood elevation. Substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial or other nonresidential structure shall have the lowest floor, including basement,elevated a minimum of one foot above the level of the base flood elevation, or, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall: 74 ORDINANCE NO. i. Be floodproofed so that below the minimum elevation required in "c" above the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; ii. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; iii. Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting provisions of this subsection based on their development and/or review of the structural design, specifications and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the Department Administrator; iv. Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not floodproofed, must meet the same standards for space below the lowest floor as described in subsection I3a(ii) of this Section; v. Applicants floodproofing nonresidential buildings shall be notified that flood insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one foot below the floodproofed level (e.g., a building floodproofed to the base flood level will be rated as one foot below). d. Recreational Vehicles: Recreational vehicles placed on sites within Zones A1-30, AH, and AE on the community's Flood Insurance Rate Map not including recreational vehicle storage lots shall either: i. Be on the site for fewer than one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days; 75 Adommorommirmerimmarimier ORDINANCE NO. ii. Be fully licensed and ready for highway use, on its wheels or jacking system, is attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices, and has no permanently attached additions; or iii. Meet the requirements of subsection I3b of this Section and the elevation and anchoring requirements for manufactured homes. 4. Additional Restrictions within Floodways: Located within areas of special flood hazard established in subsection Ilb of this Section, Flood Hazards: Mapping and Documentation, are areas designated as floodways. Since the floodway is an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of flood waters which carry debris, potential projectiles, and erosion potential, the following provisions apply: a. Increase in Flood Levels Prohibited: Encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and other development are prohibited unless certification by a registered professional engineer demonstrates through hydrologic and hydraulic analyses performed in accordance with standard engineering practice that: i. Encroachments shall not result in any increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the base flood discharge; and ii. There are no adverse impacts to the subject property or abutting or adjacent properties; and iii.There are no higher flood elevations upstream; and iv.The impact due to floodway encroachment shall be analyzed using future land use condition flows. b. Residential Construction in Floodways: Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within designated floodways, except for: 76 ORDINANCE NO. i. Repairs, reconstruction, or improvements to a structure which do not increase the ground floor area; and ii. Repairs,reconstruction or improvements to a structure, the cost of which does not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the market value of the structure either: a) before the repair, reconstruction, or repair is started; or b) if the structure has been damaged, and is being restored, before the damage occurred. Work done on structures to comply with existing health, sanitary, or safety codes or to structures identified as historic places may be excluded in the fifty percent(50%). c. Compliance Requirements: If subsections I4a and I4b of this section are satisfied, all new construction and substantial improvements shall comply with all applicable flood hazard reduction provisions of this section. 5. Critical Facility: Construction of new critical facilities shall be, to the extent possible, located outside the limits of the special flood hazard area (SFHA) (one hundred (100) year) floodplain. Construction of new critical facilities shall be permissible within the SFHA if no feasible alternative site is available. Critical facilities constructed within the SFHA shall have the lowest floor elevated three feet or more above the level of the base flood elevation (one hundred (100) year) at the site. Floodproofing and sealing measures must be taken to ensure that toxic substances will not be displaced by or released into flood waters. Access routes elevated to or above the level of the base flood elevation shall be provided to all critical facilities to the extent possible. 6. Compensatory Storage: a. Compensatory Storage Required: Development proposals and other alterations shall not reduce the effective base flood storage volume of the floodplain. If grading 77 • ORDINANCE NO. or other activity will reduce the effective storage volume, compensatory storage shall be created on the site or off the site if legal arrangements can be made to assure that the effective compensatory storage volume will be preserved over time. Compensatory storage shall be configured so as not to trap or strand salmonids after flood waters recede and may be configured to provide salmonid habitat or high flow refuge whenever suitable site conditions exist and the configuration does not adversely affect bank stability or existing habitat. b. Additional Requirements—Springbrook Creek: The higher of the City hydrologic and hydraulic model results for the one hundred(100) year future land use conveyance and storage events shall be used by the City to determine the volume of compensatory storage required for filling within the one hundred(100) year flood zone of Springbrook Creek. i. An exception to this requirement shall apply where the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)defined one hundred (100) year flood zone is lower than the City model results for the one hundred (100) year future land use conveyance event. ii. Under the exception, the lower FEMA floodplain elevation shall be used. The exception only applies for the reach of Springbrook Creek between SW 43rd Street and Oakesdale Avenue near SW 41st Street. c. Determining Finished Floor Elevations According to FEMA: Although City model results will apply to compensatory storage requirements, the FEMA one hundred (100) year flood plain elevations shall be used to establish building finished floor elevations to comply with other National Flood Insurance Program requirements. 78 ORDINANCE NO. J. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS: 1. Applicability: The geologic hazard regulations apply to all nonexempt activities on sites containing steep slopes, landslide hazards,erosion hazards, seismic hazards, and/or coal mine hazards classified below or on sites within fifty feet (59) of steep slopes, landslide hazards, erosion hazards, seismic hazards, and/or coal mine hazards classified below which are located on abutting or adjacent sites. a. Steep Slopes: i. Steep Slope Delineation Procedure: The boundaries of a regulated steep sensitive or protected slope are determined to be in the location identified on the City of Renton's Steep Slope Atlas. An applicant's qualified professional may substitute boundaries independently derived from survey data for the City's consideration in determining the boundaries of sensitive or protected steep slopes. All topographic maps shall utilize two (2) foot contour intervals or the standard utilized in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas. ii. Steep Slope Types: (a) Sensitive Slopes. (b)Protected Slopes. b. Landslide Hazards: i. Low Landslide Hazard (LL): Areas with slopes less than fifteen percent (15%). ii. Medium Landslide Hazard (LM): Areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel or glacial till. 79 ORDINANCE NO. iii. High Landslide Hazards (LH): Areas with slopes greater than forty percent (40%), and areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils consisting largely of silt and clay. iv. Very High Landslide Hazards (LV): Areas of known mappable landslide deposits. c. Erosion Hazards: i. Low Erosion Hazard(EL): Areas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) as having slight or moderate erosion potential, and that slope less than fifteen percent (15%). ii. High Erosion Hazard (EH): Areas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) as having severe or very severe erosion potential, and that slope more steeply than fifteen percent(15%). d. Seismic Hazards: i. Low Seismic Hazard(SL): Areas underlain by dense soils or bedrock.These soils generally have site coefficients of types S1 or S2, as defined in the Uniform Building Code. ii. High Seismic Hazard (SH): Areas underlain by soft or loose, saturated soils. These soils generally have site coefficients of types S3 or S4, as defined in the Uniform Building Code. e. Coal Mine Hazards: i. Low Coal Mine Hazards (CL): Areas with no known mine workings and no predicted subsidence. While no mines are known in these areas, undocumented mining is known to have occurred. 80 ORDINANCE NO. ii. Medium Coal Mine Hazards (CM): Areas where mine workings are deeper than two hundred feet (209) for steeply dipping seams, or deeper than fifteen (15) times the thickness of the seam or workings for gently dipping seams. These areas may be affected by subsidence. iii. High Coal Mine Hazard(CH): Areas with abandoned and improperly sealed mine openings and areas underlain by mine workings shallower than two hundred feet (209)in depth for steeply dipping seams, or shallower than fifteen (15) times the thickness of the seam or workings for gently dipping seams. These areas may be affected by collapse or other subsidence. f. Volcanic Hazards: Volcanic hazard areas are those areas subject to a potential for inundation from post lahar sedimentation along the lower Green River as identified in Plate II, Map D, in the report U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (Revised 1998). Volcano Hazards from Mount Rainier, Washington. Open-File Report 98-428. g. Mapping: Maps of steep slopes, landslide, erosion, seismic, and coal mine hazards are documented and included in subsection Q of this Section, Maps. The actual presence or absence of the criteria listed above, as determined by qualified professionals, shall govern the treatment of an individual building site or parcel of land requiring compliance with these regulations. h. Performance Standards: In addition to the general standards of subsection E of this Section, the following performance standards, subsections J2 to J9, apply to all regulated geologic hazard areas, unless the subsection clearly identifies that the standard applies only to a specific geologic hazard category. Multiple performance standards may apply to 81 • ORDINANCE NO. a site feature, for example steep slope, landslide and erosion hazards, based upon overlapping classification systems. 2. Special Studies Required: a. Whenever a proposed development requires a development permit and a geologic hazard is present on the site of the proposed development or on abutting or adjacent sites within fifty feet (50) of the subject site, geotechnical studies by qualified professionals shall be required. Specifically, geotechnical studies are required for developments proposed on sites with any of the following geologic hazards: i. Sensitive and protected slopes; ii. Medium, high, or very high landslide hazards; iii. High erosion hazards; iv. High seismic hazards; v. Medium or high coal mine hazards. b.The required studies shall demonstrate the following review criteria can be met: i. The proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent properties beyond pre-development conditions; and ii. The proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas; and iii. The development can be safely accommodated on the site. c. A mitigation plan may be required by the Responsible Official, consistent with Section F.8. 3. Independent Secondary Review: Independent secondary review is required consistent with 4-3-050.F.7. 82 ORDINANCE NO. 4. Conditions of Approval: Conditions of approval may modify the proposal, including, but not limited to,construction techniques, design, drainage, project size/configuration, or seasonal constraints on development. Additional possible conditions may be listed under the performance standards for each hazard type. Upon review of geotechnical studies, the development permit shall be conditioned to mitigate adverse environmental impacts and to assure that the development can be safely accommodated on the site and is consistent with the purposes of this Section. A mitigation plan may be required consistent with Section F8. 5. Protected Slopes: a. Prohibited Development: Development is prohibited on protected slopes. This restriction is not intended to prevent the subdivision or development of property that includes forty percent(40%)or greater slopes on a portion of the site, provided there is enough developable area elsewhere to accommodate building pads. b. Exceptions through Modification: Exceptions to the prohibition may be granted for: i. Filling against the toe of a natural rock wall or rock wall, or protected slope created through mineral and natural resource recovery activities or public or private road installation or widening and related transportation improvements, railroad track installation or improvement, or public or private utility installation activities pursuant to subsection N2 of this Section, Modifications. ii. Grading to the extent that it eliminates all or portions of a mound or to allow reconfiguration of protected slopes created through mineral and natural resource recovery activities or public or private road installation or widening and related 83 ORDINANCE NO. transportation improvements, railroad track installation or improvement, or public or private utility installation activities, pursuant to subsection N2 of this Section, Modifications. c. Exceptions through Variance: Exceptions to the prohibition may be granted for construction, reconstruction, additions, and associated accessory structures of a single family home on an existing legal lot pursuant to a variance as stated in RMC 4-9-250B 1. d. Exceptions through Waiver: Exceptions to the prohibition may be granted for installation of public utilities which are needed to protect slope stability, and public road widening where all the following provisions have been demonstrated: i. The utility or road improvement is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan, adopted Utility Plans, and the Transportation Improvement Program where applicable. ii. Alternative locations have been determined to be economically or functionally infeasible. iii. A geotechnical evaluation indicates that the proposal will not increase the risk of occurrence of a geologic hazard, and measures are identified to eliminate or reduce risks. iv. The plan for the improvement is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. Where the excepted activities above are allowed, the erosion control measures in subsection J6 of this Section,Sensitive Slopes, Medium, High and Very High Landslide Hazards, and High Erosion Hazards, shall also apply. 84 ORDINANCE NO. e. Native Growth Protection Areas—Protected Slopes: Unless development is allowed pursuant to subsection J.5.a through J.5.d, protected slopes shall be placed in a native growth protection area pursuant to RMC 4-3-050E.4, or dedicated to a conservation organization or land trust, or similarly preserved through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the City. f. Conditions of Approval: Based upon the results of the geotechnical report and independent review, conditions of approval for developments on sites which include steep slopes may include, but are not limited to vegetation enhancement, slope stabilization, buffer zones, or other requirements. Mitigation plans may be required consistent with Section F8. g. Coordination with Stream and Lake Buffers: When a required stream/lake buffer falls within a protected slope area, the stream/lake buffer width shall extend to the boundary of the protected slope. 6. Sensitive Slopes—Medium, High and Very High Landslide Hazards—High Erosion Hazards: The following standards apply to development on sensitive slopes, medium/high/very high landslide hazard areas, and high erosion hazard areas: a. Erosion Control Plans: Development applications shall submit erosion control plans consistent with subsection J2 of this Section, Special Studies Required, and chapter 4-8 RMC, Permits and Decisions. b. Conditions of Approval: The Reviewing Official may condition a development proposal to achieve minimal site erosion, including, but not limited to, timing of construction and vegetation stabilization, sequencing or phasing of construction, clearing and grading limits, and other measures. Mitigation plans may be required consistent with Section F8. 85 ORDINANCE NO. c. On-Site Inspections: During construction, weekly on-site inspections shall be required at the applicant's expense. Weekly reports documenting erosion control measures shall be required. 7. Very High Landslide Hazards: a. Prohibited Development: Development shall not be permitted on land designated with very high landslide hazards,except by variance, administered pursuant to RMC 4-9-250B 1, for construction of a single family home on an existing legal lot. b. Buffer Requirement: A buffer of fifty feet(50) shall be established from the top, toe and sides of a very high landslide hazard area. The Department Administrator may increase or decrease the required buffer based upon the results of a geotechnical report, and any increase or decrease based upon the results of the geotechnical study shall be documented in writing and included with the project approval. i. The modified standard shall be based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F shall be followed. Notification may be required pursuant to Section F8. ii. When a required stream/lake buffer falls within a very high landslide hazard area or buffer, the stream/lake buffer width shall extend to the boundary of the very high landslide hazard buffer. c. Native Growth Protection Area—Very High Landslide Hazards: The landslide hazard area shall be placed in a native growth protection area pursuant to subsection E.4 of this Section, or dedicated to a conservation organization or land trust, or similarly preserved through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the City. Based upon the 86 ORDINANCE NO. results of the geotechnical study, the buffer may be placed in a native growth protection area, or it may be designated as a "no build"easement, or the area may be designated in part, a native growth protection area and in part, a"no build" easement. 8. Coal Mine Hazards: a. Medium Hazard—Report Required: Reports consistent with subsection J2 of this Section, Special Studies Required, and chapter 4-8 RMC, Permits and Decisions, shall be prepared for development proposed within medium coal mine hazard areas and for development proposed within two hundred feet (209)of a medium coal mine hazard area. An applicant may request that the Department Administrator waive the report requirement pursuant to subsection D4b of this Section, Review Authority—Geologic Hazards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands. where it has been determined through field documentation that coal mine hazards are not present. b. High Hazard—Report Required: Reports consistent with subsection J2 of this Section, Special Studies Required, and chapter 4-8 RMC, Permits and Decisions, shall be prepared for development proposed within high coal mine hazard areas and for development proposed within five hundred feet (509) of a high coal mine hazard area. An applicant may request that the Department Administrator waive the report requirement pursuant to subsection D4b of this Section, Review Authority—Geologic Hazards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands, where it has been determined through field documentation that coal mine hazards are not present. c. Conditions of Approval: Based upon the results of studies prepared, the City may condition approval of development by requiring mitigation. Potential mitigation may include, but is not limited to, backfilling and sealing mine entries and shafts, backfilling existing 87 ORDINANCE NO. ' • sinkholes, removal or regrading or capping coal mine waste dumps, limiting development on portions of the site, or other measures offering equal protection from the hazard. A mitigation plan may be required consistent with Section F8. i. Additional Engineering Design and Remediation Specifications: After approval of the mitigation approach proposed as a result of subsection J8c of this Section, and prior to construction,the applicant shall complete engineering design drawings and specifications for remediation. Upon approval of the plans and specifications, the applicant shall complete the remediation. Hazard mitigation shall be performed by or under the direction of a qualified engineer or geologist. The applicant shall document the hazard mitigation by submitting as-builts and a remediation construction report. d. Hazards Found during Construction: Any hazards found during any development activities shall be immediately reported to the Development Services Division. Any coal mine hazards shall be mitigated prior to recommencing construction based upon supplemental recommendations or reports by the applicant's geotechnical professional. e. Construction in Areas with Combustion: Construction shall not be permitted where surface or subsurface investigations indicate the possible presence of combustion in the underlying seam or seams, unless the impact is adequately mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the applicant's geotechnical professional. 9. Volcanic Hazards: Critical facilities on sites containing areas susceptible to inundation due to volcanic hazards shall require an evacuation and emergency management plan. The applicant for critical facilities shall evaluate the risk of inundation or flooding resulting from mudflows originating on Mount Rainier in a geotechnical report, and identify any engineering or other mitigation measures as appropriate. Mitigation plans may be required consistent with F8. 88 ORDINANCE NO. K. HABITAT CONSERVATION: 1. Applicability: The habitat conservation regulations apply to all nonexempt activities on sites containing or abutting critical habitat as classified below. a. Critical Habitat: Critical habitats are those habitat areas which meet any of the following criteria: i. Habitats associated with he documented presence of non- salmonid(see subsection L.1 and RMC 4-3-090 Shoreline Master Program Regulations for salmonid species) species proposed or listed by the federal government or State of Washington as endangered, threatened,candidate, sensitive, monitor, or priority; and/or ii. Category 1 wetlands (refer to subsection M.1 of this Section for classification criteria. b. Mapping: i. Critical habitats are identified by lists, categories and definitions of species promulgated by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (Non-game Data System Special Animal Species) as identified in WAC 232-12-011; in the Priority Habitat and Species Program of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife; or by rules and regulations adopted currently or hereafter by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. ii. Referenced inventories and maps are to be used as guides to the general location and extent of critical habitat. Critical habitat which is identified in subsection Kla of this Section, but not shown on the referenced inventories and maps, are presumed to exist in the City and are also protected under all the provisions of this section. 89 ORDINANCE NO. iii. The actual presence or absence of the criteria listed above as determined by qualified professionals, shall govern the treatment of an individual building site or parcel of land requiring compliance with these regulations. c. Performance Standards: In addition to the general standards of subsection E of this Section, the following performance standards, subsections K2 to K5, apply to all non-exempt activities on sites containing critical habitat areas per subsection Kla. 2. Habitat Assessment Required: Based upon subsection Kl of this Section, Applicability, the City shall require a habitat/wildlife assessment for activities that are located within or abutting a critical habitat, or that are adjacent to a critical habitat, and have the potential to significantly impact a critical habitat. The assessment shall determine the extent, function and value of the critical habitat and potential for impacts and mitigation consistent with report requirements in RMC 4-8-120.D. In cases where a proposal is not likely to significantly impact the critical habitat and there is sufficient information to determine the effects of a proposal, an applicant may request that this report be waived by the Department Administrator in accordance with subsection D4b of this Section. 3. Bald Eagle Habitat: Bald eagle habitat shall be protected pursuant to the Washington State Bald Eagle Protection Rules (WAC 232-12-292). 4. Native Growth Protection Areas: Based on the required habitat assessment, the Reviewing Official may require critical habitat areas and their associated buffers be placed in a native growth protection area subject to the requirements of subsection E.4 of this Section, or dedicated to a conservation organization or land trust, or similarly preserved through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the City. 90 ORDINANCE NO. 5. Alterations Require Mitigation: If alterations to critical habitat/wildlife habitat or buffers are proposed, mitigation shall be required by the City. The applicant shall evaluate alternative methods of developing the property using the following criteria in this order: a. Avoid any disturbances to the habitat. b. Minimize any impacts to the habitat. c. Compensate for any habitat impacts. 6. Mitigation Options: In addition to any performance standards or mitigation required by wetland regulations, additional mitigation may be determined by the Reviewing Official based upon the consultant report submitted by the applicant, and/or peer review of the applicant's consultant report by a qualified professional selected by the City at the applicant's expense, and/or by information from State or Federal agencies. a. On-Site Mitigation: Mitigation shall be provided on-site, unless on-site mitigation is not scientifically feasible due to physical features of the property. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to demonstrate that mitigation cannot be provided on-site. b. Off-Site Mitigation: When mitigation cannot be provided on-site, mitigation shall be provided in the immediate vicinity of the permitted activity on property owned or controlled by the applicant, and identified as such through a recorded document such as an easement or covenant, provided such mitigation is beneficial to the habitat area and associated resources. c. In-Kind Mitigation: In-kind mitigation shall be provided except when the applicant demonstrates and the City concurs that greater functional and habitat value can be achieved through out-of-kind mitigation. 7. Mitigation Plan: Mitigation plans may be required consistent with F8. 91 ORDINANCE NO. L. STREAMS AND LAKES: 1. Applicability/Lands to Which These Regulations Apply: These stream and lake regulations apply to sites containing all or portions of Class 2 to 4 streams or lakes and/or their buffers as described below. This section does not apply to Class 1 waters which are regulated by RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, or to Class 5 waters which are exempt. All other critical area regulations, including, but not limited to flood hazard regulations and wetland regulations, do apply to classified streams where applicable. a. Classification System: The following classification system is hereby adopted for the purposes of regulating streams and lakes in the City. Stream and lake buffer widths are based on the following rating system: i. Class 1: Class 1 waters are perennial salmonid-bearing waters which are classified by the City and State as Shorelines of the State. ii. Class 2: Class 2 waters are perennial or intermittent salmonid- bearing waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Mapped on Figure Q.4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 2; and/or (b)Historically and/or currently known to support salmonids, including resident trout, at any stage in the species lifecycle; and/or (c) is a water body (e.g. pond, lake) between 0.5 acre and 20 acres in size. iii. Class 3: Class 3 waters are non-salmonid-bearing perennial waters during years of normal rainfall, and/or mapped on Figure Q.4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 3. 92 ORDINANCE NO. iv. Class 4: Class 4 waters are non-salmonid-bearing intermittent waters during years of normal rainfall, and/or mapped on Figure Q.4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 4. v. Class 5: Class 5 waters are non-regulated non-salmonid-bearing waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) flow within an artificially constructed channel where no naturally-defined channel had previously existed; and/or (b) Are a surficially isolated water body less than 0.5 acre (e.g. pond) not meeting the criteria for a wetland as defined in Section M. b. Measurement: i. Stream/Lake Boundary: The boundary of a stream or lake shall be considered to be its Ordinary High Water Mark(OHWM). The OHWM shall be flagged in the field by a qualified consultant when any study is required pursuant to Subsection L of this Section. ii. Buffer: The boundary of a buffer shall extend beyond the boundaries of the stream or lake to the width applicable to the stream/lake class as noted in Subsection L.5 below, Stream/Lake Buffer Width Requirements. Where streams enter or exit pipes, the buffer in subsection ii shall be measured perpendicular to the ordinary high water mark 93 ORDINANCE NO. from the end of the pipe along the open channel section of the stream. Figure 4-3-050.L.b.ii. Buffer measurement at pipe opening. c. Maps and Inventory: i. Mapped Streams and Lakes: The approximate location and extent of Class 2 to 4 water bodies within the City limits are indicated on a map in Subsection Q of this Section, Maps. The map is to be used as a guide to the general location and extent of streams. Specific locations and extents will be determined by the City based upon field review and applicant-funded studies prepared pursuant to Subsection L.3. ii. Reclassification: Where there is a conflict between the Renton Water Class Map in Subsection Q and the criteria in Subsection L.1.a, the criteria in Subsection L.1.a shall govern. The re-classification of a water body to a lower class (i.e. 2 to 3, or 3 to 4, etc.) requires Administrator acceptance of a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study, followed by a legislative amendment to the map in Subsection Q prior to its effect. iii. Unmapped Streams and Lakes: Streams and lakes which are defined in Subsection L.1.a of this Section, Classification System, but not shown on the Renton Water Class Map in Subsection Q, are presumed to exist in the City and are regulated by all the 94 ORDINANCE NO. provisions of this Section: IF the water body is unmapped according to the City of Renton's Water Class Map (refer to Subsection Q), and: (a) the width of the stream channel averages less than two- feet at the Ordinary High Water Mark, or (b)the stream channel has an average gradient of greater than 20 percent, or (c) the channel or water body is upstream of an existing, enduring, and complete barrier to salmonid migration, as interpreted in Subsection L.1.c.iv below, or as shown on the City of Renton's Salmonid Migration Barrier Map, and the channel or water body contains water only intermittently upstream of the barrier during years of normal rainfall, or (d)the water body is isolated from any connected stream and/or wetland, or (e) the water body is less than 0.5 acre in size and connected to a stream meeting the criteria noted in Subsections L.1.c.iii.(a) through (c) above; THEN the water body is considered Non-Salmonid-Bearing and water class would be assessed based upon the Non-Salmonid-Bearing Waters criteria in Subsections L.1.a.iii. through v. above. HOWEVER, If none of the conditions above apply, then the water body is considered Salmonid-Bearing- Class 2. Classification of an unmapped stream or lake is effective upon expiration of the 14-day appeal period following the Administrator's determination, and the map in Subsection Q shall be amended consistent with Administrator determinations at the next appropriate amendment cycle. 95 ORDINANCE NO. iv. Salmonid Migration Barriers: For purposes of classifying or reclassifying water bodies, features determined by the Administrator to be salmonid migration barriers per definition in RMC 4-11-190 shall be mapped. The Administrator shall prepare and update the map as appropriate and maintain a copy in the Planning/Building/Public Works Customer Service Area. v. Experts or State Agency May Be Required or Consulted: The City may require an applicant to retain an expert or to consult the Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife to assess salmonid-bearing status of the channel in question and prepare a report to the City detailing the facts and conclusion of their analysis. vi. Criteria to Govern: The actual presence or absence of the stream and lake criteria listed in this Section L, as determined by qualified professionals, shall govern the treatment of an individual building site or parcel of land requiring compliance with these regulations. 2. Applicability- Activities to Which This Section Applies: This Section applies to all non-exempt activities on sites containing Class 2 to 4 streams or lakes and their associated buffers. 3. Studies Required: a. When Standard Stream or Lake Study Is Required: The applicant shall be required to conduct a Standard Stream or Lake Study per RMC 4-8-120 if a site contains a water body or buffer area or the project area is within one hundred feet (100') of a water body even if the water body is not located on the subject property. b. When Supplemental Stream or Lake Study is Required: The applicant shall be required to conduct a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study per RMC 4-8-120 if a site 96 ORDINANCE NO. contains a water body or buffer area and changes to buffer requirements or alterations of the water body or its associated buffer are proposed, either administratively or via a variance request. c. When Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan is Required: The applicant shall be required to conduct a Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan per RMC 4-8-120 if impacts are identified within a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study. The approval of the Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan by the Administrator shall be based on the criteria located in Subsection L.3.c.ii below. i. Timing of Mitigation Plan—Final Submittal and Commencement: When a Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan is required, the applicant shall submit a final mitigation plan for the approval of the Administrator prior to the issuance of building or construction permits whichever comes first. The applicant shall receive written approval of the final mitigation plan prior to commencement of any mitigation activity. ii. Criteria for Approval of Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan for Alterations of Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers: In order to approve a Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan the Administrator shall find that the Plan demonstrates compliance with the following criteria: (a)Mitigation Location: Mitigation location shall follow the preferences in (i) to (iv) below. Basins and subbasins are indicated in 4-3-050.Q, Maps: (i) On-site mitigation: On-site mitigation is required unless the Reviewing Official finds that on-site mitigation is not feasible or desirable; (ii) Off-site mitigation within same drainage subbasin as subject site: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same 97 ORDINANCE NO. . drainage subbasin as the subject site and if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions over mitigation on the subject site; (iii) Off-site mitigation within same drainage basin within City limits: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions within the City over mitigation within the same drainage subbasin as the project; (iv) Off-site mitigation within the same drainage basin outside the City limits: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin outside the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions over mitigation within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits and it meets City goals. (b) Mitigation Type: Types of mitigation shall follow the preferences in (i) to (iii) below: (i)Daylighting (returning to open channel) of streams or removal of manmade salmonid migration barriers; (ii) Removal of impervious surfaces in buffer areas and improved biological function of the buffer; (iii) In stream or in-lake mitigation as part of an approved watershed basin restoration project; (iv) Other mitigation suitable for site and water body conditions that meet all other provisions for a mitigation plan. In all cases, mitigation shall provide for equivalent or greater biological functions per ii(e) below. 98 ORDINANCE NO. (c) Contiguous corridors: Mitigation sites shall be located to preserve or achieve contiguous riparian or wildlife corridors to minimize the isolating effects of development on habitat areas, so long as mitigation of aquatic habitat is located within the same aquatic ecosystem as the area disturbed; and (d) Non-indigenous species: Wildlife, or fish species not indigenous to the region shall not be introduced into a riparian mitigation area unless authorized by a State or Federal permit or approval. Plantings shall be consistent with Section 4-3- 050.L.6.c.; and (e) Equivalent or greater biological functions: The Administrator shall utilize the report"City of Renton Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommendations" by AC Kindig & Company and Cedarock Consultants, dated February 27, 2003, unless superceded with a City-adopted study, to determine the existing or potential ecological function of the stream or lake or riparian habitat that is being affected. Mitigation shall address each function affected by the alteration. Mitigation to compensate alterations to stream/lake areas and associated buffers shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic and hydrologic functions and shall include mitigation for adverse impacts upstream or downstream of the development proposal site. No-net-loss of riparian habitat or water body function shall be demonstrated; and (f) Minimum Mitigation Plan Performance Standards: See Subsection 4-3-050.F.8. (g) Additional Conditions of Approval: The Administrator shall condition approvals of activities allowed within or abutting a stream/lake or its buffers, as 99 • ORDINANCE NO. . necessary to minimize or mitigate any potential adverse impacts. Conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: (i)Preservation of critically important vegetation and/or habitat features such as snags and downed wood; (ii)Limitation of access to the habitat area, including fencing to deter unauthorized access; (iii) Seasonal restriction of construction activities; and (iv)Establishment of a duration and timetable for periodic review of mitigation activities. (h) Based on Best Available Science: The applicant shall demonstrate that the mitigation is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iii. Performance Surety: The Administrator shall require a performance surety to ensure completion and success of proposed mitigation, per RMC 4-3- 050.G and 4-1-230. iv. Alternative Mitigation: The mitigation requirements set forth in this Subsection L.3 may be modified at the Administrator's discretion if the applicant demonstrates that improved habitat functions, on a per function basis, can be obtained in the affected sub-drainage basin as a result of alternative mitigation measures. d. Studies Waived: 100 ORDINANCE NO. • i. Standard Stream or Lake Study: May only be waived by the Administrator when the applicant provides satisfactory evidence that: (a) A road, building or other barrier exists between the water body and the proposed activity, or (b)The water body or required buffer area does not intrude on the applicant's lot, and based on evidence submitted, the proposal will not result in significant adverse impacts to nearby water bodies regulated under this Section; or (c) Applicable data and analysis appropriate to the proposed project exists and an additional study is not necessary. ii. Supplemental Stream or Lake Study: May only be waived by the Administrator when: (a) No alterations or changes to the stream or lake, or its standard buffer are proposed; or (b) Applicable data and analysis appropriate to the proposed project exists and an additional report is not necessary. iii. Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan: May only be waived when no impacts have been identified through a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study. e. Period of Validity for Studies Associated with This Section: Studies submitted and reviewed are valid for five (5) years from date of Study completion unless the Administrator determines that conditions have changed significantly. 4. General Standards for Class 2 to 4 Waters: a. Disturbance Prohibited: Streams and lakes and their buffer areas shall be undisturbed, except where the buffer is to be enhanced, or where exemptions allowed in 101 ORDINANCE NO. Subsection 4-3-050.0 are conducted, or where allowed to be altered in accordance with Subsections L5, L7 and L8. Where water body or buffer disturbance has occurred in accordance with exemption or development permit approval during construction or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation shall be required. b. No Net Loss: There shall be no net loss of riparian area or shoreline ecological function resulting from any activity or land use occurring within the regulated buffer area. 5. Stream/Lake Buffer Width Requirements: a. Buffers and Setbacks: i. Minimum Stream/Lake Buffer Widths: The minimum width of the required buffers shall be based upon the water body class. (a) Class 2: 100 feet (b) Class 3: 75 feet (c) Class 4: 35 feet ii. Piped or Culverted Streams: (a) Building structures over a natural stream located in an underground pipe or culvert except as may be granted by a variance in RMC 4-9-250 is prohibited. Transportation or utility crossings or other alterations pursuant to Section L8 are allowed. Pavement over a pre-existing piped stream is allowed. Relocation of the piped stream system around structures is allowed. If structure locations are proposed to be changed or the piped stream is being relocated around buildings, a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of existing piped stream systems will be required for any development project site that contains a piped 102 ORDINANCE NO. stream to ensure it is sized to convey the 100-year runoff level from the total upstream tributary area based on future land use conditions. (b) No buffers are required along segments of piped or culverted streams. The City shall require easements and setbacks from pipes or culverts consistent with stormwater requirements in RMC 4-6-030 and the adopted drainage manual. b. Increased Buffer Width: i. Areas of High Blow-down Potential: Where the stream/lake buffer is in an area of high blow-down potential as identified by a qualified professional, the buffer width may be expanded an additional fifty (50) feet on the windward side by the Responsible Official. Notifications may be required per section F8. ii. Buffers Falling Within Protected Slope or Very High Landslide Area: When the required stream/lake buffer falls within a protected slope or very high landslide hazard area or buffer, the stream/lake buffer width shall extend to the boundary of the protected slope or the very high landslide hazard buffer. Notifications may be required per section F8. c. Reduction of Buffer Width: i. Authority: Based upon an applicant's request, and the acceptance of a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study, the Administrator may approve a reduction in the minimum buffer widths where the applicant can demonstrate compliance with Subsections iv(a), (c), (d), (e) and (f)below and any mitigation requirements as a result of L.3.c.ii above; or compliance with Subsections iv(b), (c), (d), (e), and(f)below and any mitigation requirements as a result of L.3.c.ii. above. 103 ORDINANCE NO. ii. Minimum Buffer Width Permissible by Administrator: An enhanced buffer shall not be less than the widths specified below for reduced buffers. (a) Class 2: 75 feet (b) Class 3: 50 feet (c) Class 4: 25 feet (d) Sites Separated from Stream or Lake: As determined by the Administrator, for development proposed on sites separated from the stream or lake by pre- existing, intervening, and lawfully created structures, roads, bulkheads/hard structural stabilization, or other substantial existing improvements. For the purposes of this section, the intervening lots/parcels, roads, bulkheads/hard structural stabilization, or other substantial improvements shall be found to: (i)Separate the subject upland property from the water body due to their height or width; and (ii)Substantially prevent or impair delivery of most riparian functions from the subject upland property to the water body. The buffer width established shall reflect the riparian functions that can be delivered to the regulated stream. Greater buffer width reductions than listed in subsections (a) through (c) above require review as a variance per Subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9- 250B. Where a Class 2 or 3 stream is daylighted, greater buffer reductions may be allowed by modification in RMC 4-3-050.N.2. iii. Procedure: Such determination and evidence shall be included in the application file. Public notification shall be given as follows: 104 • ' ORDINANCE NO. (a)For applications that are not subject to notices of application per RMC 4-8, notice of the buffer determination shall be given by posting the site and notifying parties of record, if any, in accordance with RMC 4-8. (b) For applications that are subject to notices of application, the buffer determination or request for determination shall be included with notice of application. Upon determination, notification of parties of record, if any, shall be made. iv. Criteria for Approval of Reduced Buffer Width: The following criteria(a) and(c) through (f), or criteria (b) through (f) shall be met: (a) Buffer condition: Either subsection (i) and (iii) through (v) shall be met or subsection (ii)through (v) shall be met: (i)The buffer area land is extensively vegetated with native species, including trees and shrubs, and has less than 5 percent non-native invasive species cover, and has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes, or (ii)The buffer can be enhanced with native vegetation and removal of non-native species per criteria (c), and has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes; and (iii)The width reduction will not reduce stream or lake functions, including those of anadromous fish or nonfish habitat; and (iv)The width reduction will not degrade riparian habitat; and (v) No direct or indirect, short-term or long-term, adverse impacts to regulated water bodies, as determined by the City, will result from a regulated 105 • ORDINANCE NO. activity. The City's determination shall be based on specific site studies by recognized experts, pursuant to Subsection F3 and RMC 4-8-120; or (b)The proposal includes daylighting of a stream, or removal of legally installed, as determined by the Administrator, salmonid passage barriers; and (c)The project includes a buffer enhancement plan using native vegetation and substantiates that the enhanced area will be equal to or improve the functional attributes of the buffer; or in the case of existing developed sites where a natural buffer is not possible, the proposal includes on- or off-site riparian/lakeshore or aquatic enhancement proportionate to its project specific or cumulative impact on shoreline ecological functions; and (d)The proposal will result in, at minimum, no-net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and (e)The proposal does not result in increased flood hazard risk; and (f)The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. d. Averaging of Buffer Width: i. Authority: Based upon an applicant's request, and the acceptance of a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study, the Administrator may approve buffer width averaging. ii. Minimum Averaged Buffer Widths: In no instance shall the buffer width be less than: (a) Class 2: 50 feet 106 ORDINANCE NO. (b) Class 3: 37.5 feet (c) Class 4: 25 feet Greater buffer width reductions than listed in subsections (a) through (c) above require review as a variance per Subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9- 250B. iii. Criteria for Approval: Buffer width averaging may be allowed by the Administrator only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: (a)The water body and associated riparian area contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; and (b) Buffer width averaging will result in no-net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and (c)The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging; and (d) The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iv. Buffer Enhancement May be Required: Where the buffer width is reduced by averaging per this Subsection, buffer enhancement shall be required where appropriate to site conditions, habitat sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. v. Notification: Notification may be required consistent with Subsection F8. 107 ORDINANCE NO. 6. Stream or Lake Buffer Use Restrictions and Maintenance: Any activity or proposal subject to RMC 4-3-050.L shall comply with the following standards within required buffer areas: a. Preservation of Native Vegetation: Existing native vegetation shall be preserved to the extent possible, preferably in consolidated areas. b. Revegetation Required: Where water body buffer disturbance has occurred in accordance with exemption or development permit approval or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation shall be required. c. Use of Native Species: When revegetation is required, native species, or other appropriate species naturalized to the Puget Sound region and approved by the Reviewing Official, shall be used. A variety of species shall be used which serve as food or shelter from climatic extremes and predators, and as structure and cover for reproduction and rearing of young. d. Removal of Noxious Species: When required as a condition of approval, noxious or undesirable species of plants shall be removed or controlled so as to not compete with native vegetation. e. Impervious Surface Restrictions: Where impervious surfaces exist in buffer areas, such impervious surfaces shall not be increased or expanded within the buffer area. The extent of impervious surfaces within the buffer area may only be re-arranged if the reconfiguration of impervious surfaces and restoration of prior surfaced areas is part of an enhancement proposal that improves ecological function of the area protected by the buffer. 108 • ORDINANCE NO. 7. Criteria for Permit Approval —Class 2 to 4: Permit approval by the Reviewing Official for projects on or near regulated water bodies shall be granted only if the approval is consistent with the provisions of this Section L, and complies with the following: a. Creation of Native Growth Protection Areas Required: As a condition of any approval for any development permit issued pursuant to this Section, the property owner shall be required to create a native growth protection area containing the stream/lake area and associated buffers based upon field investigations performed pursuant to Subsection E.4, and b. At least one of the following conditions must apply: i. A proposed action meets the standard provisions of this Section and results in no net loss of regulated riparian area or shoreline ecological function in the drainage basin where the site is located, or ii. A proposed action meets alternative administrative standards pursuant to this Section and the proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated riparian area or shoreline ecological function in the drainage basin where the site is located; or iii. A variance process is successfully completed and the proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated riparian area or shoreline ecological function in the drainage basin where the site is located. 8. Alterations Within Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers a. Transportation Crossings: i. Criteria for Administrative Approval of Transportation Crossings in Stream/Lake or Buffer Areas: Construction of vehicular or non-vehicular transportation crossings may be permitted in accordance with an approved supplemental stream/lake study subject to the following criteria: 109 ORDINANCE NO. (a)The proposed route is determined to have the least impact on the environment, while meeting City Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element requirements and standards in RMC 4-6-060; and (b)The crossing minimizes interruption of downstream movement of wood and gravel; and (c)Transportation facilities in buffer areas shall not run parallel to the water body; and (d) Crossings occur as near to perpendicular with the water body as possible; and (e) Crossings are designed according to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Passage Design at Road Culverts, 1999, and the National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings, 2000, as may be updated, or equivalent manuals as determined by the Responsible Official; and (0 Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and (g) Mitigation criteria of RMC 4-3-050.L.3.c.ii. are met. b. Alterations of Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers -- Utilities: i. Criteria for Administrative Approval of Utilities in Stream/Lake or Buffer: New utility lines and facilities may be permitted to cross water bodies in accordance with an approved supplemental stream/lake study, if they comply with the following criteria: (a) Fish and wildlife habitat areas shall be avoided to the maximum extent possible; and 110 ORDINANCE NO. (b)The utility is designed consistent with one or more of the following methods: (i) Installation shall be accomplished by boring beneath the scour depth and hyporheic zone of the water body and channel migration zone; or (ii)The utilities shall cross at an angle greater than sixty(60) degrees to the centerline of the channel in streams or perpendicular to the channel centerline; or (iii) Crossings shall be contained within the footprint of an existing road or utility crossing; and (c) New utility routes shall avoid paralleling the stream or following a down-valley course near the channel; and (d)The utility installation shall not increase or decrease the natural rate of shore migration or channel migration; and (e) Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and (f) Mitigation criteria of RMC 4-3-050.L.3.c.ii. are met. c. Alterations of Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers—In-Water Structures and In-Water Work: i. Administrative Approval of In-Water Structures or In-Water Work: In accordance with an approved supplemental stream or lake study, in-water structures or work may be permitted, subject to the following: In-stream structures, such as, but not limited to, high flow bypasses, sediment ponds, in-stream ponds, retention and detention facilities, tide gates, dams, and weirs, shall be allowed as part of an approved watershed basin restoration 111 • ORDINANCE NO. project approved by the City of Renton, and in accordance with mitigation criteria of RMC 4-3- 050.L.3.c.ii.The applicant will obtain and comply with State or Federal permits and requirements. d. Alterations of Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers --Dredging. i. Administrative Approval of Dredging: Dredging may be permitted only when: (a)Dredging is necessary for flood hazard reduction purposes,if a definite flood hazard would exist unless dredging were permitted; or (b)Dredging is necessary to correct problems of material distribution and water quality, when such problems are adversely affecting aquatic life; or (c)Dredging is associated with a stream habitat enhancement or creation project not otherwise exempt in 4-3-050.C; or (d)Dredging is necessary to protect public facilities; or (e)Dredging is required as a maintenance and operation condition of a federally funded flood hazard reduction project or a hazard mitigation project; and (f) Applicable mitigation criteria of RMC 4-3-050.L.3.c.ii. are met. e. Alterations of Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers -- Stream Relocation: i. Administrative Approval of Stream Relocation: Stream relocation may be allowed when analyzed in an accepted supplemental stream or lake assessment, and when the following criteria and conditions are met: 112 ORDINANCE NO. (a)Criteria—Stream relocation may only be permitted if associated with: (i) A public flood hazard reduction/habitat enhancement project approved by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies; or (ii)Expansion of public road or other public facility improvements where no feasible alternative exists; or (iii) A public or private proposal restoring a water body and resulting in a net benefit to on-or off-site habitat and species. (b)Additional Conditions: The following conditions also apply to any stream relocation proposal meeting one or more of the above criteria: (i) Buffer widths shall be based upon the new stream location, provided that the buffer widths may be reduced or averaged if meeting criteria of L.5 c or d or subsection (b)(ii). Where minimum required buffer widths are not feasible for stream relocation proposals that are the result of activities pursuant to criteria i(a)(i) and i(a)(ii) above, other equivalent on- or off-site compensation to achieve no-net-loss of riparian function is provided; (ii) When Class 4 streams are proposed for relocation due to expansions of public roads or other public facility improvements per subsection (a)(ii) above, the buffer area between the facility and the relocated stream shall not be less than the width prior to the relocation. The provided buffer between the facility and the relocated stream shall be enhanced or improved to provide appropriate function given the class and condition of the stream; or if there is no buffer currently, other equivalent on- or off-site compensation to achieve no-net-loss of riparian function is provided. 113 • ORDINANCE NO. (iii) Applicable mitigation criteria of RMC 4-3- 050.L.3.c.ii. must be met. (iv) Proper notifications and records must be made of stream relocations, per RMC 4-3-050.D.3.b, Information to be Obtained and Maintained, and RMC 4-3-050.D.3.c, Alterations of Watercourses, in cases where the stream/lake is subject to flood hazard regulations of RMC 4-3-050, as well as RMC 4-3-050.F8 if neighboring properties are impacted. f. Alterations—Single Family Home—Existing Legal Lot: If criteria to reduce or average a buffer cannot be met, construction, reconstruction, additions, and associated accessory structures of a single family home on an existing legal lot may be allowed to intrude into a bufferpursuant to a variance as stated in RMC 4-9-250B1. g. Alterations—Other: Proposed alterations of a stream or lake or associated buffer not addressed by Subsections L.8.a to L.8.f require a variance pursuant to RMC 4-9-250B in order to be conducted. h. When Variance Is Required: If the proposed alteration applicable to Subsections L.8.a to L.8.g does not meet the above criteria, it shall require a variance per Subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-250B in order to be conducted. 9. Incentives for Restoration of Streams Located in an Underground Pipe or Culvert: Daylighting of culverted watercourses should be encouraged and allowed with the following incentives: a. Modified Standards: i. Residential Zones: Setbacks, lot width and lot depth standards of RMC 4-2 may be reduced by the Reviewing Official without requirement of a variance for lots 114 ORDINANCE NO. that abut the daylighted watercourse to accommodate the same number of lots as if the watercourse were not daylighted. ii. Mixed Use, Commercial, and Industrial Zones: (a) Where greater lot coverage allowances are provided for structured parking in RMC 4-2, lot coverage may be increased to the limit allowed for structured parking if instead a stream is daylighted. The increase in impervious surface allowed shall be equal to the area of stream restoration. (b) Density bonuses may be allowed pursuant to RMC 4-9- 065 where specified. b. Standard buffers may be reduced per 4-3-050.L.5.c. If reduced buffers in L.5.c along with other development standards of the zone would not allow the same development level as without the watercourse daylighting, a modification may be requested in 4- 3-050.N. c. When designed consistent with the City's flood regulations in RMC 4- 3-050.1.6, portions of the daylighted stream/created buffer may be considered part of compensatory storage in flood hazard areas. d. Stream relocation is permitted subject to RMC 4-3-050.L.8. M. WETLANDS: 1. Applicability: The wetland regulations apply to sites containing or abutting wetlands as described below. Category 3 wetlands, less than two thousand two hundred (2,200) square feet in area, are exempt from these regulations if they meet exemption criteria in RMC 4- 3-050.C. 115 ORDINANCE NO. a. Classification System: The following classification system is hereby adopted for the purposes of regulating wetlands in the City. Wetlands buffer widths, replacement ratios and avoidance criteria shall be based on the following rating system: i. Category 1: Category 1 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a)The presence of species listed by Federal or State government as endangered or threatened,or the presence of essential habitat for those species; and/or (b) Wetlands having forty percent (40%) to sixty percent (60%)permanent open water(in dispersed patches or otherwise) with two (2) or more vegetation classes; and/or (c) Wetlands equal to or greater than ten (10)acres in size and having three (3) or more vegetation classes, one of which is open water; and/or (d)The presence of plant associations of infrequent occurrence; or at the geographic limits of their occurrence; and/or ii. Category 2: Category 2 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are not Category 1 or 3 wetlands; and/or (b) Wetlands that have heron rookeries or osprey nests, but are not Category 1 wetlands; and/or (c) Wetlands of any size located at the headwaters of a watercourse, i.e. a wetland with a perennial or seasonal outflow channel, but with no defined influent channel, but are not Category 1 wetlands; and/or 116 ORDINANCE NO. (d) Wetlands having minimum existing evidence of human related physical alteration such as diking, ditching or channelization; and/or iii. Category 3: Category 3 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a)Wetlands that are severely disturbed. Severely disturbed wetlands are wetlands which meet the following criteria: (i) Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydrologic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; and (ii)Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or compaction of soils; and (iii) May have altered vegetation. (b) Wetlands that are newly emerging. Newly emerging wetlands are: (i)Wetlands occurring on top of fill materials; and (ii) Characterized by emergent vegetation, low plant species richness and used minimally by wildlife. These wetlands are generally found in the areas such as the Green River Valley and Black River Drainage Basin. (c) All other wetlands not classified as Category 1 or 2 such as smaller, high quality wetlands. b. Maps and Inventory: 117 ORDINANCE NO. i. The approximate location and extent of wetlands in the City is displayed in subsection Q of this Section,Maps. The map is to be used as a guide to the general location and extent of wetlands. ii. Wetlands which are defined in subsection M.1.a of this Section, Classification System, but not shown on the Renton Wetlands Map Inventory, are presumed to exist in the City and are also protected under all the provisions of this section. iii. The actual presence or absence of the wetland criteria listed above, as determined by qualified professionals, shall govern the treatment of an individual building site or parcel of land requiring compliance with these regulations. c. Delineation of Wetland Edge: For the purpose of regulation, the wetland edge shpuld be delineated pursuant to subsection M4 of this Section. d. Regulated and Nonregulated Wetlands: Refer to subsection Mla and MY of this Section for applicability thresholds for regulatory and nonregulatory wetlands. e. Performance Standards: In addition to general standards of subsection E of this Section, the following performance standards apply to all regulated wetlands. i. Regulated and Nonregulated Wetlands—General: Wetlands created or restored as a part of a mitigation project are regulated wetlands. Regulated wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites for purposes other than wetland mitigation, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm pond, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990 that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. The Department 118 ORDINANCE NO. Administrator shall determine that a wetland is not regulated on the basis of photographs, statements, and other evidence. ii. Nonregulated Category 3 Wetlands: Based upon an applicant request, the Department Administrator may determine that Category 3 wetlands are not considered regulated wetlands, if the applicant demonstrates the following criteria are met: (a)The wetland formed on top of fill legally placed on a property; and (b)The wetland hydrology is solely provided by the compaction of the soil and fill material; and (c)The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has determined that they will not take jurisdiction over the wetland. 2. General Standards for Permit Approval: Permit approval by the Reviewing Official for projects involving regulated wetlands or wetland buffers shall be granted only if the approval is consistent with the provisions of this section. Additionally, approvals shall only be granted if: a. A proposed action avoids adverse impacts to regulated wetlands or their buffers or takes affirmative and appropriate measures to minimize and compensate for unavoidable impacts; and b. The proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated wetland area, value, or function in the drainage basin where the wetland is located; or c. A variance process is successfully completed to determine conditions for permitting of activity requested including measures to reduce impacts as appropriate. 3. Study Required: 119 ORDINANCE NO. a. When Study Is Required: Wetland assessments are required as follows: i. Wetland Classification: The applicant shall be required to conduct a study to determine the classification of the wetland if the subject property or project area is within one hundred feet (100) of a wetland even if the wetland is not located on the subject property but it is determined that alterations of the subject property are likely to impact the wetland in question or its buffer. If there is a potential Category 1 or 2 wetland within three hundred(300) feet of a proposal,the City may require an applicant to conduct a study even if the wetland is not located on the subject property but it is determined that alterations of the subject property are likely to impact the wetland in question or its buffer. ii. Wetland Delineation: A wetland delineation is required for any portion of a wetland on the subject property that will be impacted by the permitted activities. b. Study Waived: The wetland assessment shall be waived by the Department Administrator when the applicant provides satisfactory evidence that a road, building or other barrier exists between the wetland and the proposed activity, or when the buffer area needed or required will not intrude on the applicant's lot, or when applicable data and analysis appropriate to the project proposed exists and an additional report is not necessary. 4. Delineation of Regulatory Edge of Wetlands: a. Methodology: For the purpose of regulation, the exact location of the wetland edge shall be determined by the wetlands specialist hired at the expense of the applicant through the performance of a field investigation using the procedures provided in the following manual: Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, Washington State Department of Ecology,March 1997,Ecology Publication #96-94. 120 8 ORDINANCE NO. b. Delineations—Open Water: Where wetlands are contiguous with areas of open freshwater, streams, or rivers, the delineation shall be consistent with the Washington State Wetlands Rating System: Western Washington, Second Edition, Washington State Department of Ecology, August 1993,Publication #93-74, Appendix 5, or another accepted Federal or State methodology, subject to City review. c. Adjustments to Delineation by City: Where the applicant has provided a delineation of the wetland edge, the City shall review and may render adjustments to the edge delineation. In the event the adjusted edge delineation is contested by the applicant, the City shall at the applicant's expense, obtain the services of an additional qualified wetlands specialist to review the original study and render a final delineation. d. Period of Validity for Wetland Delineation: i. Within City Limits: A final wetland delineation, for properties within the city limits at the time the delineation was prepared, is valid for five (5) years, unless the Administrator determines that conditions have changed. ii. Outside City Limits: The period of validity of wetland delineations for properties, which were unincorporated at the time of the delineation, will be determined by the Administrator. Following a review of a wetland delineation prepared for a unincorporated property, since annexed into the city, the Administrator may require adjustments be made to the study or a new study prepared, per subsection M3 of this Section, Delineation of Regulatory Edge of Wetlands. 5. Determination of Wetland Classification: Wetland studies shall determine the appropriate wetland classification according to subsection M1 of this Section, Wetlands. The City may accept a dual wetland classification for a wetland exhibiting a combination of Category 121 AMEMNIMM ORDINANCE NO. 1 and 2 features or a combination of Category 1 and 3 features. The City will not accept a dual rating for a Category 2 wetland, such as a combined Category 2 and 3 rating. Dual ratings for a Category 1 wetland shall be consistent with the Washington State Wetlands Rating System: Western Washington, Second Edition, Washington State Department of Ecology, August 1993, Publication #93-74 or as thereafter amended or updated. 6. Wetland Buffers: a. Buffers Required: i. Wetland buffer zones shall be required of all proposed regulated activities abutting regulated wetlands. ii. Any wetland created, restored, or enhanced in conjunction with creation or restoration as compensation for approved wetland alterations shall include the standard buffer required for the class of the wetland being replaced. iii. All required wetland buffer zones shall be retained in their natural condition. Category 3 wetland buffers of 25 feet require the buffers be fully vegetated with native species or restored; otherwise increased buffer widths to protect functions and values may be required. iv. Where buffer disturbance has occurred during construction or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation may be required. b. Measurement of Buffers: All buffers shall be measured from the wetland boundary as surveyed in the field pursuant to the requirements of subsection M4a of this Section, Methodology. c. Standard Buffer Zone Widths: 122 ORDINANCE NO. i. The width of the required wetland buffer zone shall be determined according to the wetland category. The buffer zone required for all regulated wetlands is determined by the classification of the wetland. If standard buffer widths cannot be met, and buffer reductions per subsection M6e of this Section, and buffer averaging per subsection M6f cannot be accomplished, a variance to buffer requirements may be requested per subsection N of this Section, Alternates, Modifications and Variances, and RMC 4-9-250B, Variance Procedures. If the criteria in subsection d below are met, standard buffers may be increased. Wetland Category'Standard Buffer] Category 1 100 feet Category 2 50 feet 1 Category 3 125 feet ii. To protect the buffer functions, the Reviewing Official shall condition permits as appropriate to the nature of the development. Conditions of approval may include, but are not limited to, the following: (a)Fencing pursuant to RMC 4-3-050.E.4.e, plant materials, and signage pursuant to RMC 4-3-050.E.4.f, to limit pet and human disturbance; (b)Directing lights from buildings or parking areas, or noise generating activities, away from the wetland; (c) Implementing water quality treatment measures required in RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards; (d) Avoidance of buffer disturbance and retention of the buffer in a natural condition consistent with 4-3-050.M.6.a. 123 ORDINANCE NO. d. Increased Wetland Buffer Zone Width: Each applicant shall document in required wetland assessments whether the criteria d.i through d.iv are or are not met and increased wetland buffers are warranted. Based on the applicant's report or third party review, the Responsible Official may require increased standard buffer zone widths in unique cases, i.e., endangered species, very fragile areas, when a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetlands functions and values. Such determination shall be attached as a condition of project approval. Analysis shall be prepared as directed in subsection v, and notification shall be given pursuant to criteria vi. i. The wetland is used by species listed by the Federal or the State government as threatened, endangered and sensitive species and State-listed priority species, essential habitat for those species or has unusual nesting or resting sites such as heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees or evidence thereof; or ii. The subject property, or nearby lands to which the subject property drains in route to a wetland are susceptible to severe erosion, and erosion control measures will not effectively prevent adverse wetland impacts; or iii. The subject property, or nearby lands to which the subject property drains in route to a wetland have minimal vegetative cover or slopes greater than fifteen percent (15%) and conditions cannot be restored to prevent adverse wetland impacts; or iv. Wetland dependent wildlife species are observed to be present in the wetland, and may require larger buffers based upon the evaluation in subsection v; and v. For proposals meeting any of the criteria in subsections i to iv, buffers are established using a site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management of 124 ORDINANCE NO. Wetlands, McMillan 2000, Wetlands in Washington State Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands, Appendix 8C (Hruby et al. 2005), or similar approaches; and. vi. Notification is given consistent with Subsection F8. e. Reduction of Buffer Width: Based upon an applicant's request, the Administrator may approve a reduction in the standard wetland buffer zone widths on a case-by- case basis for Class 1 and 2 wetlands where the applicant can demonstrate compliance with subsections M6ei and iii or ii and iii below. Such determination and evidence shall be included in the application file and public notification shall be given in accordance with M6eiv. Conditions may be applied in accordance with subsection v. i. The buffer area land is extensively vegetated and has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes and no direct or indirect, short-term or long-term, adverse impacts to regulated wetlands, as determined by the City, will result from a regulated activity. The City's determination shall be based on specific site studies by recognized experts. The City may require long-term monitoring of the project and subsequent corrective actions if adverse impacts to regulated wetlands are discovered; or ii. The project includes a buffer enhancement plan using native vegetation and substantiates that the enhanced buffer will be equal to or improve the functional attributes of the buffer. An enhanced buffer shall not result in greater than a twenty five percent (25%) reduction in the buffer width. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance per subsection N3 of this Section. iii. The proposal shall rely upon a site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management of Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches. The 125 ORDINANCE NO. proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iv. Public notification of the buffer reduction determination shall be given as follows: (a)For applications that are not subject to notices of application per RMC 4-8, notice of the buffer determination shall be given by posting the site and notifying parties of record, if any, in accordance with RMC 4-8. (b) For applications that are subject to notices of application, the buffer determination or request for determination shall be included with notice of application. Upon determination, notification of parties of record, if any, shall be made. v. The Reviewing Official shall apply conditions of approval equivalent or greater than those identified in M.6.c.ii to ensure that the reduced buffer width protect the functions and values of the associated wetlands. f. Averaging of Buffer Width: Standard wetland buffer zones may be modified by averaging buffer widths. Upon applicant request, wetland buffer width averaging may be allowed by the Department Administrator only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. That the wetland contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the wetland and buffer; and ii. That width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland function and values; and 126 ORDINANCE NO. iii.That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and iv. A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management of Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches have been conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195- 905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. v. In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than fifty percent (50%) of the standard buffer or be less than twenty five feet (25.') wide. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance per subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-250B; and vi. Buffer enhancement in the areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required on a case-by-case basis where appropriate to site conditions, wetland sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. vii. Notification may be required pursuant to Subsection F8. 7. Wetlands—Native Growth Protection Areas: As a condition of any approval issued pursuant to this section for any development permit, the property owner shall be required to create a separate native growth protection area containing the areas determined to be wetland and/or wetland buffer in field investigations performed pursuant to subsections M4,Delineation of Regulatory Edge of Wetlands, and M5, Determination of Wetland Classification. Native growth protection areas shall be established pursuant to subsection E.4 of this Section. 127 ORDINANCE NO. 8. Wetland Changes—Alternative Methods of Development: If wetland changes are proposed for a non-exempt activity, the applicant shall evaluate alternative methods of developing the property using the following criteria in this order and provide reasons why a less intrusive method of development is not feasible. In determining whether to grant permit approval per subsection M2 of this Section, General Standards for Permit Approval,the Reviewing Official shall make a determination as to whether the feasibility of less intrusive methods of development have been adequately evaluated and that less intrusive methods of development are not feasible: a. Avoid any disturbances to the wetland or buffer; b. Minimize any wetland or buffer impacts; c. Restore any wetlands or buffer impacted or lost temporarily; and d. Compensate for any permanent wetland or buffer impacts by one of the following methods: i. Restoring a former wetland and provide buffers at a site once exhibiting wetland characteristics to compensate for wetlands lost; ii. Creating new wetlands and buffers for those lost; and iii. In addition to restoring or creating a wetland, enhancing an existing degraded wetland to compensate for lost functions and values. 9. Compensating for Wetlands Impacts: a. Goal: The overall goal of any compensatory project shall be no net loss of wetland function and acreage and to strive for a net resource gain in wetlands over present conditions. The concept of"no net loss" means to create, restore and/or enhance a wetland so that there is no reduction to total wetland acreage and/or function. 128 ORDINANCE NO. b. Plan Requirements: The applicant shall develop a plan that provides for land acquisition,construction, maintenance and monitoring of replacement wetlands that recreate as nearly as possible the wetland being replaced in terms of acreage, function, geographic location and setting, and that are equal to or larger than the original wetlands. c. Plan Performance Standards: Compensatory mitigation shall follow an approved mitigation plan pursuant to subsections M8 to M10 of this Section and shall meet the minimum performance standards in subsection 4-3-050.F.8. d. Acceptable Mitigation —Permanent Wetland Impacts: Any person who alters regulated wetlands shall restore or create equivalent areas or greater areas of wetlands than those altered in order to compensate for wetland losses. Enhancement of wetlands may be provided as mitigation if it is conducted in conjunction with mitigation proposed to create or restore a wetland in order to maintain "no net loss" of wetland acreage. Subsections Ml0 through M12 provide further detail on wetland restoration, creation, and enhancement. e. Restoration, Creation, or Combined Enhancement Required— Compensation for Permanent Wetland Impacts: As a condition of any permit allowing alteration of wetlands and/or wetland buffers, or as an enforcement action the City shall require that the applicant engage in the restoration or creation of wetlands and their buffers (or funding of these activities) in order to offset the impacts resulting from the applicant's or violator's actions. Enhancement in conjunction with restoration or creation may be allowed in order to offset the impacts resulting from an applicant's actions. Enhancement is not allowed as compensation for a violator's actions. 129 ORDINANCE NO. f. Compensating for Temporary Wetland Impacts: Where wetland disturbance has occurred during construction or other activities, see subsection C5f(iii) of this Section. g. Mitigation Bank Agreement—Glacier Park Company: Pursuant to the Wetland Mitigation Bank Agreement between the City and the Glacier Park Company, King County recording number 9206241805, wetland alteration and wetland mitigation shall be conducted in accordance with the agreement. 10. Wetland Compensation—Restoration, Creation, and Enhancement: The applicant may propose a mitigation approach that includes restoration or creation solely or combines restoration or creation with enhancement. The City may require one mitigation approach in favor of another if it is determined that: a. There is a greater probability of success in ensuring no net loss of wetlands acreage, functions, and values; and b. The mitigation approach can be accomplished on-site rather than off- site. 11. Wetlands Creation and Restoration: a. Creation or Restoration Proposals: Any applicant proposing to alter wetlands may propose to restore wetlands or create new wetlands, with priority first for on-site restoration or creation and then second, within the drainage basin, in order to compensate for wetland losses. Restoration activities must include restoring lost hydrologic, water quality and biologic functions. 130 ORDINANCE NO. b. Compliance with Goals: Applicants proposing to restore or create wetlands shall identify how the restoration or creation plan conforms to the purposes and requirements of this section and established regional goals of no net loss of wetlands. c. Category: Where feasible, created or restored wetlands shall be a higher category than the altered wetland. In no cases shall they be lower, except as follows: For impacts to Category 1 shrub-scrub and emergent wetlands, if it is infeasible to create or restore a site to become a Category 1 wetland, the Administrator may allow for creation/restoration of high quality Category 2 wetlands at one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the normally required creation/replacement ratios of Category 1 shrub-scrub or emergent wetlands, within the basin. d. Design Criteria: Requirements for wetland restoration or creation as compensation areas shall be determined according to the function, acreage, type and location of the wetland being replaced. Compensation requirements should also consider time factors, the ability of the project to be self-sustaining and the projected success based on similar projects. Wetland functions and values shall be calculated using the best professional judgment of a qualified wetland ecologist using the best available techniques. Multiple or cooperative compensation projects may be proposed for one project in order to best achieve the goal of no net loss. Restoration or creation must be within the same drainage basin. e. Acreage Replacement Ratio: The ratios listed in subsections Ml le(i), Ratios For Wetland Creation or Restoration, apply to all Category 1, 2, or 3 wetlands for restoration or creation which is in-kind, on- or off-site, timed prior to alteration, and has a high probability of success. The required ratio must be based on the wetland category and type that require replacement. Ratios are determined by the probability of recreating successfully the 131 ORDINANCE NO. wetland and the inability of guarantees of functionality, longevity, and duplication of type and/or functions. i. RATIOS FOR WETLANDS CREATION OR RESTORATION: Wetland Category Vegetation Type Creation/Restoration Ratio Category 1 Forested 6 times the area altered. Scrub-shrub 3 times the area altered. Emergent 2 times the area altered. Category 2 Forested 3 times the area altered. Scrub-shrub 2 times the area altered. Emergent 1.5 times the area altered. I Category 3 Forested 1.5 times the area altered. Scrub-shrub 1.5 times the area altered. 1 Emergent 1 1.5 times the area altered. f. Increased Creation/Restoration/Replacement Ratios: The Reviewing Official may increase the ratios under the following circumstances: uncertainty as to the probable success of the proposed restoration or creation; significant period of time between destruction and replication of wetland functions; projected losses in functional value; or off-site compensation. The requirement for an increased replacement ratio will be determined through SEPA review, except in the case of remedial actions resulting from illegal alterations where the Administrator or Environmental Review Committee may require increased wetland replacement ratios. g. Decreased Creation/Restoration/Replacement Ratios: i. Category 1: The Reviewing Official may decrease the ratios for Category 1 forested and scrub-shrub wetlands to 2.0 times the area altered, and to 1.5 times the area altered for emergent wetlands, provided the applicant has successfully replaced the wetland 132 • ORDINANCE NO. • prior to its filling and has shown that the replacement is successfully established for five (5) years. ii. Category 2: The Reviewing Official may decrease the ratios for Category 2 forested and scrub-shrub wetlands to 1.5 times the area altered provided the applicant has successfully replaced the wetland prior to its filling and has shown that the replacement is successfully established for two (2) years. Ratios for Category 2 emergent wetlands may be reduced to 1.25 times the area altered provided the applicant has successfully replaced the wetland prior to its filling and has shown that the replacement is successfully established for two (2) years. iii. Category 3: (1)The Reviewing Official may decrease the ratios for Category 3 emergent wetlands to 1.0 times the area altered provided the applicant has successfully replaced the wetland prior to its filling and has shown that the replacement is successfully established for twelve (12) months. Ratios for Category 3 scrub-shrub and forested wetlands may be reduced to 1.25 times the area altered provided the applicant has successfully replaced the wetland prior to its filling and has shown that the replacement is successfully established for two (2) years. (2) If the applicant can aggregate two (2) or more Category 3 wetlands, each less than ten thousand(10,000) square feet, into one wetland, the replacement ratio shall be reduced to 1:1. If the combined wetland would be rated as a Category 2 wetland as a result of the combination, the buffer requirement may be reduced to twenty five feet(25) minimum provided the buffer is enhanced. 133 ORDINANCE NO. h. Category 3 Replacement Option: The applicant, at his/her expense, may select to use accepted Federal or State methods to establish the functions and values for the Category 3 wetland being replaced in lieu of replacement by acreage only. A third party review, funded by the applicant, and hired and managed by the City, shall review and verify the reports. Dependent upon the results of the functions and values evaluation, a Category 3 wetland may be replaced by assuring that all the functions and values are replaced in another location, within the same basin. i. Minimum Restoration/Creation Ratio: Unless allowed by subsection Ml lg of this Section, restoration or creation ratios may only be reduced by modification or variance pursuant to subsection N, Alternates, Modifications and Variances, and RMC 4-9-250B, Variance Procedures, and RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures. In order to maintain no net loss of wetland acreage, in no case shall the restoration or creation ratio be less than 1:1. This minimum ratio may not be modified through the modification or variance process. 12. Wetland Enhancement: a. Enhancement Proposals—Combined with Restoration and Creation: Any applicant proposing to alter wetlands may propose to enhance an existing degraded wetland, in conjunction with restoration or creation of a wetland in order to compensate for wetland losses. Wetland enhancement shall not be allowed as compensation if it is not accomplished in conjunction with a proposal to restore or create a wetland. b.Evaluation Criteria: A wetland enhancement compensation project may be approved by the Reviewing Official provided that enhancement for one function will not degrade another function unless the enhancement would provide a higher functioning wetland with greater or multiple environmental benefits. For example, an enhancement may degrade 134 ORDINANCE NO. • habitat for one wildlife species but overall it may result in a wetland that provides higher function to a wider variety of wildlife species. Wetland function assessment shall be conducted in conformance with accepted Federal or State methodologies. c. Wetlands Chosen for Enhancement: An applicant proposing to alter wetlands may propose to enhance an existing Category 2 or 3 wetland. Existing Category 1 wetlands shall not be enhanced to compensate for wetland alteration unless the wetland selected for enhancement is a Category 1 wetland only by virtue of its acreage and three (3) vegetation classes, where the existing vegetation is characterized partly or wholly by invasive wetland species. d. Mitigation Ratios: Wetland alterations shall be created, restored and enhanced using the formulas in subsection M12d(i), Ratios for Wetland Restoration or Creation plus Enhancement. The following is an example of use of the formulas below: If one acre of Category 2, forested wetland, were proposed to be removed, the creation/replacement ratio (subsection M1 le(i)) requires that three (3) acres of forested Category 2 wetland be restored or created; if wetland enhancement were proposed (subsection M12d(i)) for the Category 2, forested wetland, 1.5 acres of forested Category 2 wetland would have to be created/restored and two (2) acres of forested Category 2 wetland enhanced, possibly in a different part of the same wetland. i. RATIOS FOR WETLAND RESTORATION OR CREATION PLUS ENHANCEMENT Wetland Category Vegetation Type Restoration or Creation Ratio! I Enhancement Ratio Forested 3 times the area altered plus! 3.5 times the area altered! Category 1 Scrub-shrub 1.5 times the area altered I plus 2 times the area altered i Emergent i 1 times the area altered !plus! 1.5 times the area altered } Category 2 Scrub-shruboForested 1.5 times the area altered !plus!2 times the area altered ! 1 times the area altered plus 1.5 times the area altered! 135 ORDINANCE NO. i.RATIOS FOR WETLAND RESTORATION OR CREATION PLUS ENHANCEMENT ,Wetland Category,Vegetation Type,Restoration or Creation Ratio Enhancement Ratio ikmergent1 times the area altered plusl l times the area altered Category 3 I Forested 1 times the area altered j plus 1 times the area altered Scrub-shrub 1 times the area altered I plus 1 times the area altered Emergent 1 times the area altered plus; 1 times the area altered e. Ratio Modification and Minimum Restoration/Creation Ratio: i. An applicant may propose an increased creation or restoration ratio and a decreased enhancement ratio if the total combined ratio is maintained overall. Restoration/creation or enhancement ratios shown in subsection M12d of this Section may only be reduced by modification or variance pursuant to subsection N3, Alternatives, Modifications and Variances, and RMC 4-9-250B, Variance Procedures, and RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures. In order to maintain no net loss of wetland acreage, in no case shall the restoration or creation ratio be less than 1:1. This minimum ratio may not be modified through the variance process. ii. The Reviewing Official may increase the ratios under the following circumstances: uncertainty as to the probable success of the proposed restoration or creation or enhancement proposal; significant period of time between destruction and replication of wetland functions; projected losses in functional value; or off-site compensation. The requirement for an increased mitigation ratio will be determined through SEPA review, except in the case of remedial actions resulting from illegal alterations where the Administrator or Environmental Review Committee may require increased mitigation ratios. 136 ORDINANCE NO. 13. Out-of-Kind Replacement: Out-of-kind replacement may be used in place of in-kind compensation only where the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Reviewing Official that: a. The wetland system is already significantly degraded and out-of-kind replacement will result in a wetland with greater functional value; or b. Scientific problems such as exotic vegetation and changes in watershed hydrology make implementation of in-kind compensation impossible or unacceptable; or c. Out-of-kind replacement will best meet identified regional goals (e.g., replacement of historically diminished wetland types). 14. Off-Site Compensation: a. When Permitted: Off-site compensation may be provided in lieu of on- site compensation only where the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Responsible Official that: i. The hydrology and ecosystem of the original wetland and those abutting or adjacent land and/or wetlands which benefit from the hydrology and ecosystem will not be substantially damaged by the on-site loss; and ii. On-site compensation is not feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, or other factors; or iii. Compensation is not practical due to potentially adverse impact from surrounding land uses; or iv. The proposed wetland functions at the mitigation site are significantly greater than the wetland functions that could be reasonably achieved with on-site 137 ORDINANCE NO. , mitigation, and there is no significant loss of function on-site, i.e. at the development project site; or v. Established regional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat or other wetland functions have been addressed and strongly justify location of compensatory measures at another site. b. Locations: Any off-site compensation shall follow the preferences in "i" to"iii" below. Basins and subbasins are indicated in 4-3-050.Q,Maps: i. Off-site mitigation within same drainage subbasin as subject site: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage subbasin as the subject site subject to criteria in M.14.a above; ii. Off-site mitigation within same drainage basin within City limits: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions within the City over mitigation within the same drainage subbasin as the project, and shall be subject to criteria in M.14.a above; iii. Off-site mitigation within the same drainage basin outside the City limits: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin outside the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions over mitigation within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits and it meets City goals, and shall be subject to criteria in M.14.a above. c. Siting Recommendations: In selecting compensation sites, the City encourages applicants to pursue siting compensation projects in disturbed sites which were 138 • ORDINANCE NO. formerly wetlands, and especially those areas which would result in a series of interconnected wetlands. d. Timing: Compensatory projects shall be substantially completed and approved by the City prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. Construction of compensation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing wildlife and flora. The Reviewing Official may elect to require a surety device for completion of construction. 15. Cooperative Wetland Compensation: Mitigation Banks or Special Area Management Programs (SAMP): a. Applicability: The City encourages, and will facilitate and approve cooperative projects wherein a single applicant or other organization with demonstrated capability may undertake a compensation project under the following circumstances: i. Restoration or creation on-site may not be feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, or other factors; or ii. Where the cooperative plan is shown to better meet established regional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat or other wetland functions. b. Process: Applicants proposing a cooperative compensation project shall: i. Submit a permit application; ii. Demonstrate compliance with all standards; iii. Demonstrate that long-term management will be provided; and iv. Demonstrate agreement for the project from all affected property owners of record. 139 ORDINANCE NO. c. Mitigation Banks: Mitigation banks are defined as sites which may be used for restoration,creation and/or mitigation of wetland alternatives from a different piece of property than the property to be altered within the same drainage basin. The City of Renton maintains a mitigation bank. A list of City mitigation bank sites is maintained by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department. With the approval of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department, non-City-controlled mitigation banks may be established and utilized. d. Special Area Management Programs: Special area management programs are those wetland programs agreed upon through an interjurisdictional planning process involving the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Washington State Department of Ecology, any affected counties and/or cities, private property owners and other parties of interest. The outcome of the process is a regional wetlands permit representing a plan of action for all wetlands within the special area. e. Compensation Payments to Mitigation Bank: Compensation payments, amount to be determined by the Reviewing Official, received as part of a mitigation or creation bank must be received prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. 16. Mitigation Plans: a. Required for Restoration, Creation and Enhancement Projects: All wetland restoration, creation, and enhancement in conjunction with restoration and creation projects required pursuant to this section either as a permit condition or as the result of an enforcement action shall follow a mitigation plan prepared by qualified wetland specialists approved by the City. b.Timing for Mitigation Plan Submittal and Commencement of any Work: See subsection F.B. 140 ORDINANCE NO. • c. Content of Mitigation Plan: Unless the City, in consultation with qualified wetland specialists, determines, based on the size and scope of the development proposal, the nature of the impacted wetland and the degree of cumulative impacts on the wetland from other development proposals, that the scope and specific requirements of the mitigation plan may be reduced, the mitigation plan shall address all requirements in RMC 4-8- 120D23, Wetland Mitigation Plan and RMC 4-3-050F8. d. Performance Surety: As a condition of approval of any mitigation plan, the Reviewing Official shall require a performance surety per RMC 4-1-230 and RMC 4-3- 050.G. N. ALTERNATES, MODIFICATIONS AND VARIANCES: 1. Alternates: a. Applicability: See RMC 4-9-250E. 2. Modifications: a. Applicability: The Department Administrator may grant modifications, per RMC 4-9-250D1, Application Time and Decision Authority, in the following circumstances: i. Aquifer Protection—Modifications: The Department will consider modification applications in the following cases: (a)The request is to find that a standard is inapplicable to that activity, facility, or development permit due to the applicant's proposed methods or location; or (b)The request is to modify a specific standard or regulation due to practical difficulties; and 141 ORDINANCE NO. (c)The request meets the intent and purpose of the aquifer protection regulations. Based upon application of the above tests (a), (b), and (c), applications which are considered appropriate for review as modifications are subject to the procedures and criteria in RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures. Requests to modify regulations or standards which do not meet the above tests shall be processed as variances. (d) In addition to the criteria of RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. ii. Geologic Hazards—Modifications: An applicant may request that the Administrator grant a modification to allow: (a) Regrading of any slope which was created through previous mineral and natural resource recovery activities or was created prior to adoption of applicable mineral and natural resource recovery regulations or through public or private road installation or widening and related transportation improvements, railroad track installation or improvement, or public or private utility installation activities; (b)Filling against the toe of a natural rock wall or rock wall created through mineral and natural resource recovery activities or through public or private road installation or widening and related transportation improvements, railroad track installation or improvement or public or private utility installation activities; and/or (c) Grading to the extent that it eliminates all or portions of a mound or to allow reconfiguration of protected slopes created through mineral and natural 142 ORDINANCE NO. resource recovery activities or public or private road installation or widening and related transportation improvements, railroad track installation or improvement, or public or private utility installation activities. The following procedures shall apply to any of the above activities: (a)The applicant shall submit a geotechnical report describing any potential impacts of the proposed regrading and any necessary mitigation measures; (b) All submitted reports shall be independently reviewed by qualified specialists selected by the City at the applicant's expense; (c)The Department Administrator may grant, condition, or deny the request based upon the proposal's compliance with the applicable modification criteria of RMC 4-9-250D; and (d) Any slope which remains forty percent (40%) or steeper following site development shall be subject to all applicable geologic hazard regulations for steep slopes and landslide hazards, in this section. (e) In addition to the criteria of RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iii. Wetlands—Modifications: An applicant may request that the Administrator grant a modification as follows: 143 ORDINANCE NO. (a)Modifications may be requested for a reduction in creation/restoration or enhancement ratios for a Category 3 wetland; however, the creation/restoration ratio shall not be reduced below 1:1. (b) In addition to the criteria of RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: (i)The proposal will result in no-net loss of wetland or buffer area and functions. (ii)The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iv. Streams—Modifications: An applicant may request that the Administrator grant a modification as follows: (a) Modifications may be requested for a reduction in stream buffers for Class 2 or 3 watercourses proposed to be daylighted, below the stream buffer reduction levels of 4-3-050.L.5.c. (b) In addition to the criteria of RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: (i)The buffer is lowered only to the amount necessary to achieve the same amount of development as without the daylighting. (ii)The buffer width is no less than 50 feet on a Class 2 watercourse and 25 feet on a Class 3 watercourse. 144 ORDINANCE NO. (iii)The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. 3. Variances: a. Aquifer Protection —Variance: i. Applicability: If an applicant feels that the strict application of this Section would deny all reasonable use of the property or would deny installation of public transportation or utility facilities determined by the public agency proposing these facilities to be in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare, the applicant of a development proposal may apply for a variance. ii. Application Submittal: An application for a variance shall be filed with the Development Services Division. iii. Review Authority: A variance shall be decided by the Hearing Examiner based on the standards set forth RMC 4-9-250B, Variance Procedures. b. Flood Hazards—Variances: i. Applicability: Refer to RMC 4-9-250B. c. Geologic Hazards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes—Classes 2 to 4, and Wetlands—Variance: i. Applicability: If an applicant feels that the strict application of this section would deny all reasonable use of the property containing a critical area or associated buffer, or would deny installation of public transportation or utility facilities determined by the agency proposing these facilities to be in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare, 145 ORDINANCE NO. the public agency or an applicant of a development proposal may apply for a critical area variance. ii. Application Submittal: An application for a critical areas variance shall be filed with the Development Services Division. iii. Review Authority: Variances shall be determined administratively by the Department Administrator, or by the Hearing Examiner, as indicated in RMC 4-9-250B. O. APPEALS: 1. General: See RMC 4-8-070, Authority and Responsibilities, and RMC 4-8-110. 2. Record Required—Flood Hazards: The Department Administrator or his/her designee, the Building Official, shall maintain the records of all appeal actions and report any variances to the Federal Insurance Administration upon request. P. ASSESSMENT RELIEF—WETLANDS: 1. City Assessments: Such landowner should also be exempted from all special City assessments on the controlled wetland to defray the cost of Municipal improvements such as sanitary sewers, storm sewers, water mains and streets. Q. MAPS: 1. Aquifer Protection: See Figure 4-3-050Q1 for reference map. 2. Flood Hazards: see Figure 4-3-050Q2 for reference map. 3. Geologic Hazards: a. Coal Mine Hazards: i. Map: See Figure 4-3-050Q3a(i) for reference map. ii. Mapping Criteria: 146 ORDINANCE NO. (1)Low Coal Mine Hazards (CL): Areas not identified as high or medium hazards. While no mines are known in these areas, undocumented mining is known to have occurred. (2)Medium Coal Mine Hazards (CM): (A)Lands overlying coal mines, but not included in the high hazard category; and (B) Surrounding lands overlying a wedge between a plane rising vertically from the mine and a plane rising from the mine at a break angle of between twenty five (25) and forty (40) degrees. The break angle is measured from the vertical. The break angle appropriate for the given seam is determined by the slope of the seam and the workings. Approximate mine depths and seam dip and break angles are provided in Appendices C and D of the Summary Report, Critical and Resource Areas Evaluation, GeoEngineers, 1991. (3)High Coal Mine Hazard (CH): All lands where underlying coal mines are within two hundred feet (209) below the ground surface, or fifteen (15) times the height of the mine workings below the surface, whichever is less. b. Erosion Hazards: i. Map: See Figure 4-3-050Q3b(i) for reference map. ii. Mapping Criteria: (1) Low Erosion Hazard (EL): All surface soils on slopes less than fifteen percent (15%). Mapped areas include all Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) soils designated A, B, or C. 147 ORDINANCE NO. (2) High Erosion Hazard (EH): All surface soils on slopes steeper than fifteen percent (15%). Mapped areas include all Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) soils designated as D, E, or F. c. Landslide Hazards: i. Map: See Figure 4-3-050Q3c(i) for reference map. ii. Mapping Criteria: (1) Low Landslide Hazard(LL): Areas with slopes less than fifteen percent (15%). (2)Medium Landslide Hazard(LM): areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) where the surface soils are underlain by permeable geologic units.The permeable units include: (A) Fill: af, afm, and m; (B) Alluvium: Qac, Qaw, Qas, and Qa; (C) Vashon recessional and advance glacial deposits: Qik, Qit, Qiv, Qpa, Qis, Qys, Qyg, Qvr, Qsr, and Qos; (D) Vashon glacial deposits: Qg, Qgt,Qt, and Qvt. (3) High Landslide Hazards (LH): Areas with slopes greater than forty percent(40%) and areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) where the surface soils are underlain by low permeability geologic units. The low permeability units include: (A) Post-glacial lake and peat silts: Qlp, Qp, Qlm, and Qvl; 148 ORDINANCE NO. (B)Pre-Vashon Pleistocene deposits: Qss, Qu, Qc, Qcg, and Qog; (C)Tertiary rock formations: Ts, Ti,Tr, Tt,Tet, Ttu, Tta, Teta, and Ttl. (4) Very High Landslide Hazards (LV): All mapped landslide deposits: Qmc, Qm, Ql, and landslides known from public records. d. Seismic: i. Map: See Figure 4-3-050Q3d(i) for reference map. ii. Mapping Criteria: (1) Low Seismic Hazard(SL): All Vashon age glacial and older sediments. The mapped areas include: (A) All deposits of recessional and advance glacial deposits: Qik, Qit, Qiv, Qpa, Qis, Qys, Qyg, Qur, Qsr, Qos, Qog. (B) Vashon glacial deposits: Qg, Qgt, Qt, and Qvt; (C) Pre-Vashon Pleistocene deposits: Qss, Qu, Qc, and Qcg; (D)Tertiary rock formations: Ts, Ti, Tr,Tt,Tet, Ttu, Tta,Teta, and Ttl; (E) Areas of roadway fill, of and afm, which overly the above units. (2) High Seismic Hazard (SH): Post-glacial deposits which are likely to be saturated as they occupy low areas and frequently overlay low permeability deposits. They include: 149 ORDINANCE NO. (A)Deposits of fill: af, afm, and m; (B) Alluvium: Qaw, Qac, Qas, and Qa; (C) Mass wasting deposits: Qmc, Qm, and Ql; (D) Post-glacial lake silts and peats: Qlp, Qp, Qlm, and Qvl. e. Steep Slopes: i. Map: Refer to the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas and Figure 4-3-050Q3e(i) for reference map. f. Volcanic Hazards: Volcanic hazard areas are those areas subject to a potential for inundation from post lahar sedimentation along the lower Green River as identified in Plate II, Map D, in the report U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (Revised 1998). Volcano Hazards from Mount Rainier, Washington. Open-File Report 98-428. 4. Streams and Lakes: See Figure 4-3-050.Q.4 for reference map identifying Class 2 to 4 water bodies. Water class shall be determined in accordance with RMC 4-3- 050.L.1. For Class 1 waters, refer to RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations. 5. Wetlands: Refer to the City of Renton Wetland and Stream Corridors Critical Areas Inventory and see Figure 4-3-050Q5 for reference map. 6.Drainage Basins: See Figure 4-3-050.Q.6 a and b for a map identifying basins and subbasins in the Renton vicinity. SECTION III. Figure 4-3-050.Q.1 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Special Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington" is hereby replaced with the following figure: 150 ORDINANCE NO. FIGURE 4-3-050Q1 AQUIFER PROTECTION ZONES prrmilliii' T.— - \iiiiii:Nii::::1::::k.:1:1:1::::i:Niekiiii ..._3::::::::::::::::::::::::::: E1 v � t 4 J 9 ES ..M ..i:i:iiiiiiiiiiiiiell 3....s...„ 44 g • t..St ilifidi ,4yyK I) SM 111s 5( /•••• S' ::, IPItel ..4f: :•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:::•:•:•:•:•::::. .<.':*I-, k‘-.=.-,i mil Ilis . „...,::::;;::,:„„,,,EE; EEEi; s Y i j �,.1r ,11 E g Pafox1MY • S.I Illi St.i :IT- -..«.,..+t r , ri 8 c,� .,, pi EM , 8 1.•:•:•i:•:•:•::•':••:•:•:•:•::::;}1:!EEE:; ;:::::{;:l::::{:{:{::::: ti•:•}•f:::::::$ KENTT , I' Y /L s zi 1 RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE 0 5280' 10560' Zone 1 //////A Zone 1 Modified 1 ,,,._._._._.,...,.,..... Zone 2 1" = 1 MILE City Limits 151 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION IV. Figure 4-3-050.Q.4 of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Special Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington"is hereby added, to read as follows: 152 ORDINANCE NO. Streams and Lakes Figure 4-3-050.Q.4 • . J ., ll tiw �� ill I �` I .,, �.. i See the detailed map on file with Development Services Division for the location of piped streams. i , �� Class 2 - .NY,. —•-• • Class 3 • nae zoos Class 4 153 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION V. Figure 4-3-050.Q.6.a and Q.6.b of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Special Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington" is hereby added to read as follows: 154 ORDINANCE NO. I • • ! - -410 t ' rt uKEacR^ i Me k`` -- - +..tna Antw.xn i h i k.! ' •'• ,~ --� 1.~ a hin torn 1, ,,,,"--.:17 i, 1111 _ r ;: ,. Duwami'sh a �9 ' ,,,: - .2,1- ,.,tm''. ' s;� 1. • i, vipik..... T -,c. II' t \). 1 ,vF,,,e- It; : ep; C ar, i - _ `/,-<.-' - s: i Black River, .. . 3 ' Sons Creek 1 I '( _— Basin L: , I t -i4 1 cy�Y °� Surface Water Facilities Basins 4+ "12 City Limits April 2005 4-3-050.Q.6.a 155 ORDINANCE NO. ' t, , , '\ -- - .. - dal �+ . .M7Qk• C 4ARM hTL+VE `.� Ouih • 1 '.` r"nnydele. nye et i .P, HOneyCre: r ' -7 la)h RetUpr) JAL ,, - i '''4, ._:::,-,7,,„ �, 4-1 iN .<" ' lii� . 1 �owei ,,�, �s�:.. f :,!‘.11°11"t.,:',:".,: MtOet t * 1P41164. ',, ' . :''' '' 'HI' ' -;' - :'''--S'' ,.,... ,. .. ,i. - llRoirPg}Illi&°%�' ,E', ^'., .Valle ., - _ ,,. — w _' ... • i, f ,Panther Creek- �_,_�.:' , -=j: 9,r,:., ;' �� i- ,_ I 1. . i� .S ori .b::k ;�.,�,., ,, Soos. :e l_-_ ; ,.,;t' .. • ' - U v(:.R)+`+ Surface Water Facilities Sub-Basins NT City Limits April 2005 4-3-050.Q.6.b 156 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION VI. Section 4-4-130 of Chapter 4, Citywide 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: 4-4-130 TREE CUTTING AND LAND CLEARING REGULATIONS: A. PURPOSE: This Section provides regulations for the clearing of land and the protection and preservation of trees and associated significant vegetation. The purposes of these regulations are to: 1. Preserve and enhance the City's physical and aesthetic character by minimizing indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees and ground cover; 2. Implement and further the goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan for the environment, open space, wildlife habitat, vegetation, resources, surface drainage, watersheds, and economics; 3. Promote building and site planning practices that are consistent with the City's natural topographical and vegetative features while at the same time recognizing that certain factors such as condition (e.g., disease, danger of falling, etc.), proximity to existing and proposed structures and improvements, interference with utility services, protection of scenic views, and the realization of a reasonable enjoyment of property may require the removal of certain trees and ground cover; 4. Ensure prompt development, restoration and replanting, and effective erosion control of property during and after land clearing; 5. Promote land development practices that result in minimal adverse disturbance to existing vegetation and soils within the City; 157 ORDINANCE NO. 6. Minimize surface water and groundwater runoff and diversion, and aid in the stabilization of soil, and to minimize erosion and sedimentation, and minimize the need for additional storm drainage facilities caused by the destabilization of soils; 7. Retain clusters of trees for the abatement of noise and for wind protection; and 8. Recognize that trees and ground cover reduce air pollution by producing pure oxygen from carbon dioxide. B. APPLICABILITY: The regulations of this Section apply to any developed, partially developed, or undeveloped property where land development or routine vegetation management activities are undertaken. C. EXEMPTIONS: The following activities are exempt from routine vegetation management permit requirements, and may be authorized without an associated land development permit; however, the activities must be conducted in accordance with stated requirements: 1. Emergency Situations: Removal of trees and/or ground cover by the City and/or public or private utility in emergency situations involving immediate danger to life or property, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services provided by a utility. 2. Dead, Dangerous, or Diseased Trees: Removal of dead, terminally diseased, and/or damaged, ground cover or trees which have been certified as hazard trees by a forester, registered landscape architect, or certified arborist, selection of which to be approved by the City based on the type of information required, or the City prior to their removal. 3. Maintenance Activities/Essential Tree Removal —Public or Private Utilities, Roads and Public Parks: Maintenance activities including routine vegetation management and 158 • ` ORDINANCE NO. essential tree removal for public and private utilities, road rights-of-way and easements, and public parks. 4. Installation of SEPA Exempt Public or Private Utilities: Installation of distribution lines by public and private utilities provided that such activities are categorically exempt from the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act and RMC 4-9-070, Environmental Review Procedures. 5. Existing and Ongoing Agricultural Activities: Clearing associated with existing and ongoing agricultural activities as defined in chapter 4-11 RMC, Definitions. 6. Commercial Nurseries or Tree Farms: Clearing or cutting of only those trees that are planted and growing on the premises of a licensed retailer or wholesaler. 7. Public Road Expansion: Expansion of public roads, unless critical areas would be affected, in which case see C12 and C13. 8. Site Investigative Work: Site investigative work necessary for land use application submittals such as surveys, soil logs, percolation tests, and other related activities including the use of mechanical equipment to perform site investigative work provided the work is conducted in accordance with the following requirements. a. Investigative work should not disturb any more than five percent (5%) of any protected sensitive area described in subsection D2 of this Section, Restrictions for Critical Areas, on the subject property. In every case impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas restored. b. In every location where site investigative work is conducted, disturbed areas shall be minimized, and immediately restored. 159 ORDINANCE NO. • c. A notice shall be posted on the site by the property owner or owner's agent indicating that site investigative work is being conducted, and that the work must minimize disturbance to the critical areas identified in subsection D2 of this Section, Restrictions for Critical Areas. d. No site investigative work shall commence without first notifying the Director or designee in advance. 9. Allowable Minor Tree Cutting Activities: Tree cutting and associated use of mechanical equipment is permitted as follows, except as provided in subsection D2 of this Section,Restrictions for Critical Areas: a. On a developed lot or on a partially developed lot less than one-half (1/2) of an acre any number of trees may be removed; b. On a partially developed lot one-half(1/2) of an acre and greater or on an undeveloped lot provided that: i. No more than three (3) trees are removed in any twelve (12) month period from a property under thirty five thousand (35,000) square feet in size; and ii. No more than six (6) trees are removed in any twelve (12) month period from a property thirty five thousand (35,000) square feet and greater in size. iii. Rights-of-Way Unobstructed: In conducting minor tree cutting activities, rights-of-way shall not be obstructed. 10. Landscaping or Gardening Permitted: Land clearing in conformance with the provisions of subsection C9 of this Section, Allowable Tree Cutting Activities, and subsection D2, Restrictions for Critical Areas, is permitted on a developed lot for purposes of landscaping or gardening. Land clearing in conformance with the provisions of subsection C9, Allowable 160 ORDINANCE NO. • Minor Tree Cutting Activities, and subsection D2, Restrictions for Critical Areas, is permitted on a partially developed or undeveloped lot for purposes of landscaping or gardening provided that no mechanical equipment is used. 11. Operational Mining/Quarrying: Land clearing and tree cutting associated with previously approved, operational mining and quarrying activities. 12. Modification of Existing Utilities and Streets (not otherwise exempted by RMC 4-3-05007) by Ten Percent (10%) or Less: See RMC 4-3-050.0 for conditions. 13. Utilities, Traffic Control, Walkways, Bikeways Within Existing, Improved Right-of-Way or Easements: Within existing improved public road rights-of-way or easements, installation, construction, replacement, operation, overbuilding, or alteration of all natural gas, cable, communication, telephone and electric facilities, lines pipes, mains, equipment or appurtenances, traffic control devices, illumination, walkways and bikeways. If activities exceed the existing improved area or the public right-of-way, this exemption does not apply. Where applicable, restoration of disturbed areas shall be completed. D. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES: 1. Prohibited Activities: There shall be no tree cutting or land clearing on any site for the sake of preparing that site for future development unless a land development permit for the site has been approved by the City. 2. Restrictions for Critical Areas—General: Unless exempted by critical areas, Section 4-3-050.C.5 or Shoreline Master Program Regulations, Section 4-3-090, no tree cutting, or land clearing, or groundcover management is permitted: a. On portions of property with protected critical habitats, per RMC 4-3- 050.K; streams and lakes, per RMC 4-3-050.L; Shorelines of the State, per RMC 4-3-090, 161 ORDINANCE NO. ' • Renton Shoreline Master Program Regulations; and wetlands, per RMC 4-3-050.M; and their associated buffers; b. On protected slopes except as allowed in this Section or in the Critical Areas Regulation, RMC 4-3-050; or c. Areas classified as very high landslide hazards, except as allowed in this Section or in the Critical Areas Regulations, RMC 4-3-050. Buffer requirements shall be consistent with the critical area regulations. Tree cutting or land clearing shall be consistent with established Native Growth Protection Area requirements of RMC 4-3-050E.4. 3. Restrictions for Native Growth Protection Areas: Tree cutting or land clearing shall be consistent with established Native Growth Protection Area requirements of RMC 4-3- 050E.4. E. AUTHORITY AND INTERPRETATION: The City's Development Services Division Director, or his duly authorized representative, is hereby authorized and directed to interpret and enforce all the provisions of this Section. F. PERMITS REQUIRED: 1. Land Development Permit: An approved land development permit is required in order to conduct tree cutting or land clearing on any site for the sake of preparing that site for future development. 2. Permit Required for Routine Vegetation Management on Undeveloped Properties: Any person who performs routine vegetation management on undeveloped property in the City must obtain a routine vegetation management permit prior to performing such work. 162 ORDINANCE NO. 3. Permit Required to Use Mechanical Equipment: Except where use of mechanical equipment is specifically listed as exempt, any person who uses mechanical equipment for routine vegetation management, land clearing, tree cutting, landscaping, or gardening on developed, partially developed or undeveloped property must obtain a routine vegetation management permit prior to performing such work. 4. Timber Stand Maintenance—Conditional Use Permit Required: While timber harvesting shall not be permitted until such time as a valid land development is approved, a request may be made for maintenance and thinning of existing timber stands to promote the overall health and growth of the stand. Permits allowing maintenance and thinning beyond the limits allowed in subsections subsection C9 of this Section, Allowable Minor Tree Cutting Activities, shall be considered as a conditional use permit, by the Hearing Examiner according to the following criteria in lieu of standard conditional use permit criteria: a. Appropriate approvals have been sought and obtained with the State Department of Natural Resources; and b. The activity shall improve the health and growth of the stand and maintain long-term alternatives for preservation of trees; and c. The activity shall meet the provisions of subsections H2, Applicability, Performance Standards, and Alternates, and H3, General Review Criteria, of this Section; and d. Thinning activities shall be limited to less than forty percent (40%) of the volume and trees. 5. Tree Cutting—Solar Access or Pasture Land: A routine vegetation management permit is required for tree cutting in greater amounts than specified under partially exempt actions in subsection C9 of this Section, Allowable Minor Tree Cutting Activities, for any 163 ORDINANCE NO. property where tree cutting is proposed without an associated land development permit. A routine vegetation management permit may be issued allowing tree cutting only in the following cases: a. For purposes of allowing solar access to existing structures; or b. To create pasture land where agricultural activities are permitted uses in the zone. Any tree cutting activities shall be the minimum necessary to accomplish the purpose, and shall be consistent with subsection D2 of this Section, Restrictions for Critical Areas. G. ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS: Permits for routine vegetation management shall be processed consistent with RMC 4-9- 195, Routine Vegetation Management Permits. H. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT/BUILDING PERMITS: 1. Plan Required: When a development permit is submitted to the City it shall be accompanied by a tree cutting and land clearing plan. Where it is not practicable to retain all trees on site due to the proposed development, the plan shall identify trees that are proposed for removal. Where the drip line of a tree overlaps an area where construction activities will occur, this shall be indicated on the plan. Trees shall be shown on the plan as follows: a. For allowed activities, including allowed exemptions, modifications, and variances, show all trees proposed to be cut in priority tree retention areas: slopes twenty five percent (25% to 39%), high or very high landslide hazard areas, and high erosion hazard areas. 164 ORDINANCE NO. b. Show trees to be cut in protected critical areas: wetlands, shorelines of the state, streams and lakes, floodways, floodplain slopes forty percent (40%) or greater, very high landslide hazard areas, and critical habitat if the activity is exempt or allowed by the critical areas regulations in RMC 4-3-05005, Specific Exemptions. c. Show all trees to be retained in critical area buffers. d. Show trees proposed to be cut within required zoning setbacks along perimeter of development. e. In all other areas of the site, trees to be cut may be indicated generally with clearing limit lines. 2. Applicability, Performance Standards and Alternates: All land clearing and tree cutting activities shall conform to the criteria and performance standards set forth in this Section unless otherwise recommended in an approved soil engineering, engineering geology, hydrology or forest management plan or arborist report and where the alternate procedures will be equal to or superior in achieving the policies of this Section. All land clearing and tree cutting activities may be conditioned to ensure that the standards, criteria, and purpose of this Section are met. 3. General Review Criteria: All land clearing and tree cutting activities shall meet the following criteria: a. The land clearing and tree cutting will not create or significantly contribute to landslides, accelerated soil creep, settlement and subsidence or hazards associated with strong ground motion and soil liquefaction. b. The land clearing and tree cutting will not create or significantly contribute to flooding, erosion, increased turbidity, siltation, or other forms of pollution in a watercourse. 165 ORDINANCE NO. ' c. Land clearing and tree cutting will be conducted to maintain or provide visual screening and buffering between land uses of differing intensity, consistent with applicable landscaping and setback provisions of the Renton Municipal Code. d. Land clearing and tree cutting shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time,consistent with an approved build-out schedule and including any necessary erosion control measures. e. Land clearing and tree cutting shall be consistent with subsection D2 of this Section, Restrictions for Critical Areas, and RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations. 4. Tree Preservation: Trees shall be maintained to the maximum extent feasible on the property where they are growing. a. Ability to Condition Plan: The City may require a modification of the land clearing and tree cutting plan or the associated land development plan to ensure the retention of the maximum number of trees. b. Clearing—Conditions of Approval: The Department Administrator or designee may condition a proposal to restrict clearing outside of building sites, rights-of-way, utility lines and easements, to require sequencing and phasing of construction, or other measures, consistent with the permitted density and intensity of the zone. 5. Timing: The City may restrict the timing of the land clearing and tree cutting activities to specific dates and/or seasons when such restrictions are necessary for the public health, safety and welfare, or for the protection of the environment. 6. Restrictions for Critical Areas: See subsection D2 of this Section, Restrictions for Critical Areas—General and RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations. 166 ORDINANCE NO. 7. Tree/Ground Cover Retention: The following measures may be used by the Department Administrator or designee in conditioning a land development permit or building permit proposal per subsection H4 of this Section, Tree Preservation, to comply with the general review criteria of subsection H3. a. Trees shall be maintained to the maximum extent feasible on the property where they are growing. b. The City may require and/or allow the applicant to relocate or replace trees, provide interim erosion control, hydroseed exposed soils, or other similar conditions which would implement the intent of this Section. c. Priority shall be given to retention of trees on sensitive slopes and on lands classified as having high or very high landslide hazards, or high erosion hazards as classified in the critical areas regulations. d. Where feasible, trees that shelter interior trees or trees on abutting properties from strong winds that could otherwise cause them to blow down should be retained. e. Except in critical areas unless enhancement activities are being performed, the removal of trees on the following list should be allowed in order to avoid invasive root systems, weak wood prone to breakage, or varieties that tend to harbor insect pests: i. All Populus species including cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), lombardy poplar(Populus nigra "Italica"), etc. ii. All Alnus species including red alder (Alnus oregona), black alder(Alnus glutinosa), white alder(Alnus rhombifolia), etc. iii. Salix species including weeping willow (Salix babylonica), etc., unless along a stream bank and away from paved areas. 167 ORDINANCE NO. iv. All Platanus species including London plane tree (Platanus acerifolia), American sycamore/buttonwood (Platanus occidentalis), etc. 8. Protection Measures During Construction: a. Tree Protection Measures: Protection measures in the following subsections H8b(i) through H8b(vi) of this section shall apply for all trees which are to be retained in areas immediately subject to construction. These requirements may be waived pursuant to RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures, individually or severally by the City if the developer demonstrates them to be inapplicable to the specific on-site conditions or if the intent of the regulations will be implemented by another means with the same result. b. Drip Line: All of the following tree protection measures shall apply: i. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. ii. The applicant shall erect and maintain rope barriers, temporary construction fencing, or place bales of hay on the drip line to protect roots. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. iii. If the grade level adjoining a tree to be retained is to be raised, the applicant shall construct a dry rock wall or rock well around the tree. The diameter of this wall or well must be equal to the tree's drip line. iv. The applicant may not install impervious surface material within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 168 • ORDINANCE NO. v. The grade level around any tree to be retained may not be lowered within the greater of the following areas: (1) the area defined by the drip line of the tree, or(2) an area around the tree equal to one foot in diameter for each one inch of tree caliper. vi. The applicant shall retain a qualified professional to prune branches and roots, fertilize, and water as appropriate for any trees and ground cover that are to be retained. I. VARIANCE PROCEDURES: The Hearing Examiner shall have the authority to grant variances from the provisions of this Section pursuant to RMC 4-8-070H and RMC 4-9-250. J. VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES: 1. Penalties: Penalties for any violation of any of the provisions of this Section shall be in accord with RMC 1-3-2. In a prosecution under this Section, each tree removed, damaged or destroyed will constitute a separate violation, and the monetary penalty for each violated tree shall be no less than the minimum penalty, and no greater than the maximum penalty of RMC 1-3-2D. 2. Additional Liability for Damage: In addition, any person who violates any provision of this Section or of a permit issued pursuant thereto shall be liable for all damages to public or private property arising from such violation, including the cost of restoring the affected area to its condition prior to such violation. 3. Restoration Required: The City may require replacement of all improperly removed ground cover with species similar to those which were removed or other approved species such that the biological and habitat values will be replaced. Restoration shall include 169 • ORDINANCE NO. ` installation and maintenance of interim and emergency erosion control measures that shall be required as determined by the City. 4. Replacement Required: The City may require for each tree that was improperly cut and/or removed, replacement planting of a tree of equal size, quality and species or up to three (3) trees of the same species in the immediate vicinity of the tree(s) which was removed. The replacement trees will be of sufficient caliper to adequately replace the lost tree(s)or a minimum of three inches (3 ) in caliper. 5. Stop Work: For any parcel on which trees and/or ground cover are improperly removed and subject to penalties under this Section, the City shall stop work on any existing permits and halt the issuance of any or all future permits or approvals until the property is fully restored in compliance with this Section and all penalties are paid. SECTION VII. Tables 4-8-120.A of Chapter 8, Permits—General and Appeals, 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: 170 ORDINANCE NO. TABLE 4-8-120A PUBLIC WORKS Utility Roadway Combined APPLICATIONS Construction Stormwater APA APA TYPE OF Pennit Permit Construction Construction Operating I Closure APPLICATION/PERMIT (includes SUBMITTAL (Sewer and/or Permit Permit Plats) Pe��uit Permit REQUIREMENTS Water) Closure Permit Application Form I 1(b) Construction Permit Application Form 1 1 1 2 ' Construction Mitigation Description 3 3 3 4 Drainage Plans 3 3 3 Drainage Report 2 2 2 Erosion Control Plan(Temporary) 3 3 3 3 Geotechnical Report 3 2 1 2 Grading Plans 3 3 4 Hazardous Materials Management Statement 1(b) j 1(b) 1(b) 1(b) Neighborhood Detail Map 3 3 3 3 Operating Permit Application 1 Roadway Construction Plans 3 3 Source Statement,Fill Material 1(b) 1(b) 1(b) 1(b) Street Lighting Plans 3 3 Stream or Lake Study 1(c) 1(c) 1(c) 1(c) Topography Map 3 3 3 4 Tree Cutting/Inventory/Land Clearing Plan— 3 3 3 j 3 Approved Utilities Plans—Engineered 3 3 3 1 4 'Wetlands Assessment I 1(a) I 1(a) 1(a) 1(a)1(a) L 171 ORDINANCE NO. TABLE 4-8-120A PUBLIC WORKS Utility Combined APPLICATIONS TYPE OF Construction Stormwater Roadway Permit APA APA Permit Construction Construction Operating Closure SUBMITTAL APPLICATION/PERMIT (includes (Sewer and/or Permit Permit Plats) Permit Permit REQUIREMENTS Water) Table 4-8-120A The number of copies required(if any) is indicated for each type of application and each submittal requirement,unless waived by the Le end: Development Services Division Plan Review Supervisor.Waiver of aquifer permit submittal requirements may be granted by the Water g ;Utility (a)Required when wetlands or buffer are present on-site. (b)Required when project is located in Zones 1 or 2 of an aquifer protection area. (c) A Standard Stream or Lake Study is required for any application proposal. A Supplemental Study is required if an unclassified stream is involved,or if there are proposed alterations of the water body or buffer. 172 ORDINANCE NO. SECTION VIII. The rows "Stream/Lake Data," "Topography Map (5' contours)," and"Wetland Report/Delineation" of Table 4-8-120.0 of Chapter 8, Permits—General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinaces of the City of Renton, Washington" are hereby amended and renamed, as shown in Exhibit B. SECTION IX. Table C of Section 4-8-120 of Chapter 8, Permits—General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding a footnote 8, to read as follows: (8) A Standard Stream or Lake Study is required for any application proposal. A Supplemental Study is required if an unclassified stream is involved, or if there are proposed alterations of the water body or buffer. SECTION X. The definition of"Geotechnical Report" in Definitions G of Section 4-8-120.D.7, of Chapter 8, Permits—General and Appeals, 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. Geotechnical Report: A study prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical practices and stamped by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Washington which includes soils and slope stability analysis, boring and test pit logs, and recommendations on slope setbacks, foundation design, retaining wall design, material selection, and all other pertinent elements. If the evaluation involves geologic evaluations or interpretations, the report shall be reviewed and approved by a geologist. Further recommendations, additions or exceptions to the original report based on the plans, site 173 ORDINANCE NO. conditions, or other supporting data shall be signed and sealed by the geotechnical engineer. If the geotechnical engineer who reviews the plans and specifications is not the same engineer who prepared the geotechnical report, the new engineer shall in a letter to the City accompanying the plans and specifications, express his or her agreement or disagreement with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and state that the plans and specifications conform to his or her recommendations. If the site contains a geologic hazard regulated by the critical areas regulations, the preparation and content requirements of RMC 4-8-120D, Table 18 shall also apply. Table 18 —Geotechnical Report—Detailed Requirements Report Landslide Landslide Coal Coal Preparation/Content Steep — Landslide _Very High Seismic Mine— Mine Volcanic Requirements Slopes Medium —High High Erosion Medium Hi—gh Hazards g 1.Characterize soils, X X X X X X X X X geology and drainage. 2.Describe and depict all natural and man-made features within one X X X X X X X X X hundred fifty feet(150')of the site boundary. 3.Identify any areas that have previously been disturbed or degraded by X X X X X X X X X human activity or natural processes. 4.Characterize groundwater conditions including the presence of X X X X X X X X any public or private wells within one-quarter(1/4) mile of the site. 5.Provide a site evaluation review of X X X X X X X X X available information regarding the site. 6.Conduct a surface reconnaissance of the site X X X X X X X X and adjacent areas. 7.Conduct a subsurface X X X X X X X X 174 • • ORDINANCE NO. • Report Landslide Landslide Coal Coal Preparation/Content Steep — Landslide —Very High Seismic Mine— Mine Volcanic Requirements Slopes Medium —Htgh High Erosion Medium Hi— gh Hazards g exploration of soils and hydrologic conditions. 8.Provide a slope stability X X X X X X X analysis. 9. Address principles of erosion control in proposal design including: Plan the development to fit the topography, drainage patterns,soils and natural vegetation on site; Minimize the extent of the area exposed at one time and the duration of the exposure; Stabilize and protect X X X X X X X disturbed areas as soon as possible; Keep runoff velocities low; Protect disturbed areas from stormwater runoff; Retain the sediment within the site area; Design a thorough maintenance and follow- up inspection program to ensure erosion control practices are effective. 10.Provide an evaluation of site response and liquefaction potential X relative to the proposed development. 11.Conduct sufficient subsurface exploration to provide a site coefficient (S)for use in the Uniform X Building Code to the satisfaction of the Building Official. 12. Calculate tilts and strains,and determine X X appropriate design values for the building site. 13.Review available X X QeoloQic hazard maps. 175 • ORDINANCE NO. Report Landslide Landslide Coal Coal Preparation/Content Steep _ Landslide —Very High Seismic Mine— Mine Volcanic — Requirements Slopes Medium —High High Erosion Medium High Hazards g mine maps,mine hazard maps,and air photographs to identify any subsidence features or mine hazards including,but not limited to,surface depressions, sinkholes,mine shafts, mine entries,coal mine waste dumps,and any indication of combustion in underground workings or coal mine waste dumps that are present on or within one hundred feet (100')of the property. 14. Inspect,review and document any possible mine openings and potential trough X X subsidence,and any known hazards previously documented or identified. 15.Utilize test pits to investigate coal mine waste dumps and other shallow hazards such as slope entry portals and shaft collar areas.Drilling X X is required for coal mine workings or other hazards that cannot be adequately investigated by surface investigations. 16.Provide an analysis of proposed clearing,grading and construction activities including construction scheduling. Analyze X X X X X X X X potential direct and indirect on-site and off- site impacts from development. 17.Propose mitigation measures,such as any special construction X X X X X X X X X techniques, monitoring or inspection programs, erosion or sedimentation 176 • ORDINANCE NO. Report Landslide Landslide Coal Coal Preparation/Content Steep — Landslide —Very Seismic Mine— Mine, Volcanic Requirements Slopes Medium —High High ErosionHigh Medium Hi—gh Hazards g programs during and after construction,surface water management controls, buffers,remediation, stabilization,etc. 18. Critical facilities on sites containing areas susceptible to inundation due to volcanic hazards shall require an evacuation and emergency management plan.The applicant for critical facilities shall evaluate the X risk of inundation or flooding resulting from mudflows originating on Mount Rainier in a geotechnical report,and identify any engineering or other mitigation measures as appropriate. Note: An "X" indicates that the requirement applies in the identified critical area. SECTION XI. Three new definitions, "Stream or Lake Study, Standard," "Stream or Lake Study, Supplemental" and "Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan" of Definitions S, of Section 4-8-120.D.19 of Chapter 8, Permits—General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" are hereby added, to read as follows: Stream or Lake Study, Standard: A report shall be prepared by a qualified biologist, unless otherwise determined by the Administrator, and include the following information: a. Site Map: Site map(s) indicating, at a scale no smaller than 1" = 20' (unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Director): 177 • ORDINANCE NO. ' i. The entire parcel of land owned by the applicant, including 100 feet of the abutting parcels through which the water body(ies) flow(s); ii. The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) determined in the field by a qualified biologist pursuant to RMC 4-3-050.L.1.b (the OHWM must also be flagged in the field); iii. Stream classification, as recorded in the City of Renton Water Class Map in RMC 4-3-050Q4 or RMC 4-3-090 (if unclassified, see Supplemental Stream or Lake Study below); iv. Topography of the site and abutting lands in relation to the stream(s) and its/their buffer(s) at contour intervals of 2 feet where slopes are less than 10 percent, and of 5 feet where slopes are 10 percent or greater; v. 100-year floodplain and floodway boundaries, including 100 feet of the abutting parcels through which the water body(ies) flow(s); vi. Site drainage patterns, using arrows to indicate the direction of major drainage flow; vii. Top view and typical cross-section views of the stream or lake bed, banks, and buffers to scale; viii. The vegetative cover of the entire site, including the stream or lake, banks, riparian area, and/or abutting wetland areas, extending 100 feet upstream and downstream from the property line. Include position, species, and size of all trees at least 10 inches average diameter that are within 100 feet of the OHWM; 178 • ' ORDINANCE NO. ix. The location, width, depth, and length of all existing and proposed structures, roads, stormwater management facilities, wastewater treatment and installations in relation to the stream/lake and its/their buffer(s); and x. Location of site access, ingress and egress. b. Grading Plan: A grading plan prepared in accordance with RMC 4-8- 120.D.7, and showing contour intervals of 2 feet where slopes are less than 10 percent, and of 5 feet where slopes are 10 percent or greater. c. Stream or Lake Assessment Narrative: A narrative report shall be prepared to accompany the site plan which describes: i. The stream or lake classification as recorded in the City of Renton Water Class Map in RMC 4-3-050Q4 or RMC 4-3-090. ii. The vegetative cover of the site, including the stream or lake, banks, riparian area, wetland areas, and flood hazard areas extending 100 feet upstream and downstream from the property line; iii. The ecological functions currently provided by the stream/lake and existing riparian area; iv. Observed or reported fish and wildlife that make use of the area including, but not limited to, salmonids, mammals, and bird nesting, breeding, and feeding/foraging areas; and v. Measures to protect trees, as defined per RMC 4-11-200, and vegetation. Stream or Lake Study, Supplemental: The application shall include the following information: 179 ORDINANCE NO. a. Unclassified Stream Assessment: If the site contains an unclassified stream, a qualified biologist shall provide a proposed classification of the stream(s)based on RMC 4-3-050.L.1 and a rationale for the proposed rating. b. Alterations to Stream/Lake and/or Buffer(s): A supplemental report prepared by a qualified biologist shall evaluate alternative methods of developing the property using the following criteria for justification: i. Avoid any disturbances to the stream, lake or buffer; ii. Minimize any stream, lake or buffer impacts; iii. Compensate for any stream, lake or buffer impacts,; iv. Restore any stream, lake or buffer area impacted or lost temporarily; v. Enhance degraded stream or lake habitat to compensate for lost functions and values. c. Impact Evaluation: i. An impact evaluation for any unavoidable impacts prepared by a qualified biologist, to include: (a) Identification, by characteristics and quantity, of the resources (stream, lake) and corresponding functional values found on the site; (b) Evaluation of alternative locations, design modifications, or alternative methods of development to determine which option(s) reduce(s) the impacts on the identified resource(s) and functional values of the site; (c) Determination of the alternative that best meets the applicable approval criteria and identify significant detrimental impacts that are unavoidable; 180 ORDINANCE NO. (d)To the extent that the site resources and functional values are part of a larger natural system such as a watershed, the evaluation must also consider the cumulative impacts on that system; ii. For a violation, the impact evaluation must also include: (a) Description, by characteristics and quantity, of the resource(s) and functional values on the site prior to the violations; and (b)Determination of the impact of the violation on the resource(s) and functional values. Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan: The mitigation plan must ensure compensation for unavoidable significant adverse impacts that result from the chosen development alternative or from a violation as identified in the impact evaluation. A mitigation plan must include: a. Site Map: Site map(s) indicating, at a scale no smaller than 1" = 20' (unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Director): i. The entire parcel of land owned by the applicant, including 100 feet of the abutting parcels through which the water body(ies) flow(s); ii. The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) determined in the field by a qualified biologist pursuant to RMC 4-3-050.L.1.b (the OHWM must also be flagged in the field); iii. Stream classification, as recorded in the City of Renton Water Class Map in RMC 4-3-050Q4 or RMC 4-3-090 or as determined through a Supplemental Stream or Lake Study approved by the Administrator; 181 ORDINANCE NO. iv. Topography of the site and abutting lands in relation to the stream(s) and its/their buffer(s) at contour intervals of 2 feet where slopes are less than 10 percent, and of 5 feet where slopes are 10 percent or greater; v. 100-year floodplain and floodway boundaries, including 100 feet of the abutting parcels through which the water body(ies) flow(s); vi. Site drainage patterns, using arrows to indicate the direction of major drainage flow; vii. Top view and typical cross-section views of the stream or lake bed, banks, and buffers to scale; viii. The vegetative cover of the entire site, including the stream or lake, banks, riparian area, and/or abutting wetland areas, extending 100 feet upstream and downstream from the property line. Include position, species, and size of all trees at least 10 inches average diameter that are within 100 feet of the OHWM; ix. The location, width, depth, and length of all existing and proposed structures, roads, stormwater management facilities, wastewater treatment and installations in relation to the stream/lake and its/their buffer(s); and x. Location of site access, ingress and egress; xi. Indication of where proposed mitigation or remediation measures will take place on the site; xii. Separate indication of areas where revegetation is to take place and areas where vegetation is anticipated to be removed; and xiii. Any other areas of impact with clear indication of type and extent of impact indicated on site plan. 182 ORDINANCE NO. b. Mitigation narrative that includes the following elements: i. Description of existing conditions on the site and associated water resource (baseline information); ii. Resource(s) and functional values to be restored, created, or enhanced on the mitigation site(s); iii. Documentation of coordination with appropriate local, regional, special district, state, and federal regulatory agencies; iv. Construction schedule; v. Operations and maintenance practices for protection and maintenance of the site; vi. Environmental goals, objectives, and performance standards to be achieved by mitigation; vii. Monitoring and evaluation procedures, including minimum monitoring standards and timelines (i.e., annual, semi-annual, quarterly); viii. Contingency plan with remedial actions for unsuccessful mitigation; ix. Cost estimates for implementation of mitigation plan for purposes of calculating surety device; and x. Discussion of compliance with criteria or conditions allowing for the proposed stream/lake alteration or buffer reduction or buffer averaging, and a discussion of conformity to applicable mitigation plan approval criteria. xi. A review of the best available science supporting the proposed request for a reduced standard and/or the method of impact mitigation; a description of the report 183 ORDINANCE NO. ' • author's experience to date in restoring or creating the type of critical area proposed; and an analysis of the likelihood of success of the compensation project. SECTION XII. The definition of"Stream and Lake Data" of Definitions S, of Section 4-8-120.D.19 of Chapter 8, Permits—General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby deleted. SECTION XIII. The definitions of"Wetland Mitigation Plan —Preliminary" and "Wetland Mitigation Plan—Final" of Definitions W of Section 4-8-120.D.23 of Chapter 8, Permits—General and Appeals, 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: Wetland Mitigation Plan —Preliminary: A preliminary wetland mitigation plan shall include the following: a. A conceptual site plan demonstrating sufficient area for replacement ratios; b. Proposed planting scheme for created, restored, and enhanced wetlands; c. Written report consistent with final wetland mitigation plan requirements regarding baseline information, environmental goals and objectives, and performance standards. Wetland Mitigation Plan—Final: A final wetland mitigation plan shall include: a. Baseline Information: A written assessment and accompanying maps of the impacted wetland including, at a minimum, a wetland delineation by a qualified wetland specialist; existing wetland acreage; vegetative, faunal and hydrologic characteristics; an 184 ORDINANCE NO. identification of direct and indirect impacts of the project to the wetland area and wetland functions; soil and substrata conditions; topographic elevations and compensation site. If the mitigation site is different from the impacted wetland site, the assessment should include at a minimum: existing acreage; vegetative, faunal and hydrologic conditions; relationship within the watershed and to existing water bodies; soil and substrata conditions, topographic elevations; existing and proposed adjacent site conditions; buffers; and ownership. b. Environmental Goals and Objectives: A written report by a qualified wetland specialist shall be provided identifying goals and objectives of the mitigation plan and describing: i. The purposes of the compensation measures including a description of site selection criteria, identification of compensation goals; identification of target evaluation species and resource functions, dates for beginning and completion, and a complete description of the structure and functional relationships sought in the new wetland. The goals and objectives shall be related to the functions and values of the original wetland or if out-of-kind, the type of wetland to be emulated; and ii. A review of the best available science and report author's experience to date in restoring or creating the type of wetland proposed shall be provided. An analysis of the likelihood of success of the compensation project at duplicating the original wetland shall be provided based on the experiences of comparable projects, preferably those in the same drainage basins, if any. An analysis of the likelihood of persistence of the created or restored wetland shall be provided based on such factors as surface and ground water supply and flow patterns, dynamics of the wetland ecosystem; sediment or pollutant influx and/or erosion, 185 ORDINANCE NO. periodic flooding and drought, etc., presence of invasive flora or fauna, potential human or animal disturbance, and previous comparable projects, if any. c. Performance Standards: Specific criteria shall be provided for evaluating whether or not the goals and objectives of the project are achieved and for beginning remedial action or contingency measures. Such criteria may include water quality standards, survival rates of planted vegetation, species abundance and diversity targets, habitat diversity indices, or other ecological, geological or hydrological criteria. These criteria will be evaluated and reported pursuant to subsection e of this definition, Monitoring Program. An assessment of the project's success in achieving the goals and objectives of the mitigation plan should be included along with an evaluation of the need for remedial action or contingency measures. d. Detailed Techniques and Plans: Written specifications and descriptions of compensation techniques shall be provided including the proposed construction sequence, grading and excavation details, erosion and sediment control features needed for wetland construction and long-term survival, a planting plan specifying plant species, quantities, locations, size, spacing, and density; source of plant materials, propagates, or seeds; water and nutrient requirements for planting; where appropriate, measures to protect plants from predation; specification of substrata stockpiling techniques and planting instructions; descriptions of water control structures and water level maintenance practices needed to achieve the necessary hydroperiod characteristics; etc. These written specifications shall be accompanied by detailed site diagrams, scaled cross-sectional drawings, topographic maps showing slope percentage and final grade elevations, and any other drawings appropriate to show construction techniques or anticipated final outcome. The plan shall provide for elevations which are appropriate for the 186 ORDINANCE NO. desired habitat type(s) and which provide sufficient hydrologic data. The City may request such other information as needed to determine the adequacy of a mitigation plan. e. Monitoring Program: A program outlining the approach for monitoring construction and development of the compensation project and for assessing a completed project shall be provided in the mitigation plan. Monitoring may include, but is not limited to: i. Establishing vegetation plots to track changes in plant species composition and density over time; ii. Using photo stations to evaluate vegetation community response; iii. Sampling surface and subsurface waters to determine pollutant loading, and changes from the natural variability of background conditions (pH, nutrients, heavy metals); iv. Measuring base flow rates and storm water runoff to model and evaluate hydrologic and water quality predictions; v. Measuring sedimentation rates; vi. Sampling fish and wildlife populations to determine habitat utilization, species abundance and diversity; and vii. A description shall be included outlining how the monitoring data will be evaluated by agencies that are tracking the progress of the compensation project. A monitoring report shall be submitted quarterly for the first year and annually thereafter, and at a minimum, should document milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions of the compensation project. The compensation project shall be monitored for a period necessary to establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than five (5) years. 187 ORDINANCE NO. f. Contingency Plan: Identification of potential courses of action, and any corrective measures to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance standards are not being met. g. Permit Conditions: Any compensation project prepared for mitigation pursuant to RMC 4-3-050M, Wetlands, and approved by the City shall become part of the application for project approval. h. Demonstration of Competence: A demonstration of financial resources, administrative, supervisory, and technical competence and scientific expertise of sufficient standing to successfully execute the compensation project shall be provided. A compensation project manager shall be named and the qualifications of each team member involved in preparing the mitigation plan and implementing and supervising the project shall be provided, including educational background and areas of expertise, training and experience with comparable projects. SECTION XIV. The definition of"Wetland Report/Delineation" of Definitions W of Section 4-8-120.D.23 of Chapter 8, Permits —General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended and retitled to read as follows: Wetland Assessment: A wetland assessment includes the following: a. A description of the project and maps at a scale no smaller than one inch equals two hundred feet (1" = 200') showing the entire parcel of land owned by the applicant and the wetland boundary surveyed by a qualified wetlands ecologist, and pursuant to RMC 4-3- 050M3; 188 ` ORDINANCE NO. b. A description of the vegetative cover of the wetland and adjacent area including identification of the dominant plant and animal species; c. A site plan for the proposed activity at a scale no smaller than one inch equals two hundred feet(1" = 200') showing the location, width, depth and length of all existing and proposed structures, roads, stormwater management facilities, sewage treatment and installations within the wetland and its buffer; d. The exact locations and specifications for all activities associated with site development including the type, extent and method of operations; e. Elevations of the site and adjacent lands within the wetland and its buffer at contour intervals of no greater than five feet (5') or at a contour interval appropriate to the site topography and acceptable to the City; f. Top view and typical cross-section views of the wetland and its buffer to scale; g. The purposes of the project and, if a wetland alteration or a buffer reduction or averaging proposal is being requested, an explanation of how applicable review criteria are met; h. If wetland mitigation is proposed, a mitigation plan which includes baseline information, an identification of direct and indirect impacts of the project to the wetland area and wetland functions, environmental goals and objectives, performance standards, construction plans, a monitoring program and a contingency plan. i. Alternative Methods of Development: If wetland changes are proposed, the applicant shall evaluate alternative methods of developing the property using the following criteria in this order: 189 ORDINANCE NO. • Avoid any disturbances to the wetland or buffer; • Minimize any wetland or buffer impacts; • Compensate for any wetland or buffer impacts; • Restore any wetlands or buffer impacted or lost temporarily; • Create new wetlands and buffers for those lost; and • In addition to restoring a wetland or creating a wetland, enhance an existing degraded wetland to compensate for lost functions and values. This evaluation shall be submitted to the Department Administrator. Any proposed alteration of wetlands shall be evaluated by the Department Administrator using the above hierarchy. j. Such other information as may be needed by the City, including but not limited to an assessment of wetland functional characteristics, including a discussion of the methodology used; a study of hazards if present on site, the effect of any protective measures that might be taken to reduce such hazards; and any other information deemed necessary to verify compliance with the provisions of this Section. SECTION XV. Section 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review, of Chapter 9, Permits— Specific, 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: 4-9-065 DENSITY BONUS REVIEW: A. PURPOSE: The purpose of the density bonus review is to provide a procedure to review requests for density bonuses authorized in chapter 4-2 RMC. Density bonuses are offered to meet the intent 190 ORDINANCE NO. of the Comprehensive Plan policies, including but not limited to Land Use and Housing Element policies and the purpose and intent of the zoning districts. B. APPLICABILITY: The density bonus review procedure and review criteria are applicable to applicants who request bonuses in the zones which specifically authorize density bonuses in chapter 4-2 RMC. This Section of chapter 4-9 RMC contains density bonus procedures and review criteria for the R-14, RM-U, COR-1, and COR-2 Zones. C. REVIEW PROCESS: 1. Concurrent Review: Density bonus review shall occur concurrently with any other required land use permit that establishes the permitted density and use of a site, including subdivisions, site plan review, and conditional use permits. When the development proposal does not otherwise require a subdivision, site plan review, or conditional use permit to establish the permitted density of a site, but includes a density bonus request, the development proposal shall be reviewed under administrative site plan review requirements. 2. Reviewing Official: The Reviewing Official for the required land use permit as described in subsection Cl of this Section, Concurrent Review, shall also determine compliance with the density bonus process. 3. Submittal Requirements and Fees: An applicant shall submit applications and fees in accordance with the requirements for the primary development application per chapters 4- 1 and 4-8 RMC. D. BONUS ALLOWANCES AND REVIEW CRITERIA: The following table lists the conditions under which additional density or alternative bulk standards may be achieved: 191 ORDINANCE NO. R-14 ZONE RM-U ZONE COR 1 COR 2 The bonus provisions are intended to allow greater flexibility in the implementation of the purpose of the R-14 designation.Bonus The bonus criteria encourage provision of aggregated provisions are intended to allow open space and rear greater densities access parking in an within the portion of effort to stimulate the RM-U zone provision of higher located within the Density and Unit amenity neighborhoods Urban Center Size Bonus- and project designs NA NA Purpose: which address methods Design Overlay and of reducing the size and north of South 2nd bulk of structures. Street for those Applicants wishing development such bonuses must proposals that demonstrate that the provide high quality same or better results design and will occur as a result of amenities. creative design solutions that would occur with uses developed under standard criteria. Up to 2 dwelling units per acre for compliance with each provision listed below may be allowed;provided there is a balance of Up to 5 additional height,bulk and dwelling units per density established acre may be addressing the 1 to 4 additional Up to 25 dwelling allowed;provided following public Maximum dwelling units per net units per net acre. there is a balance of benefits: Additional Units acre. Densities of Densities of greater height,bulk and (i)Provision of Per Acre: greater than 18 units per than 100 dwelling density established continuous net acre are prohibited. units per net acre are through a floor area pedestrian access to prohibited. ratio system and/or a the shoreline master plan to be consistent with decided at the time requirements of the of site plan review. Shoreline Management Act and fitting a circulation pattern within the site, (ii)Provision of an additional 25 ft setback from the 192 ORDINANCE NO. • R-14 ZONE RM-U ZONE COR 1 COR 2 shoreline beyond that required by the Shoreline Management Act, (iii)Establishment of view corridors from upland boundaries of the site to the shoreline, (iv)Water Related Uses. If the applicant wishes to reach these bonus Maximum Additional Units objectives in a Per Acre: different system,a (continued) system of floor area ratios may be established for the property to be determined at the time of site plan review as approved by Council. (v)Daylighting of piped streams. Dwelling units permitted per structure may be increased as follows: (i) Dwellings Limited to 3 Attached: A maximum of 4 units per structure, with a Maximum maximum structure Allowable Bonus length of 100 feet. NA NA NA Dwelling Unit Mix/Arrangement: (ii)Dwellings Limited to 6 Attached: A maximum of 8 units per structure with a maximum structural height of 35 feet,or 3 stories and a maximum structural length of 115 feet. Bonuses may be Development achieved independently projects within the or in combination.To applicable area that qualify for one or both meet both the Bonus Criteria: NA NA bonuses the applicant "Minimum shall provide either: requirements"and at (i) Alley and/or rear least one access and aarkinc for "Guideline"in each 193 ORDINANCE NO. ' R-14 ZONE RM-U ZONE COR 1 COR 2 50%of detached,semi of the following four attached,or townhouse categories: units,or Building Siting and (ii)Civic uses such as a Design; community meeting Parking,Access,and hall,senior center, Circulation; recreation center,or Landscaping/Recrea other similar uses as tion/Common determined by the Space;and Zoning Administrator, Building or Architectural Design (iii)A minimum of 5% applying to Area of the net developable "A"of the Urban area of the project in Center Design aggregated common Overlay District open space. Common located in RMC 4-3- open space areas may 100 shall be be used for any of the permitted a following purposes maximum density of (playgrounds,picnic 100 dwelling units shelters/facilities and per net acre. equipment, village greens/square,trails, corridors or natural). Structures such as kiosks,benches, fountains and maintenance equipment storage facilities are permitted provided that they serve and/or promote the use of the open space.To qualify as common open space an area must meet each of the following conditions: function as a focal point for the development, have a maximum slope of 10%, have a minimum width of 25 feet except for trails or corridors, be located outside the right-of-way, be improved for passive and/or active recreational uses, be improved with landscaping in public areas,and Bonus Criteria be maintained by the 194 ORDINANCE NO. R-14 ZONE RM-U ZONE COR 1 COR 2 (continued): homeowners association if the property is subdivided, or by the management organization as applied to the property if the property is not subdivided. In addition,in order to qualify for a bonus, developments shall also incorporate a minimum of 3 features described below: (i)Architectural design which incorporates enhanced building entry features(e.g., varied design materials,arbors and/or trellises, cocheres,gabled roofs). (ii) Active common recreation amenities such as picnic facilities, gazebos,sports courts, recreation center,pool, spa/jacuzzi. (iii)Enhanced ground plane textures or colors (e.g.,stamped patterned concrete,cobblestone, or brick at all building entries,courtyards, trails or sidewalks). (iv)Building or structures incorporating bonus units shall have no more than 75%of the garages on a single facade. (v)Surface parking lots containing no more than 6 parking stalls separated from other parking areas by landscaping with a minimum width of 15 feet. (vi)Site design incorporating a package of at least 3 amenities which enhance neiehborhood character. 195 • ORDINANCE NO. ' R-14 ZONE RM-U ZONE COR 1 COR 2 such as coordinated lighting(street or building),mailbox details,address and signage details,and street trees as approved by the Reviewing Official. Where included, affordable units must meet the provisions of housing element of Where included, the Comprehensive affordable units Plan.For COR 2,if must meet the a significant public General benefit above City Provisions: NA NA provisions of Code requirements housing element of can be provided for the Comprehensive a portion of the Plan. property which may be contaminated,a transfer of density may be allowed for other portions of the site. SECTION XVI. Section 4-9-070.J of Chapter 9, Permits — Specific, 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: J. ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS/INAPPLICABLE EXEMPTIONS: 1. Maps Depicting Environmentally Critical Areas and Critical Area Designation: a. Maps Adopted by Reference: The map(s) in RMC 4-3-050.Q identify Critical Areas. The Maps in RMC 4-3-090 identify regulated Shorelines of the State. The specific environmentally critical areas where SEPA exemptions are not applicable are identified in subsection "1.b" below. 196 ORDINANCE NO. b. Critical Areas Designated: Wetlands, Protected Slopes, Very High Landslide Hazard Areas, Class 2 to 4 Streams and Lakes, Shorelines of the State designated as Natural or Conservancy, or Shorelines of the State designated Urban if also meeting the requirement of RMC 4-9-070.J.2.a or c, and the one hundred (100) year floodway, as mapped and identified pursuant to subsection "a" above, or when present according to the critical area classification criteria of RMC 4-3-050, are designated as environmentally critical areas pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, WAC 197-11-908. 2. Inapplicable State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Exemptions: a. General: Certain exemptions do not apply on lands covered by water, and this remains true regardless of whether or not lands covered by water are mapped. b. Environmentally Critical Areas: For each environmentally critical area, the exemptions within WAC 197-11-800 that are inapplicable for that area are: WAC 197-11-800(1) WAC 197-11-800(2)(d, e, g) WAC 197-11-800(6)(a) WAC 197-11-800(24)(a, b, c, d, f, g) WAC 197-11-800(25)(f, h) c. Wetlands: The following SEPA categorical exemptions shall not apply to wetlands: WAC 197-11-800(1) WAC 197-11-800(2) WAC 197-11-800(3) WAC 197-11-800(4) WAC 197-11-800(6) 197 ORDINANCE NO. WAC 197-11-800(8) WAC 197-11-800(25) Unidentified exemptions shall continue to apply within environmentally critical areas of the City. 3. Threshold Determinations for Proposals Located within Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The City shall treat proposals located wholly or partially within an environmentally sensitive area no differently than other proposals under this Section, making a threshold determination for all such proposals. The City shall not automatically require an EIS for a proposal merely because it is proposed for location in an environmentally sensitive area. SECTION XVII. Section 4-9-250 of Chapter 9, Permits—Specific, 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: 4-9-250 VARIANCES, WAIVERS, MODIFICATIONS, AND ALTERNATES: A. PURPOSES: 1. Variances: A grant of relief from the requirements of this Title which permits construction in a manner that otherwise is prohibited by this Title. 2. Waivers: (Reserved) 3. Modifications: To modify a Code requirement when there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this Title when a special individual reason makes the strict letter of this Code impractical. 4. Alternates: To allow the use of any material or method of construction not specifically prescribed by this Title. B. VARIANCE PROCEDURES: 198 ORDINANCE NO. 1. Authority and Applicability: a. Hearing Examiner Variances: The Hearing Examiner shall have the authority to grant variances from the provisions of those sections of this Title listed in RMC 4-8- 070 where the proposed development requires or required any permit or approval as set forth in RMC 4-8-070, Review Authority for Multiple Permit Applications, and for variances from the following critical area regulations: i. Proposals Located within Critical Areas —Aquifer Protection Areas: If an applicant feels that the strict application of aquifer protection regulations would deny all reasonable use of the property or would deny installation of public transportation or utility facilities determined by the public agency proposing these facilities to be in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare, the applicant of a development proposal may apply for a variance. ii. Proposals Located within Critical Areas —Flood Hazards: The Hearing Examiner shall hear and decide requests for variances from the flood hazard requirements of RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations. iii. Proposals Located within Critical Areas —Wetlands: Buffer width reductions not otherwise authorized by RMC 4-3-050M6e and M6f—Category 1 or 2. iv. Proposals Located within Critical Areas —Streams and Lakes: Buffer width reductions not otherwise authorized by RMC 4-3-050.L—Class 2 to 4. Activities proposing to vary from stream regulations not listed elsewhere in l.a or as an administrative variance in 1.c, and authorized to be requested as variances in RMC 4-3-050.L. 199 ORDINANCE NO. v. Proposals Located Within Critical Areas—General: Public/quasi-public utility or agency proposing to alter aquifer protection, geologic hazard, habitat or wetlands regulations not listed above or as an administrative variance. b. Board of Adjustment Variances: The Board of Adjustment shall have authority to grant variances from the provisions of this Title upon application to the Development Services Division where no approval or permit is required for the proposed development which must be granted by the Hearing Examiner pursuant to RMC 4-1-050H. The Board of Adjustment shall have no authority to vary the terms or conditions of any permit, recommendation or decision issued by the Hearing Examiner. c. Administrative Variances: The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee shall have the authority to grant variances from the following development standards when no other permit or approval requires Hearing Examiner Review: i. Residential Land Uses: Lot width, lot depth, setbacks, allowed projections into setbacks, and lot coverage. Lot width, lot depth, and setback variations do not require a variance if the request is part of a stream daylighting proposal and meets criteria in RMC 4-3-050.L; and ii. Commercial and Industrial Land Uses: Screening of surface- mounted equipment and screening of roof-mounted equipment. iii. Proposals Located Within Critical Areas: (a) Steep Slopes Forty Percent (40%) or Greater and Very High Landslide Hazards: The construction of one single family home on a pre-existing platted lot where there is not enough developable area elsewhere on the site to accommodate building pads and provide practical off-street parking. 200 • • ORDINANCE NO. (b) Wetlands: • Creation/restoration/enhancement ratios: Categories 1 and 2. • Buffer width reductions not otherwise authorized by RMC 4-3-050M6e and M6f—Category 3. • A new or expanded single family residence on an existing, legal lot, having a regulated Category 3 wetland. (c) Streams and Lakes. A new or expanded single family residence on a pre-existing platted lot where there is not enough developable area elsewhere on the site to accommodate building pads and provide practical off-street parking, providing reasonable use of the property. 2. Filing of Application: A property owner, or his duly authorized agent, may file an application for a variance which application shall set forth fully the grounds therefor and the facts deemed to justify the granting of such variance. 3. Submittal Requirements and Application Fees: Shall be as listed in RMC 4-8- 120C, Land Use Applications, and 4-1-170, Land Use Review Fees. 4. Public Notice and Comment Period: Notice of the application shall be given pursuant to RMC 4-8-090, Public Notice Requirements. 5. Decision Criteria: Except for variances from critical areas regulations, the Reviewing Official shall have authority to grant a variance upon making a determination in writing that the conditions specified below have been found to exist: a. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, 201 ORDINANCE NO. topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification; b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated; c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; d. That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. 6. Special Review Criteria—Reasonable Use Variance —Critical Areas Regulations Only: For variance requests related to the critical areas regulations not subject to subsections B7 to B11 of this Section, the Reviewing Official may grant a reasonable use variance if all of the following criteria are met: a. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated; b. There is no reasonable use of the property left if the requested variance is not granted; c. The variance granted is the minimum amount necessary to accommodate the proposal objectives; and 202 ORDINANCE NO. d. The need for the variance is not the result of actions of the applicant or property owner; and e. The proposed variance is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. 7. Special Review Criteria for Variances from the Aquifer Protection Regulations: Except for public or quasi-public utility or agency proposals which are subject to subsection B10 of this Section, the Hearing Examiner shall consider the following criteria, in addition to those criteria in subsections B5 and B6 of this Section, for variances from aquifer protection regulations: a. That the proposed activities will not cause significant degradation of groundwater or surface water quality; b. That the applicant has taken deliberate measures to minimize aquifer impacts, including but not limited to the following: i. Limiting the degree or magnitude of the hazardous material and activity; and ii. Limiting the implementation of the hazardous material and activity; and iii. Using appropriate and best available technology; and iv. Taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts; and c. That there will be no damage to nearby public or private property and no threat to the health or safety of people on or off the property; and 203 ORDINANCE NO. ' • d. The proposed variance is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. 8. Special Review Criteria for Variances from Flood Hazard Requirements in the Critical Areas Regulations: In lieu of the variance criteria of subsection B5 of this Section, the following directives and criteria shall be utilized by the Hearing Examiner in the review of variance applications related to the flood hazard requirements of the critical areas regulations: a. Purpose and Intent: Variances, as interpreted in the national flood insurance program, are based on the general zoning law principle that they pertain to a physical piece of property; they are not personal in nature and do not pertain to the structure, its inhabitants, economic or financial circumstances. They primarily address small lots in densely populated residential neighborhoods. As such, variances from the flood elevations should be quite rare. b. Review Criteria: In passing upon such an application for a variance, the Hearing Examiner shall consider the following review criteria: • i. Consider all technical evaluations, all relevant factors, standards specified in other sections of this section; and: (1)The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury of others. (2)The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage; (3)The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner; 204 • • ORDINANCE NO. (4)The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community; (5)The necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, where applicable; (6)The availability of alternative locations for the proposed use which are not subject to flooding or erosion damage; (7)The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development; (8)The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and flood plain management program for that area; (9) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles; (10) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters and the effects of wave action, if applicable, expected at the site; and (11) The costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems, and streets and bridges. ii. Generally, the only condition under which a variance from the elevation standard may be issued is for new construction and substantial improvements to be erected on a lot of one-half(1/2) acre or less in size contiguous to and surrounded by lots with existing structures constructed below the base flood level, provided criteria in subsection B8bi of 205 • ORDINANCE NO. ' this Section have been fully considered. As the lot size increases the technical justification required for issuing the variance increases. iii. Variances may be issued for nonresidential buildings in very limited circumstances to allow a lesser degree of floodproofing than watertight or dry- floodproofing, where it can be determined that such action will have low damage potential, complies with all other variance criteria except subsections B8bii, iii or iv, and otherwise complies with RMC 4-3-050I2a and I2b of the general standards. iv. Variances may be issued for the reconstruction, rehabilitation, or restoration of structures listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the State Inventory of Historic Places, without regard to the procedures set forth in this section. v. Variances shall not be issued within a designated floodway if any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge would result. vi. Variances shall only be issued upon: (1) A showing of good and sufficient cause; (2) A determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant; (3) A determination that the granting of a variance will not result in increased flood heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, create nuisances,cause fraud on or victimization of the public or conflict with existing local laws or ordinances. (4) A determination that the variance is the minimum necessary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief. 206 • ' ORDINANCE NO. c. Conditions of Approval: Upon consideration of the factors of subsection B8b of this Section, and the purposes of this section, the Hearing Examiner may attach such conditions to the granting of variances as it deems necessary to further the purposes of this section. d. Notice Required upon Variance Approval: Any applicant to whom a variance is granted shall be given written notice that the structure will be permitted to be built with a lowest floor elevation below the base flood elevation and that the cost of flood insurance will be commensurate with the increased risk resulting from the reduced lowest floor elevation. e. Records: The Department Administrator or his/her designee, the Building Official, shall maintain the records of all variance actions and report any variances to the Federal Insurance Administration upon request. 9. Special Review Criteria—Single Family Residence on a Legal Lot with a Category 3 Wetland; or Single Family Residence on a Legal Lot with a Class 2, 3, or 4 Stream/Lake: In lieu of the criteria shown in subsections B5 and B6 of this Section, a variance may be granted from any wetland or stream requirement in the critical areas regulations for a single family residence to be located on an existing legal lot if all of the following criteria are met: a. The proposal is the minimum necessary to accommodate the building footprint and access. In no case, however, shall the impervious surface exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet, including access. Otherwise the alteration shall be reviewed as a Hearing Examiner variance and subject to the review criteria of subsection B6 of this Section; b. Access is located so as to have the least impact on the wetland and/or stream/lake and its buffer; 207 • ORDINANCE NO. ' c. The proposal preserves the functions and values of the wetlands and/or stream/lake/riparian habitat to the maximum extent possible; d. The proposal includes on-site mitigation to the maximum extent possible; e. The proposal first develops non-critical area, then the critical area buffer, before the critical area itself is developed; f. The proposed activities will not jeopardize the continued existence of endangered, threatened or sensitive species as listed by the Federal government or the State; g. The inability to derive reasonable economic use of the property is not the result of actions segregating or dividing the property and creating the undevelopable condition after the effective date of this Section; and h. The proposed variance is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. 10. Special Review Criteria—Public/Quasi-Public Utility or Agency Altering Aquifer Protection, Geologic Hazard, Habitat, Stream/Lake or Wetland Regulations: In lieu of the variance criteria of subsection B5 of this Section, applications by public/quasi-public utilities or agencies proposing to alter aquifer protection, geologic hazard, habitat, stream and lake or wetland regulations shall be reviewed for compliance with all of the following criteria: a. Public policies have been evaluated and it has been determined by the Department Administrator that the public's health, safety, and welfare is best served; b. Each facility must conform to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and with any adopted public programs and policies; 208 ORDINANCE NO. • c. Each facility must serve established, identified public needs; d. No practical alternative exists to meet the needs; e. The proposed action takes affirmative and appropriate measures to minimize and compensate for unavoidable impacts; f. The proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated wetland or stream/lake area, value, or function in the drainage basin where the wetland, stream or lake, is located; g. The proposed activities will not jeopardize the continued existence of endangered, threatened or sensitive species as listed by the Federal government or the State; h. That the proposed activities will not cause significant degradation of groundwater or surface water quality; i. The approval as determined by the Hearing Examiner is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose; and, j. The proposed variance is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. 11. Special Review Criteria—Constructing Structures over Piped Streams: For variance requests involving the construction of structures over piped streams, the following criteria shall apply: a. The proposal is the minimum necessary to accommodate the structure; and b. There is no other reasonable alternative to avoid building over a piped stream; and 209 • ORDINANCE NO. ' c. The existing pipe stream system that would have to be located under the structure is replaced with new pipe material to insure long term life of the pipe and meets structural requirements; and d. The piped stream system is sized to convey the 100-year future land use condition runoff from the total upstream tributary area as determined from a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis performed in accordance with standards determined by the City and in accordance with other City's standards; and e. The piped stream that will be built over will need to be placed in a casing pipe sized to allow pipe skids and the potential need to increase the pipe size by a minimum of one pipe diameter. The casing pipe shall be a minimum of three pipe diameters larger than the diameter of the pipe that conveys the stream; and f. To allow for maintenance, operation and replacement of the piped stream that has been built over, a flow bypass system shall be constructed and access manholes or other structures of sufficient size as determined by the City shall be required on both sides of the section of the piped stream that is built upon; and g. There will be no damage to nearby public or private property and no threat to the health or safety of people on or off the property. 12. Continuation of Public Hearing: If for any reason testimony in any manner set for public hearing, or being heard, cannot be completed on date set for such hearing, the person presiding at such public hearing or meeting may, before adjournment or recess of such matters under consideration, publicly announce the time and place to and at which said meeting will be continued, and no further notice of any kind shall be required. 13. Board of Adjustment Decision Process: 210 ` ORDINANCE NO. a. Board of Adjustment Shall Announce Findings and Decisions: Not more than thirty (30) days after the termination of the proceedings of the public hearing on any variance, the Board of Adjustment shall announce its findings and decision. If a variance is granted, the record shall show such conditions and limitations in writing as the Board of Adjustment may impose. b. Notice of Decision of Board of Adjustment: Following the rendering of a decision on a variance application, a copy of the written order by the Board of Adjustment shall be mailed to the applicant at the address shown on the application and filed with the Board of Adjustment and to any other person who requests a copy thereof. c. Reconsideration: (Reserved) d. Record of Decision: Whenever a variance is approved by the Board of Adjustment, the Building Department shall forthwith make an appropriate record and shall inform the administrative department having jurisdiction over the matter. 14. Conditions of Approval: The Reviewing Official may prescribe any conditions upon the variance deemed to be necessary and required. 15. Finalization: (Reserved) 16. Expiration of Variance Approval: Any variance granted by the Reviewing Official, unless otherwise specified in writing, shall become null and void in the event that the applicant or owner of the subject property for which a variance has been requested has failed to commence construction or otherwise implement effectively the variance granted within a period of two (2) years after such variance has been issued. For proper cause shown, an applicant may petition the Reviewing Official during the variance application review process, for an extension 211 . ORDINANCE NO. of the two (2) year period, specifying the reasons therefor. The time may be extended but shall not exceed one additional year in any event. 17. Extension of Approval: For proper cause shown, an applicant may petition the Reviewing Official for an extension of the approved expiration period established per subsection D15 of this Section prior to the expiration of the time period, specifying the reasons therefor. The Reviewing Official may extend the time limit, but such extension shall not exceed one additional year in any event. C. WAIVER PROCEDURES: 1. Authority for Waiver, General: (Reserved) 2. Authority for Waiver of Street Improvements: The Board of Public Works may grant waiver of the installation of street improvements subject to the determination that there is reasonable justification for such waiver. 3. Application and Fee: Any application for such a waiver shall specify in detail the reason for such requested waiver and may contain such evidence including photographs, maps, surveys as may be pertinent thereto. The application fee shall be as specified in RMC 4-1- 170, Land Use Review Fees. 4. Decision Criteria, General: (Reserved) 5. Decision Criteria for Waivers of Street Improvements: Reasonable justification shall include but not be limited to the following: a. Required street improvements will alter an existing wetlands or stream, or have a negative impact on a shoreline's area. b. Existing steep topography would make required street improvements infeasible. 212 ORDINANCE NO. c. Required street improvements would have a negative impact on other properties, such as restricting available access. d. There are no similar improvements in the vicinity and there is little likelihood that the improvements will be needed or required in the next ten (10) years. e. In no case shall a waiver be granted unless it is shown that there will be no detrimental effect on the public health, safety or welfare if the improvements are not installed, and that the improvements are not needed for current or future development. D. MODIFICATION PROCEDURES: 1. Application Time and Decision Authority: Modification from standards, either in whole or in part, shall be subject to review and decision by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department upon submittal in writing of jurisdiction for such modification. 2. Decision Criteria: Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this Title, the Department Administrator may grant modifications for individual cases provided he/she shall first find that a specific reason makes the strict letter of this Code impractical, that the intent and purpose of the governing land use designation of the Comprehensive plant is met and that the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Code, and that such modification: a. Substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element and the proposed modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and objectives. b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; and c. Will not be injurious to other property(s) in the vicinity; and 213 ORDINANCE NO. ' d. Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code; and e Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and f. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. 3. Additional Decision Criteria Only for Center Office Residential 3 (COR 3) Zone: For a modification to special upper story setback standards in the COR 3 Zone, RMC 4-2-120B, the Department shall rely on the recommendations contained within the Report on Design Criteria for Modifications prepared by the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Administrator or designee as the basis for approval or denial of the request. In addition to the criteria in subsection D2 of this Section, the request for modification in the COR 3 Zone requirements for upper story setbacks shall meet all of the following criteria: a. In comparison to the standard upper story setbacks, the proposed building design will achieve the same or better results in terms of solar access to the public shoreline trails/open space and publicly accessible plazas; the building will allow access to sunlight along the public trail/open space system and plazas abutting the shoreline during daytime and seasonal periods projected for peak utilization by pedestrians. b. The building will create a step in perceived height, bulk and scale in comparison to buildings surrounding the subject building. E. ALTERNATE PROCEDURES: 1. Authority: The provisions of this Title are not intended to prevent the use of any material or method of construction or aquifer protection not specifically prescribed by this 214 ORDINANCE NO. Title, provided any alternate has been approved and its use authorized by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator. 2. Decision Criteria: The Administrator may approve any such alternate, provided he/she finds that the proposed design and/or methodology is satisfactory and complies with the provisions of this Title and that the material, method or work offered is, for the purpose intended, at least the equivalent of that prescribed in this Title in suitability, strength, effectiveness, durability, safety, maintainability and environmental protection. 3. Substantiation: The Department Administrator shall require that sufficient evidence or proof be submitted to substantiate any claims that may be made regarding its use. 4. Record of Decision: The details of any action granting approval of an alternate shall be written and entered in the files of the Code enforcement agency. F. ABSENCE OF VALID SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION: Where there is an absence of valid scientific information or incomplete scientific information relating to a critical area leading to uncertainty about the risk to critical area function of permitting an alteration of or impact to the critical area, the Responsible Official shall: 1. Take a "precautionary or a no-risk approach," that appropriately limits development and land use activities until the uncertainty is sufficiently resolved, or determine that protection can be ensured by using an approach different from that derived from the best available science provided that the applicant demonstrates on the record how the alternative approach will protect the functions and values of the critical area; and 2. Require application of an effective adaptive management program that relies on scientific methods to evaluate how well regulatory and nonregulatory actions protect the critical area. An adaptive management program is a formal and deliberate scientific approach to taking 215 ORDINANCE NO. action and obtaining information in the face of uncertainty. An adaptive management program shall: a. Address funding for the research component of the adaptive management program; b. Change course based on the results and interpretation of new information that resolves uncertainties; and c. Commit to the appropriate timeframe and scale necessary to reliably evaluate regulatory and nonregulatory actions affecting protection of critical areas and anadromous fisheries. SECTION XVIII. Section 4-10-090 of Chapter 10, Legal Nonconforming Structures, Uses and Lots, 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: 4-10-090 CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS —NONCONFORMING ACTIVITIES AND STRUCTURES: A legally nonconforming,regulated activity or structure that was in existence or approved or vested prior to the passage of the Critical Area Regulations, RMC 4-3-050, and to which significant economic resources have been committed pursuant to such approval but which is not in conformity with the provisions of RMC 4-3-050 may be continued; provided, that: 1. No such legal nonconforming activity or structure shall be expanded, changed, enlarged or altered in any way that infringes further on the critical area that increases the extent of its nonconformity with this Section without a permit issued pursuant to the provisions of RMC 4-3-050; 216 ORDINANCE NO. 2. Except for cases of on-going agricultural uses, if a nonconforming activity is discontinued pursuant to RMC 4-10-060, any resumption of the activity shall conform to this Section; 3. Except for cases of on-going agricultural use, if a nonconforming use or activity or structure is destroyed by human activities or an act of God, it shall not be resumed or reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of RMC 4-3-050 and RMC 4-10-050 and 060; 4. Activities or adjuncts thereof that are or become nuisances shall not be entitled to continue as nonconforming activities. SECTION XIX. Section 4-10-100 of Chapter 10, Legal Nonconforming Structures, Uses and Lots, 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: 4-10-100 VIOLATIONS OF THIS CHAPTER AND PENALTIES: Penalties for any violations of any of the provisions of this Chapter shall be in accord with chapter 1-3-2 RMC. SECTION XX. Section 4-11-010, Definitions A, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definition, to read as follows: ARTIFICIAL CHANNEL: A stream channel that is entirely manmade but does not include relocated natural channels. SECTION XXI. Section 4-11-020, Definitions B, of Chapter 11, Definitions, 217 ORDINANCE NO. ' of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definition, to read as follows: BASEMENT: (This definition for RMC 4-3-050, flood hazard regulations, use only.) Any area of the building having its floor subgrade (below ground level) on all sides. SECTION XXII. Section 4-11-030, Definitions C, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by deleting the definition of "Creek." SECTION XXIII. The definition of"Critical Areas" in Section 4-11-030, Definitions C, of Chapter 11, Definitions, 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: CRITICAL AREAS: Wetlands, aquifer protection areas, fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded and geologically hazardous areas as defined by the Growth Management Act and Section 4-3-050, Critical Area Regulations, in this Title. SECTION XXIV. The definition of"Critical Facility" in Section 4-11-030, Definitions C, of Chapter 11, Definitions, 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: CRITICAL FACILITY: A facility for which even a slight chance of flooding, high geologic hazard, or inundation in the areas of flood hazard or volcanic hazard might be too great. Critical facilities include, but are not limited to schools, nursing homes, hospitals, police, fire and 218 • ORDINANCE NO. emergency response installations, and facilities that produce, use or store hazardous materials or hazardous waste. SECTION XXV. Section 4-11-040, Definitions D, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definitions, to read as follows: DAYLIGHTING: Restoration of a culverted or buried watercourse to a surface watercourse. DEVELOPMENT: (This definition for RMC 4-3-050, flood hazard regulations, use only.) Any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations or storage of equipment or materials located within the area of special flood hazard. SECTION XXVI. The definition of"Density, Net" in Section 4-11-040, Definitions D, of Chapter 11, Definitions, 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: DENSITY, NET: A calculation of the number of housing units and/or lots that would be allowed on a property after critical areas, i.e. very high landslide hazard areas, protected slopes, wetlands, Class 1 to 4 streams and lakes, or floodways, and public rights-of-way and legally recorded private access easements serving three (3) or more dwelling units, are subtracted from the gross area (gross acres minus streets and critical areas multiplied by allowable housing units per acre). Required critical area buffers, streams that have been daylighted including restored 219 ORDINANCE NO. riparian and aquatic areas, and public and private alleys shall not be subtracted from gross acres for the purpose of net density calculations. SECTION XXVII. Section 4-11-080, Definitions H, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definitions, to read as follows: HAZARD TREE: Any tree or tree part that poses a high risk of damage to persons or property as certified by a qualified arborist and accepted by the City. HIGH BLOWDOWN POTENTIAL: An area where field conditions indicate the potential for tree blowdown is high. Evidence may include the presence of toppled trees in the area, and thin or saturated soils. HYPORHEIC ZONE: The saturated zone located beneath and adjacent to streams that contains some portion of surface waters, serves as a filter for nutrients, and maintains water quality. SECTION XXVIII. Section 4-11-090, Definitions I, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definition, to read as follows: INTERMITTENT: A condition where water is not present in the channel year round during years of normal or above normal rainfall. SECTION XXIX. The definition of"Lowest Floor" in Section 4-11-120, Definitions L, of Chapter 11,Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 220 ORDINANCE NO. entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: LOWEST FLOOR: The lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement). An unfinished or flood-resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage, in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building's lowest floor; provided, that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of RMC 4-3-050.I. 3.a.ii. SECTION XXX. Section 4-11-140, Definitions N, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definition, to read as follows: NORMAL RAINFALL: Rainfall that is at the mean or within one standard deviation of the mean of the accumulated annual rainfall record, based upon the water year for King County as recorded at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport by the graph shown at King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks' Water and Land Resources Division's Hydrologic Information Center (http://dnr.metrokc.gov/hydrodat/seatacprecip.asp). SECTION XXXI. Section 4-11-160, Definitions P, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definition, to read as follows: PERENNIAL: Waters which flow continuously. SECTION XXXII. Section 4-11-170, Definitions Q, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General 221 ORDINANCE NO. ' Ordinances of the City of Renton,Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definition, to read as follows: QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL: A person with experience and training in the pertinent scientific discipline, and who is a qualified scientific expert with expertise appropriate for the relevant subject in accordance with WAC 365-195-905(4). A qualified professional must have obtained a B.S. or B.A. or equivalent degree in biology, and professional experience related to the subject habitat or species. SECTION XXXIII. Section 4-11-180, Definitions R, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definition, to read as follows: RIPARIAN AREA: The upland area immediately adjacent to and paralleling a body of water and is usually composed of trees, shrubs and other plants. Riparian functions include bank and channel stability, sustained water supply, flood storage, recruitment of woody debris, leaf litter, nutrients, sediment and pollutant filtering, shade, shelter, and other functions that are important to both fish and wildlife. SECTION XXXIV. Section 4-11-190, Definitions S, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definitions, to read as follows: SALMONID MIGRATION BARRIER: An in-stream blockage that consists of a natural drop (no human influence) with an uninterrupted slope greater than 100-percent (45 degree angle) and a height in excess of 11 vertical feet within anadromous salmon-bearing waters or a 222 ORDINANCE NO. height in excess of 3 vertical feet within resident trout only bearing waters. Human-made barriers to salmonid migration (e.g., culverts, weirs, etc.) shall be considered barriers to salmonid migration by this definition, only if they were lawfully installed; permanent; present a complete barrier to salmonid passage based on hydraulic drop, water velocity, water depth, or any other feature which would prevent all salmonid from passing upstream; and in the opinion of the City Reviewing Official cannot be modified to provide salmonid passage without resulting in significant impacts to other environmental resources, major transportation and utility systems, or to the public, and would have significant expense. For the purposes of this definition significant expense means a cost equal to or greater than 50% of the combined value of the proposed site buildings, structures, and/or site improvements, and existing buildings, structures, and/or site improvements to be retained. SCOUR: The erosive action of running water in streams, which excavates and carries away material from the bed and banks. Scour may occur in both earth and solid rock material. STREAM/LAKE CLASS: The stream and lake waters in the City are defined by class as follows: 1. Class 1: Class 1 waters are perennial salmonid-bearing waters which are classified by the City and State as Shorelines of the State. 2. Class 2: Class 2 waters are perennial or intermittent salmonid-bearing waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: a. Mapped on Figure 4-3-050.Q.4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 2; and/or b. Historically and/or currently known to support salmonids, including resident trout, at any stage in the species lifecycle; and/or 223 ORDINANCE NO. c. is a water body (e.g. pond, lake) between 0.5 acre and 20 acres in size. 3. Class 3: Class 3 waters are non-salmonid-bearing perennial waters during years of normal rainfall, and/or mapped on Figure 4-3-050.Q.4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 3. 4. Class 4: Class 4 waters are non-salmonid-bearing intermittent waters during years of normal rainfall, and/or mapped on Figure 4-3-050.Q.4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 4. 5. Class 5: Class 5 waters are non-regulated non-salmonid-bearing waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: a. flow within an artifically constructed channel where no naturally- defined channel had previously existed; and/or b. Are a surficially isolated water body less than 0.5 acre (e.g. pond) not meeting the criteria for a wetland as defined in Section 4-3-050.M. SECTION XXXV. Section 4-11-190, Definitions S, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by deleting the definition "Stream, Creek, River, or Watercourse." SECTION XXXVI. Section 4-11-220, Definitions V, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definition, to read as follows: VOLCANIC HAZARDS: Volcanic hazard areas are those areas subject to a potential for inundation from post lahar sedimentation along the lower Green River as identified in Plate II, 224 • ORDINANCE NO. Map D, in the report U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (Revised 1998). Volcano Hazards from Mount Rainier, Washington. Open-File Report 98-428. SECTION XXXVII. The definition of"Wetland Creation" of Section 4-11-230, Definitions W, of Chapter 11, Definitions, 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: WETLAND CREATION (OR ESTABLISHMENT): The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics present to develop a wetland that did not previously exist on an upland or deepwater site. Establishment results in a gain in wetland acres. SECTION XXXVIII. The definition of"Wetland Enhancement" of Section 4-11- 230, Definitions W, of Chapter 11,Definitions, 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: WETLAND ENHANCEMENT: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a wetland (undisturbed or degraded) site to heighten, intensify, or improve specific function(s) or for a purpose such as water quality improvement, flood water retention or wildlife habitat. Enhancement results in a change in wetland function(s) and can lead to a decline in other wetland function, but does not result in a gain in wetland acres. This term includes activities commonly associated with the terms enhancement, management, manipulation, directed alteration. SECTION XXXIX. Section 4-11-230, Definitions W, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled"Code of 225 ORDINANCE NO. General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following definition, to read as follows: WETLAND PROTECTION/MAINTENANCE: The removal of a threat to, or preventing decline of, wetland conditions be an action in of near a wetland. Includes purchase of land or easement, repairing water control structures or fences, or structural protection such as repairing a barrier island. This term also includes activities commonly associated with the term preservation. Protection/Maintenance does not result in a gain of wetland acres or function. SECTION XL. The definition of"Wetland, Regulated" in Section 4-11-230, Definitions W, of Chapter 11, Definitions, 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: WETLAND, REGULATED: See RMC 4-3-050Mle. SECTION XLI. The definition of"Wetland Restoration" in Section 4-11-230, Definitions W, of Chapter 11, Definitions, 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: WETLAND RESTORATION: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning natural/historic functions to former or degraded wetland. For the purpose of tracking net gains in wetland acres, restoration is divided into: Re-establishment: the manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning natural/historic functions to a former wetland. Re-establishment results in rebuilding a former wetland and results in a gain in wetland acres. 226 ORDINANCE NO. Rehabilitation: the manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of repairing natural/historic functions of degraded wetland. Rehabilitation results in a gain in wetland function, but does not result in a gain in wetland acres. SECTION XLII. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2005 Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD.1177.4/21/05:ma 227 • r Exhibit A Documents Prepared in Support of City of Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration Project • "Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration,"Jones & Stokes, July 13, 2004. • "City of Renton Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommendations," prepared by AC Kindig&Company and Cedarock Consultants, Inc. on February 27, 2003. • Stream/lake classification results in the Renton Water Classes Map prepared by AC Kindig& Company and Cedarock, in conjunction with Renton City staff, as most recently issued January 26, 2005. • "Transmittal of Parametrix Review of Wetlands Regulations,"Jones& Stokes, July 13, 2004; together with"Best Available Science Ordinance Review"by Jim Kelly, PhD,Parametrix,June 28, 2004. • "Overview and Comparison of Aquifer,Flood Hazard, Geologic Hazard, and Habitat Conservation Regulations to State Example Critical Areas Code,"Jones& Stokes,July 13, 2004. • "Proposed Renton Comprehensive Plan and Shoreline Master Program Policy Amendments,"Jones & Stokes,January 26, 2005. • "Proposed Renton Shoreline Master Program Use Environment Amendments,"Jones & Stokes, March 8, 2004 together with the updated Shoreline Environment Map transmitted January 26, 2004. • "Revised Review Draft--Renton Critical Area Ordinance and Shoreline Master Program Regulation Amendments,"Jones&Stokes, January 26, 2005. Includes proposed draft Best Available Science Regulation Amendments, January 26, 2005. • "Agency Comments March 2004 to December 2004,"Jones &Stokes,January 26, 2005. • "Stream and Lake Code Amendments and Updates: Edits to July 13, 2004 Best Available Science Regulation Amendments,"Jones& Stokes, January 26, 2005. • "Staff Recommended Adjustments to January 26, 2005 Revised Review Drat Critical Areas Ordinance and Shoreline Master Program Regulation Amendments,"Jones & Stokes, March 2,2005 together with"City of Renton Wetland Rating System—Field Review," Parametrix, March 2,2005. • "Frequently Asked Questions: Single Family Homes and new Stream/Lake/Shoreline Buffers," March 8, 2005, prepared by Jones& Stokes for the City of Renton. • "Responses to Planning Commission Hearing Comments: Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration"Jones & Stokes, dated March 9, 2005. Includes ERC Report and Decision dated August 17, 2004, as well as the March 2, 2005 memo above. • "Meeting with Richard Robohm, State Department of Ecology," Jones & Stokes, March 15, 2005. • "Planning Commission Follow-Up Questions,"prepared by Jones&Stokes, March 15, 2005. • "Updated Responses to City Council Hearing Comments: Renton Best Available Science Critical Areas Regulations and Shoreline Master Program GMA Integration,"Jones& Stokes,March 31, 2005; together with a letter"Critical Areas and Shoreline Master Plan Update: Response to Livable Communities Coalition Letter,March 21, 2005,"by AC Kindig&Co. EXHIBIT B TABLE 4-8-12OC Conditional Conditional Business Comp.Plan Conditional Conditional Environ- Master Site TYPE OF Annexation Comp.Plan Approval Approval Environ- Grade and Kennel Mobile Home Modifica- Annexation License for Map Use Permit Use Permit mental Kennel Lot Line Master Site Plan Mobile Home Park, APPLICATION/ (10%Notice o Appeal Text Permit for a Permit for a mental Fill Permit License, tions/ PERMIT of Intent) (60%Petition) Home Amendment/ Amendment Nonconforming Nonconforming (Admin- (Hearing Review Review(Non- (Special) License Hobby Adjustment Plan(Overall)(Individual Park,Final Preliminary Alternate Occupation Rezone Structure Structure istrative) Examiner) Project) Phases) Request Topography Map(5' contours) _ _ _ Stream/Lake Study 3 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 3 (8) Wetlands Assessment 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 II TYPE OF Plat Rebuild Approval Permit Shoreline Short Plat, Site S ecial TemporaryCritical Area Plat PUD, PUD, Rebuild Approval Permit Routine Vegetation Shoreline Shoreline Substantial Shoreline Short Plat, p APPLICATION/ Final Preliminary/Binding Site Preliminary Final for a Nonconforming for a Nonconforming Use Rezone Management Permit Exemption Development Permit Conditional Use Variance Preliminary Final/Binding Site Plan Permit Use Permit Variance Waiver Permit PERMIT Plan Structure Permit Plan Topography Map(5' 12 12 12 contours) Stream/Lake Study(8) 3 3 3 3 3 3 12 12 121 12 12 12 3 12 12 3 12 12 Wetlands Assessment 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 I 3 3 3 3 3 3