The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About60% Petition (per Agenda Bill) - 4/2/2001 � � � CITY , RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA Bl� � AI 1l: •C • , For Agenda of: ApT1I 9, 2001 DepuD��soa�a.. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning sc�ff con��c...... Owen Dennison (#6576) Agenda Status Consent.............. X Subject: Public Hearing.. X PROPOSED ANNEXATION Correspondence.. Ordinance............. Lee Annexation Public Hearings Resolution............ Petition to Annex Old Business........ First zoning Public Hearing Exhibits: New Business....... Issue Paper Study Sessions...... Information......... Recommended Action: Approvals: Set Public Hearing date for Apri123, 2001 1-egal Dept......... Finance Dept...... Other............... Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted.......... Revenue Generated......... Total Project Budget N�A Ciry Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: On September 11, 2000, the Council accepted a 10% Notice of Intent petition to initiate annexation of about 12 acres located east of Hoquiam Avenue NE (142"� Avenue SE) north of NE 9`'' Street (if extended) and west of 144�' Avenue SE (if extended).. The proponents have submitted a 60% Petition to Annex that has been certified as sufficient by the King County Department of Assessments. Under State law, a Public Hearing must be held prior to acceptance of the Petition to Annex. Two Public Hearings must also be held prior to adoption of City of Renton zoning for the subject properties. STAFF RECOMl�IENDATION: Council accept the 60% Petition to Annex. \10ENTRAL\SYS2\DEPTS\FINANCE\ECON DEV\EconomicDevelopment\STRATPLN\PLANNING\ANNEX\Lee\Agnb160%.doc/ . �r�+' � CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: April 2,2001 TO: Dan Clawson,Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: �� Jesse Tanner,Mayor �,a f FROM: Sue Carlson,Administrator ./'•7" STAFF CONTACT: Owen Dennison(#6576) SUBJECT: Proposed Lee Annexation-60%Petition to Annex ISSUE: The City is in receipt of a 60% Petition to Annex for about 12 acres. (Figure 1, Vicinity Map) With annexation, City of Renton zoning must supplant existing King County zoning for the subject parcel. R-8 is proposed to replace the existing King County R-4 zoning, consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, should annexation occur. RECOMMENDATION: On the basis of the following analysis,the Administration recommends that Council: • Accept the 60%Petition to Annex; and • Authorize the Administration to prepare a Notice of Intention package for submittal to the Boundary Review Board for King County. Since two public hearings are required before adoption of a zoning ordinance,no action on zoning is required at this time. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The Council held a Public Meeting with proponents of the annexation on September 11, 2000. Public comment was received from two property owners,both outside the proposed annexation area. Issues raised by the two parties included concern for development impacts to the on-site wetland, traffic impacts and surface water management concerns. Following the Public Meeting,the Council accepted a 10%Notice of Intent petition and authorized the proponent to circulate the 60%Petition to Annex. As conditions of annexation, the Council elected to require assumption of existing bonded indebtedness and acceptance of zoning consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. A 60%Petition has been certified as . sufficient by the King County Department of Assessments. Proposed Lee Annexatio�0%Petition to Annex ,,� April 2,2001 Page 2 1. Location: The subject area is bounded on the north and west by the existing city limits, on the east by 144`h Avenue SE, if extended, and by NE 9`�' Street, if extended, on the south. 2. Assessed value: The assessed value at cunent development is$690,100. 3. Natural features: The subject is generally flat and appears to include a wetland(Figure 2, Topography). 4. Existing land uses: Existing development includes 5 single family homes on medium-to large-lots (Figure 3, Existing Structures). 5. Existing zoning: King County zoning is R-4. R-4 allows up to a base density of four units per gross acre, and up to six units per acre with incentives and transfer of density credits. 6. Comprehensive Plan: Renton's Comprehensive Plan designates the subject parcel Residential Single Family(RS). 7. Public services: Apart from the lack of existing recreational facilities noted under Parks, below,no impediments to service delivery or unusual costs were identified by responding departments and divisions. Water Utility. 'The subject area is within the water service area of Water District#90 by agreement under the East King County Coardinated Water System Plan. A certificate of water availability from the District will be required prior to the issuance of development permits within the subject area, following annexation to the City. Hydrant flow test and hydraulic analysis of the District's system will also be required for new development in the annexed area. The District must provide adequate water supply and pressure for new development within the City and must meet Renton's standards for fire protection and domestic water service. Sewers. The area is not currently served by sewer. Sewers could be extended either by developer extension or local improvement district. Parks. The Community Services Department noted that this area of the City is highly underserved with regard to public recreational facilities including active and passive parks,trails and open space. The Deparhnent recommends consideration be given to provide these facilities. Although small areas are being annexed and developed on a regular basis, the mitigation fees being collected are not sufficient to provide service to the new residents. The cost of providing park services at the policy level.of service is included in the fiscal impact analysis. Fire. The area is currently served by the City under the contract with Fire District#25. Annexation of the area would result in a loss of the contract fee received for provision of fire suppression services to the subject area. Public Works Maintenance. Maintenance staff noted no infrastructure issues at the current level of development. � \\CENTRAL�SYS2\DEPTS�F INANC E\ECON_DEV�EconomicDevelopment�.STRATPLN�PLANNING�ANNEX�Lee\60%Issue.doc\o d � Proposed Lee Annexation-F ,�Petition to Annex � April 2, 2001 �"' ""'�'�` Page 3 Surface Water. The site drains to Honey Creek which is a tributary of May Creek. Future development of the site may impact Honey Creek water quality. City Code or higher storm water management standards will be required at the time of development. Development Services: The Development Services Division noted that impacts to transportation,parks and fire resulting from future development would be mitigated through the application of fees at the time of subdivision. 8. Fiscal Impact Analysis: The following tables identify General Fund revenues and costs associated with annexing the area as it is currently developed, and includes estimates of the annual fiscal impact of full development. The full development scenario assumes 53 single family homes and a population of 132. General Fund Revenue Summary Revenue Source Current Full Development Development Regular Property Tax Levy $2,259 $42,688 State-Shared Revenues 355 3,901 Miscellaneous Revenues 1,262 13,614 Total $3,876 $60,203 Excess Levy $70 $1,314 General Fund Cost Summary Current Full City Service Development Development Contracted services $162 $1,781 Road Maintenance 0 2,000 � � Storm& Sanitary Sewer Maintenance 1,126 1,007 Fire Protection 863 16,299 Police Protection 1,043 11,060 Parks Maintenance 276 - 3,036 Court, Legal and Administration 678 7,454 Ongoing costs $4,148 $42,637 Surplus<Deficit> <$272> $17,567 'I'he analysis shows a negligible deficit under current conditions. With future development,the analysis suggests a minor surplus in revenues. An additional one-time expense of$26,136 is estimated for the acquisition and development of parks to serve the UCENTRAL\SYS2\DEPTS�FINANCE�ECON_DEV�EconomicDevelopment\STRATPLN\PLANNINGWNNEX\L ee\60%Issue.doc\o d Proposed Lee Annexatioily�0%Petition to Annex v,�/ , Apri12,2001 Page 4 future population of the annexation area. Anticipated mitigation fees have been deducted from the estimated park acquisition and development costs. 9. Proposed zoning: As noted above,the adopted Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the subject properties Residential Single Family(RS) (Figure 4) The RS designation is implemented by Residential Manufactured Home Park(RMH),R-8 and R-5 Zones. Since the site is within one-half mile of the Urban Growth Boundary, it is eligible for R-5. R-8 is proposed to supplant the existing King County R-4 zoning. No significant constraints to development or service issues have been raised that would recommend a lower zoned density. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION: (Pursuant to City Counci]Resolution 2429) 1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The annexation policies generally support the proposed annexation. 'The subject properties are within Renton's Potential Annexation Area and are subject to development pressure. (Policies LU-378 and LU-380) The area is available for urbanization under the King County Comprehensive Plan,zoning and subdivision regulations. (Policy LU-380) Renton is the logical provider of urban infrastructure and services to the area. (Policy LU-383) Policy LU-388 states that, in general,the greater the contiguity with the city limits,the more favorable the annexation. The area proposed for annexation is adjacent to the city limits along 50%of its boundaries. Policy LU-388 states that annexation boundaries should be readily identifiable in the field. 'The proposal follows lot lines along the south and east boundaries. There are no alternative boundaries more consistent with Policy LU-388 that could be used,without vastly increasing the size of the annexation. 2. Consistency with the Boundary Review Board Objectives: (from RCW 36.93.180) a. Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities; The proposed annexation would cause no disruption to the larger community. b. Use of physical boundaries, including but not limited to bodies of wafer, highways, and land contours; The proposed annexation follows lot lines on two sides. No alternative physical boundaries exist in the vicinity. c. Creation and preservation of logical service areas; With the exception of water service,provided by King County Water District 90,the . city is capable of providing all urban services to the proposed aru�exation area. The \\CENTRA L\SYS2\DEPTS\FINANC E\ECON_DEV�Economic Development�STRATPLN�PLANNINGWNNE?C�Lee\60%Issue.doc\o d � Proposed Lee Annexation-f ',Petition to Annex �• ° � Apri12, 2001 �` � Page 5 City cunently serves the west side of Hoquiam Avenue NE. The proposal would increase service efficiency by allowing the City to serve both sides of the street. d. Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries; The boundaries are not irregular. e. Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cities and encouragement of incorporations of cities in excess of ten thousand population in heavily populated urban areas; Not applicable. f. Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts; Not applicable. g. Adjustment of impractical boundaries; Neither the existing nor the proposed boundaries are impractical. h. Incorporation as cities or lowns or annexation to cities or towns of unincorporated areas which are urban in character; • King County has designated this area for urban development. i. Protection of agricultura!and rural lands which are designated for long term productive agricultural and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the county legislative authoriry. Not applicable. No portions of the proposed Annexation area are rural or designated for long term productive agricultural use in the King County Comprehensive Plan. CONCLUSION: The proposed annexation is generally consistent with the annexation policies in the Comprehensive Plan and the objectives of the Boundary Review Board. The fiscal impact to the City at current development is.marginally negative,with positive revenues anticipated at full development. With the exception of a deficit of parkland, staff analysis has revealed no impediments to extension of City services to the subject area. Following the Public Hearing, if the Council accepts the Petition to Annex, the Administration will submit a Notice of Intention package to the Boundary Review Board. If the Board approves the proposal, staff will request a date for the second and final public hearing on zoning proposed for the annexation area. �� Attachments cc: Gregg Zimmerman \\CENTRAL�SYS2IDEPTS\FINANCE\ECON_DEV�Economic Development\STRATPLMPLANNINGW NNE?{�Lee\60%Issue.doc\o d Prc � osed Lee Annexa�on . , �igure 1 . — Vicinity Map �� z �� ,` � � ; �`� i ¢ z �` � � o '� � � o � c� �' Q - 0 �`\ -� ; d�- i � N E 1 T S'� ��, � � i , :� o \ � � 11 � i � ► � , � 0 r' � � I � S ' � w � ; / i ;/ \ > I � � � � -}-� � , I � E 6th St � _ �� - ,� � � � I � � 0 600 1,200 - Proposed annexation 1:7 2�� - - --- Existing Renton city limits � Gti�Y o,t, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Planning �O• Sue Carlson.Adminisvawr O.Dennison �'cNTOZ 5 June 2000 Proposed Lee Annexation , � �ure 3. — Structures � � � � � 0 � ❑ ❑ � � Q 0 ao 0 � � \ n p � L� � 0 �� a , ,a � � � � o � , a � ❑ �, o Q � � ._ a a o � 0 0 200 400 Proposed annexation 1:2,400 - - - - - Existing Renton city limits G��Y o,,, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Planning � Existing structures �aS of 1996) �n♦ Sue Carlson,Adminisvator �!�� O.Dennison �NT� 5 June 2000 Pr� �osed Lee Annex� +,ion , `"�'igure 2. — Topograph`�` " ` o I \ � � `�� ;�� \� � �� L�� — � � � �� \��\��\��\� � � � � ` � � `��`�� `� �; ; ��\�;��;;�� , , , , , , , ,,,,,,, , ` ` �\ � , i '' ► � i�i�i ��. i� i `, � i � � �� ``�' i 0 ' i � � i i i� �� i i� � ► i � t� � � � � � i ►� � � i i � ii � �� i �\ �� \ � �� i� �� _ �� i i nd � � � � x. � ---;� ► i i � � � ii �,._..\ � ,— %� a � � ._ �•' , � .•' �- � � _ —_��_ —�_,,�'— —, �,� �-�—_—_-'� __�—• --- ,,— ��.+ � — — i � � � i � i �� i i i i � � 't /� � I 1 / � / ( 1 �-.> I � j � 1 � � �i � � % � � �� j / i � �� j � 1 � � � � �i t / �� / � 1 ♦ � I �_ �� 1 � �/ � � ' � � J\� �� 1 � /� / �"� \ �� ,�� j / /! \�...� �"� i� � � � / � i'—"� / � / � J / � l 1 / � / / / � — _`� �i � \ \\`��—%� / /� /� �—_ � � �� ..� � � ._ l \ i � � � � / � i'"� � I t \`�\ � \\� � / �/ �,..'\ � ) 1 / 1 \ � J / 1 \ � — — �_ � �-.�� / I � � i / �J \ I � ` / � � / ,� ) �L � ! i � �� -,\ -' /�� ----- ♦ \\ � 1 / 1 1 / �� I � � � I l � �� i I _ j � � � /�� 0 200 400 Proposed annexation — — — — — Existing Renton city limits 1:2,4QQ 1 meter topographic interval ��Y o,,, Economic Development,Neighborhoods&Planning —"—"—"—"—"— HyCiT'OLO�1C F@1tllT2S �.' Sue Carlson,Administrator O.Dennison �FNT�� 5 June 2000