HomeMy WebLinkAboutCITY COUNCIL RETREAT Packet for 02/09/2017
AGENDA
City Council Retreat
8:30 AM - Thursday, February 9, 2017
Maplewood Greens, Cedar Room
WELCOME
Review of Agenda and Outcomes
1. UPDATE & DISCUSSION ON KEY ISSUES & PRIORITIES
8:45 am
a) Code Compliance and Enforcement: Review current practice and process, and discuss
ideas and options to be more effective
b) Sidewalk Program Update: Discuss progress and effectiveness
BREAK
10:30 am
2. CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON KEY ISSUES AND PRIORITIES
10:45 am
a) Downtown Redevelopment Efforts Update: Center Core, Transit Center, 200 Mill, Rainier
Ave, Timeline on 2-way streets, Other potential development
b) Sunset Redevelopment Update
c) Park Avenue Extension
LUNCH
Noon
3. RFA UPDATE
12:30 pm
4. CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON KEY ISSUES AND PRIORITIES
1:00 pm
a) Affordable Housing: Discussion on incentives, other measures City should take to
encourage and increase affordable housing in Renton
b) Safe and Healthy Housing
c) Homelessness: Determining appropriate level of service, target of service (i.e. youth,
women), funding, other strategies and level of service and funding to vulnerable
populations
BREAK
2:45 pm
5. CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON KEY ISSUES AND PRIORITIES
3:00 pm
a) Current Zoning Policies: Housing impact on Renton density, infrastructure impacts, other
issues
b) Influencing Regional Policy Issues: Transportation (ST3 & Metro; future systems), Other
issues
c) Other??
ADJOURN
5:00 pm
CODE COMPLIANCE
Background:
Current Process - Receive, Investigate and Document Violation(s):
• Send first Warning of Violation with a 15-day compliance date.
• Re-inspect. If not in compliance, send second Warning of Violation, with an additional 15-day compliance date;
or Close case if compliance achieved.
• If not in compliance after second re-inspection, send a Finding of Violation with $100/$200/300 fine and forward
invoices to Finance to send as back up.
• If not in compliance after three (3) issued Finding of Violations, refer to prosecutor and police for criminal
citation.
• 2016 Code Cases
o 833 cases opened (increased by 110 cases from 2015, and does not include 419 business licenses
processed).
o 858 cases closed.
Current Work:
Coordination
• Monthly meetings with Police, Fire, and City Attorney Staff regarding nuisance properties.
o Define a process and how it can be streamlined to achieve compliance in a shorter amount of time. These
meetings will continue throughout 2017.
• Weekly Meetings with City Attorney Staff
o Review processes, code sections, etc., and discuss what works and what needs to be updated.
o Develop a process to take cases from civil to criminal. What do police and the attorney’s office require from
code compliance to move forward with a criminal citation in a timely manner?
o These meetings are informative and keep both parties on the same page.
o City Attorney staff is currently working on an ordinance to address commercial vehicles in residential areas.
• Weekly Meetings with staff from Economic Development and Police
o One staff member is the designated liaison for the Downtown and North Renton neighborhoods. They
attend meetings to discuss & find solutions for these areas, working closely with residents and business
owners.
Abandoned Structures
• Follow the current ordinance revision to the International Property Maintenance Code that requires vacant
structures to look habitable.
• Re-adopt the Unfit Building Ordinance from the RCW. This ordinance requires a property owner to repair or
demolish a structure deemed unfit. The process is very well outlined with timeframes and fines for non-
compliance.
• We are currently responding on a complaint basis, unless directed by the Mayor and Council to devise a
proactive plan to deal with these structures throughout the city.
Next Steps:
• City Attorney and Code Compliance staff are considering the issuance of one 30-day Warning of Violation,
instead of two 15-day notices. We are also looking at going directly to criminal offenses for repeat violators.
• Continue to refine and identify job duties of the new Administrative Secretary assignments specific to Code
Compliance
o Develop PowerPoint presentations for all appeals presented to the Hearing Examiner.
o Assist with straightforward Warnings or Findings of Violation, i.e. shopping cart and sign correspondence.
o Clarice established a new hotline call log for x7373 and maintains this line and our code compliance email.
AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
SHOPPING CART COLLECTION PROGRAM
Background:
• In 2005, City Council adopted an ordinance that declared shopping carts located on any property
other than that of the cart’s owner to be a public nuisance. The regulations were developed in
response to shopping carts being left in public right-of-ways and upon private property, which
create obstructions for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, as well as contributing to visual
blight.
• The regulations curtailed the nuisances for a couple years, but their blight upon the community
began to increase significantly in recent years.
• In early 2016, more stringent regulations were adopted. The revisions to RMC enable City staff
to immediately impound any lost, stolen, or abandoned carts and issue a $100 fine for each
impounded cart.
• Weekly shopping cart collections began in mid-April of 2016; however, in order to provide stores
substantial notice, fines were not issued until early July.
Current Work:
• On October 19, 2016, the City convened a meeting with retail providers to discuss the new
regulations. After consulting with the Mayor and City Council leadership, staff agreed to
contemplate exempting stores from fines if they accomplish the following:
1. Affix permanent identification to shopping carts (identifies the owner of the shopping
cart or the name of the business establishment, or both; notifies the public that the
unauthorized removal of the cart from the premises of the business or parking area of
the retail establishment, or the unauthorized possession of the cart, is unlawful; and
lists a current telephone number or address for returning carts removed from the
premises or parking area to the owner or retailer);
2. Implement security controls (we have not yet determined which security measures
would be reasonable, equitable, and effective for all stores); and
3. Have contracted with a vendor to pick up stray shopping carts (specific conditions
regarding this service are to be developed).
• 424 shopping carts have been retrieved.
• $20,700 fines issued and $17,900 fines collected.
Next Steps:
• Continue to work with stores and monitor progress and effectiveness to ensure carts don’t end
up in the right-of-way.
• Ensure stores that have not paid violations do so as part of the business license renewal process.
AGENDA ITEM #1. a)
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
U
P
D
A
T
E
B
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
:
•
R
e
n
t
o
n
h
a
s
o
v
e
r
5
0
0
m
i
l
e
s
o
f
s
t
r
e
e
t
e
d
g
e
a
n
d
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
m
i
l
e
s
o
f
t
h
a
t
d
o
n
o
t
h
a
v
e
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
i
n
p
l
a
c
e
.
B
a
c
k
i
n
2
0
0
3
t
h
e
e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
c
o
s
t
t
o
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
a
l
l
r
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
w
a
s
$
1
4
0
M
—
t
h
e
n
u
m
b
e
r
i
s
h
i
g
h
e
r
n
o
w
.
•
T
I
P
N
o
.
2
0
,
t
h
e
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
,
i
s
b
u
d
g
e
t
e
d
a
t
$
2
5
0
,
0
0
0
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
t
o
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
n
d
b
u
i
l
d
n
e
w
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
C
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
S
t
u
d
y
.
•
T
I
P
N
o
.
2
9
,
t
h
e
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
-
F
r
e
e
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
,
h
a
s
a
b
u
d
g
e
t
o
f
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
t
o
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
t
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
n
s
w
i
t
h
D
i
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
A
c
t
.
•
T
I
P
N
o
.
2
1
,
t
h
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
,
h
a
s
a
b
u
d
g
e
t
o
f
$
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
f
o
r
t
h
e
r
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
t
h
a
t
h
a
v
e
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
e
d
.
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
R
e
p
a
i
r
,
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
:
•
T
h
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
g
r
i
n
d
s
a
n
d
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
s
a
s
p
h
a
l
t
w
e
d
g
e
s
a
s
t
e
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
r
e
p
a
i
r
s
i
n
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
w
h
e
r
e
r
o
o
t
h
e
a
v
e
a
n
d
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
h
a
s
c
a
u
s
e
d
t
r
i
p
p
i
n
g
h
a
z
a
r
d
s
.
T
h
i
s
w
o
r
k
i
s
d
o
n
e
b
o
t
h
p
r
o
a
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
,
a
n
d
i
n
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
o
c
i
t
i
z
e
n
c
o
m
p
l
a
i
n
t
s
.
•
D
u
r
i
n
g
2
0
1
6
l
e
g
i
s
l
a
t
i
o
n
w
a
s
p
a
s
s
e
d
t
h
a
t
a
f
f
e
c
t
e
d
t
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
:
V
A
l
l
o
w
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
t
o
c
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
o
r
w
h
o
l
l
y
p
a
y
f
o
r
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
r
e
g
a
r
d
l
e
s
s
o
f
t
h
e
c
a
u
s
e
o
f
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
d
e
f
e
c
t
(
s
)
;
V
R
e
p
a
i
r
o
r
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
r
e
m
a
i
n
s
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
a
b
u
t
t
i
n
g
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
w
n
e
r
s
.
H
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
m
a
y
u
s
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
t
o
r
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
n
g
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
,
a
n
d
m
a
y
a
l
s
o
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
w
i
t
h
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
w
n
e
r
s
o
r
h
o
m
e
o
w
n
e
r
s
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
j
o
i
n
t
l
y
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
r
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
v
e
g
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
;
V
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
a
b
u
t
t
i
n
g
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
w
n
e
r
s
t
o
r
e
p
o
r
t
a
n
y
h
a
z
a
r
d
o
u
s
o
r
d
e
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
;
a
n
d
V
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
t
h
e
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
,
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
a
b
i
e
n
n
i
a
l
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
i
n
g
f
u
n
d
s
t
o
b
e
e
x
p
e
n
d
e
d
f
o
r
“
m
i
s
s
i
n
g
l
i
n
k
”
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
b
a
s
e
d
u
p
o
n
a
n
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
o
f
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
e
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
,
t
h
e
s
e
v
e
r
i
t
y
o
f
t
h
o
s
e
h
a
z
a
r
d
o
u
s
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
,
t
h
e
c
o
s
t
o
f
m
a
k
i
n
g
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
,
a
n
d
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
b
u
d
g
e
t
e
d
f
u
n
d
s
;
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
:
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
c
a
n
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
b
e
c
a
t
e
g
o
r
i
z
e
d
a
s
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
i
n
g
o
n
e
o
f
t
h
e
t
h
r
e
e
p
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
l
y
m
e
n
t
i
o
n
e
d
C
i
t
y
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
i
n
t
h
e
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
:
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
-
F
r
e
e
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
,
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
,
o
r
t
h
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
1
.
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
-
F
r
e
e
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
:
T
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
l
a
w
,
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
’
s
e
f
f
o
r
t
t
o
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
i
n
t
o
c
o
n
f
o
r
m
i
t
y
w
i
t
h
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
c
o
n
t
a
i
n
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
n
s
w
i
t
h
D
i
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
A
c
t
(
A
D
A
)
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
.
T
h
i
s
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
a
l
s
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
f
o
r
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
d
e
s
i
g
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
o
n
a
n
“
a
s
-
n
e
e
d
e
d
”
b
a
s
i
s
i
n
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
o
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
t
o
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
a
c
c
e
s
s
f
o
r
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
w
i
t
h
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
i
z
e
d
n
e
e
d
s
.
2
.
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
:
T
h
i
s
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
f
o
r
t
h
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
n
d
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
h
i
g
h
-
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
y
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
(
i
.
e
.
,
“
m
i
s
s
i
n
g
l
i
n
k
s
”
)
.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
a
r
e
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
a
n
d
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
z
e
d
u
s
i
n
g
c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
o
u
t
l
i
n
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
C
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
C
i
t
y
w
i
d
e
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
S
t
u
d
y
(
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
i
n
2
0
0
9
)
,
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
o
f
R
e
n
t
o
n
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
3
.
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
:
T
h
i
s
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
a
n
d
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
u
r
b
a
n
d
g
u
t
t
e
r
,
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
a
n
d
c
u
r
b
r
a
m
p
s
,
w
h
e
r
e
s
u
c
h
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
h
a
v
e
d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
e
d
o
r
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
d
a
m
a
g
e
d
.
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
,
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
l
a
r
g
e
i
n
s
c
o
p
e
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
f
u
n
d
s
,
a
r
e
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
i
n
a
d
v
a
n
c
e
a
n
d
a
c
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
e
d
a
s
a
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
.
S
t
a
f
f
p
r
o
m
p
t
l
y
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
s
t
o
c
i
t
i
z
e
n
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
,
i
n
j
u
r
i
e
s
t
o
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
,
a
n
d
k
n
o
w
n
h
a
z
a
r
d
s
(
a
n
y
t
h
i
n
g
g
r
e
a
t
e
r
t
h
a
n
a
%
“
r
a
i
s
e
.
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
H
o
n
e
y
C
r
e
e
k
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
—
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
R
e
h
a
b
&
c
u
r
b
r
a
m
p
s
I
n
P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
/
U
p
c
o
m
i
n
g
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
T
o
B
e
D
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
$
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
T
o
B
e
D
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
$
4
7
0
,
0
0
0
T
o
B
e
D
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
$
3
5
0
,
0
0
0
T
o
B
e
D
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
d
h
.
$
1
5
0
,
0
0
0
T
o
B
e
D
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
T
y
p
e
(
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
-
F
r
e
e
,
N
a
m
e
o
f
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
,
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
C
o
s
t
(
e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
)
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
D
a
t
e
R
e
h
a
b
)
6
t
h
&
W
h
i
t
w
o
r
t
h
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
-
F
r
e
e
$
1
8
,
0
0
0
S
u
m
m
e
r
2
0
1
6
B
u
r
n
e
t
t
A
v
e
n
u
e
(
R
e
n
t
o
n
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
$
1
5
,
5
0
0
S
u
m
m
e
r
2
0
1
6
S
e
n
i
o
r
C
e
n
t
e
r
)
T
a
l
b
o
t
R
o
a
d
,
n
e
a
r
V
a
l
l
e
y
M
e
d
i
c
a
l
C
e
n
t
e
r
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
$
4
6
,
8
0
0
S
u
m
m
e
r
2
0
1
6
N
E
1
2
t
h
B
e
t
w
e
e
n
O
l
y
m
p
i
a
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
$
1
,
5
0
0
S
u
m
m
e
r
2
0
1
5
A
v
e
N
E
a
n
d
U
n
i
o
n
A
v
e
N
E
2
0
1
5
S
t
r
e
e
t
P
a
t
c
h
&
O
v
e
r
l
a
y
w
i
t
h
1
6
c
u
r
b
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
-
F
r
e
e
$
7
0
,
6
0
0
S
u
m
m
e
r
2
0
1
5
r
a
m
p
s
$
5
0
,
5
0
0
S
u
m
m
e
r
2
0
1
6
T
y
p
e
(
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
-
F
r
e
e
,
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
,
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
C
o
s
t
(
e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
)
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
D
a
t
e
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
R
e
h
a
b
)
1
1
6
A
v
e
S
E
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
$
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
S
p
r
i
n
g
2
0
1
7
M
a
p
l
e
w
o
o
d
G
l
e
n
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
R
e
h
a
b
$
4
0
0
,
0
0
0
S
u
m
m
e
r
2
0
1
7
J
e
r
i
c
h
o
A
v
e
n
u
e
a
t
M
a
p
l
e
w
o
o
d
S
c
h
o
o
l
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
-
F
r
e
e
$
2
8
,
0
0
0
S
p
r
i
n
g
2
0
1
7
t
h
4
&
T
a
y
l
o
r
A
D
A
R
a
m
p
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
-
F
r
e
e
$
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
S
u
m
m
e
r
2
0
1
7
N
E
7
t
h
b
t
w
K
i
r
k
l
a
n
d
A
v
e
N
E
&
M
o
n
r
o
e
A
v
e
N
E
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
(
n
o
r
t
h
s
i
d
e
)
—
N
e
l
s
o
n
M
S
(
1
0
A
v
e
5
E
)
j
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
(
U
n
f
u
n
d
e
d
)
T
a
l
b
o
t
R
d
S
&
S
2
1
s
t
4
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
(
U
n
f
u
n
d
e
d
)
B
e
n
s
o
n
R
d
S
S
o
u
t
h
o
f
4
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
(
U
n
f
u
n
d
e
d
)
2
7
t
h
S
t
(
1
1
5
f
e
e
t
)
L
a
k
e
A
v
e
5
,
S
2
n
d
t
o
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
(
U
n
f
u
n
d
e
d
)
T
o
b
i
n
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
R
E
H
A
B
I
L
I
T
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
H
O
N
E
Y
C
R
E
E
K
R
I
D
G
E
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
L
e
g
e
n
d
C
i
t
y
a
n
d
C
o
u
n
t
y
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
U
C
i
t
y
o
F
R
e
n
t
i
A
d
d
r
e
s
s
e
s
,
J
P
a
r
c
e
l
s
N
o
t
e
s
N
o
n
e
0
2
5
6
0
1
2
8
2
5
6
F
.
e
t
W
G
S
1
9
8
4
_
W
e
b
_
M
e
r
c
a
t
o
r
A
u
a
a
r
y
_
S
p
h
e
r
e
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
I
o
y
.
G
I
S
T
h
r
s
m
a
p
o
a
u
o
n
r
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
s
t
a
c
a
u
t
p
t
A
(
,
o
r
n
n
n
i
a
p
.
p
n
o
t
a
n
d
i
n
i
c
r
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
o
n
l
y
O
c
l
a
l
a
y
e
l
s
t
h
a
t
o
o
n
e
a
i
.
n
r
h
r
o
n
y
p
r
n
a
o
r
n
a
y
n
p
t
e
I
R
e
n
t
o
n
d
A
a
p
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
R
e
n
I
u
r
w
a
g
t
o
v
a
c
u
r
a
r
e
.
U
t
r
e
n
t
,
o
u
r
e
r
w
n
e
F
i
n
a
n
c
e
&
I
T
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
1
/
2
5
/
2
0
1
7
T
H
I
S
M
A
P
I
S
N
O
T
T
O
B
E
U
S
E
D
F
O
R
N
A
V
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
L
L
Z
Z
:
!
I
I
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
—
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
R
E
H
A
B
I
L
I
T
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
M
A
P
L
E
W
O
O
D
G
L
E
N
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
Sidewalk Rehab &Replacement Program
Newport Avenue SE at SE 6th Street (Maplewood Glen)—
Completed Summer 2015 as part of Street Patch &
Overlay Program
Newport Avenue SE at SE 5th Street (Maplewood Glen)—
Completed Summer 2015 as part of Street Patch &
Overlay Program
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
N
2
N
N
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
C
O
M
P
L
E
T
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
Complete Streets
Logan Avenue
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
4
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
B
A
R
R
I
E
R
-
F
R
E
E
T
R
A
N
S
I
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
Barrier Free Transition Plan
NE 76th Street at Lake Washington Blvd —
Completed Summer 2015 as part of
Street Patch &Overlay Program
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
Barrier Free Transition Plan
i
Index Avenue NE at Jefferson Avenue NE
Behind Renton Technical College -
Completed Summer 2015 as part of
Street Patch &Overlay Program
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
1
.
b
)
DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT
Background:
The City of Renton is working to partner with the private sector to revitalize downtown. We have defined five keys to
success:
• Engaging business and property owners as partners
• Building on foundations already in place
• Making strategic public investments to spur private investment
• Instilling a sense of pride in our Downtown
• Supporting existing businesses, attracting new ones, and encouraging development
Current Work:
• 200 Mill Redevelopment. Offered the former City Hall building and parking area for mixed-use development.
Selected partner and working on Exclusive Negotiation Agreement. (Separate one-pager)
• Civic Core. Working with consultant to develop and implement a master design vision for amenities and
development of the Civic Core area (including Piazza & Gateway parks, Pavilion, parking garage, transit center
[see graphics for new Transit Center], and Burnett Linear Park/Cedar River Trail connections), as well as, the
Downtown Business District. This project also includes redesign of the Downtown Wayfinding project. (Separate
one-pager)
• Main Ave 2-way Conversion. Construction on the first phase of couplet conversions has begun. The project also
includes improvements to the pedestrian realm with a raised table intersection and a new plaza that will feature
a new piece of public art. (Separate PowerPoint showing benefits)
• Investments in Public Art. Under the auspices of the Renton Municipal Arts Commission
• Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Façade Program. Program to provide matching funds to business
and property owners improving the exteriors of downtown buildings.
o Cortona Building (724 S 3rd), complete
o Vigor Life Building (332 Burnett Ave), under construction
o 306 Williams Ave Building, construction anticipated to begin late winter 2017
• Engage Development Community. Work with development teams on an ongoing basis to identify building sites
and develop projects in the downtown area.
• Support Business Development. Support existing businesses directly, through the Renton Downtown
Partnership, and partnering with the Renton Chamber and others. Work to fill vacant spaces with new business
opportunities.
• Improving the appearance of the district. Continue emphasis on cleaning up Downtown and bringing new safe,
modern, and attractive amenities.
o Code enforcement
o Street banners, signal boxes, window displays, and other art
o Flower baskets
o Downtown Streetscape Design Standards and Guidelines
• Infrastructure Assessment. The Downtown core has some of the oldest public infrastructure in the city and it is
not always adequate to support the scale, scope, and quality of development we seek there.
o Sewer, water, and storm water
o Streets, streetscape, and transit
Next Steps:
• Continue to secure resources necessary to implement enhancement projects
o 2-way conversions, sidewalks & streetscapes, parklets, outdoor dining, signage, arts
• Align public infrastructure investment with development vision
o Invest in public utilities to support development
o Evaluate developer incentives
• Enhance marketing and promotion efforts Downtown to strengthen the business climate and attract new
investment.
o Identify new development opportunities and promote them to qualified developers
o Continue support of events, festivals, and Renton Downtown Partnership
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
200 MILL/ FORMER CITY HALL PROPERTY
Background:
• In November 2016, City Council approved staff’s recommendation to select a proposal from Winson
Investment of Bellevue to redevelop the former city hall property at 200 Mill Avenue South in
Downtown Renton. Council passed a motion to begin exclusive negotiations with Winson for
possible purchase of the property for the purpose of developing the team’s proposal.
• Winson’s proposal is to transform the property into a home for an international school, a 10-story
adult/senior housing complex, and an outdoor civic plaza and a riverfront park. The proposal also
includes educational facilities, community meeting space, a gymnasium/theater, retail shops, a
340-space below ground parking garage, and a restaurant with a view of the Cedar River. The
school would initially enroll up to 500 students in grades 6-12, with many living in an 11-story
dormitory.
Current Work:
• In January 2017, in advance of entering into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA), the Winson
team and Mayor Law signed a letter of intent for the purpose of facilitating currency transfers from
China to the United States of America to invest in the proposed project. The transfers are
necessary to ensure that the Winson team has funding available to carry out due diligence,
feasibility studies, and entitlement review during the ENA period. The ENA is expected to set forth
terms and conditions under which the Winson team will conduct those activities, the City and
Winson will negotiate an agreement for the Winson team to acquire the property and construct the
proposed project, and the parties will agree to a schedule to complete negotiations and enter into
the agreement.
• Staff is currently working to finalize details on entitlement requirements and project approval
timeframes that will be incorporated into the ENA. A final ENA is expected to be completed and
approved by the parties soon and executed in February 2017.
Next Steps:
• The ENA is anticipated to provide the City and Winson team a 120-day negotiation period to
complete preliminary due diligence related to the property and Winson’s proposal. Some of the
items anticipated to be addressed during this period include:
o Zoning and land use review of plans for applicability and consistency with City development
standards.
o Initial environmental review of shoreline development standards with the Washington
Department of Ecology (DOE).
o Financial feasibility and constructability of the proposal components (including public
amenities), including development of construction cost budgets, school operating plan,
senior housing market study, budgets for operating and maintaining public amenities and
parking, development scenarios and phasing for the various project components, and
project financing strategy.
• Following the 120 days, if the parties agree that the results of the preliminary due diligence are
satisfactory, the parties would enter in a second phase of negotiations to draft and finalize an
agreement for Winson to acquire the property from the City. The negotiation period would also
involve Winson submitting the necessary plans and associated materials for entitlements (land use
and project approvals), including a master site plan for all proposal components, SEPA review, and
Shoreline permits by DOE. The project approvals would be timed to be reviewed and approved by
the appropriate bodies in conjunction with City Council’s approval of the agreement. Staff is
working with Winson to determine an appropriate amount of time necessary for the second phase
of negotiations, but currently estimates that approximately 180 days will be necessary. This would
allow project plans and the City-Winson agreement to be completed and approved by the end of
2017.
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
RENTON DOWNTOWN CIVIC CORE VISION AND ACTION PLAN
Background:
An interdepartmental team consisting of Community and Economic Development, Community
Services, and Public Works, is working with our consultant team led by MIG, Inc. to develop a
Vision and Action Plan for the Civic Core and Downtown Business District areas.
The Civic Core includes several blocks surrounding the Transit Center, Pavilion Event Center,
Piazza and Gateway parks, and City Center Parking Garage. The Downtown Business District
stretches generally from Shattuck Avenue (west), to Cedar River/I‐405 (east), South 2nd Street
(north), and South 4th Street (south).
Current Work:
Renton enjoys numerous public facilities and amenities in its Civic Core and Downtown Business
District areas. However, linkages and placemaking interventions are needed to truly make
Downtown Renton and the Civic Core the center of the community.
Many projects are already happening in Downtown, including roadway reconfigurations, Transit
Center and transit routing modifications, private development and rehabilitation, community
events, and beautification efforts. The Vision and Action Plan is a community planning process
that will take a thoughtful and integrated approach to leverage these existing projects and the
energy in the community to create a more distinctive and economically prosperous environment
for residents, employees, businesses, and visitors.
From November 2016 through today, MIG has been working on Discovery, or Phase I of the
project, which includes MIG's on‐site observations of the Civic Core and Downtown Business
District areas and analysis of background info on City facilities. MIG has so far produced a Public
Participation Plan and drafts of analysis documents focusing on the economic market, baseline
conditions of the areas, and transportation/parking. A project website,
www.rentonciviccore.com, has been established to introduce the project to the public, provide
project information, and encourage community involvement.
In late January through early March 2017, MIG and the City’s project management team have
begun engaging the public through stakeholder interviews and focus groups, forming a
community advisory committee (CAC) and technical advisory committee (TAC), and planning a
public project Kick‐Off + Visioning Workshop on Thursday, March 2nd at the Pavilion. The focus
groups/stakeholder interviews have engaged representatives from downtown business and
property owners, Chamber of Commerce, Renton Downtown Partnership, Municipal Arts
Commission and other arts groups, Piazza Renton, History Museum, Library, City Center
Community Plan Advisory Board, Parks Commission, residential and commercial brokers, and
developers.
The CAC is made up of community leaders representing a broad spectrum of downtown and city
stakeholders, while the TAC is composed of representatives from City department and local
transit and other agencies that have expertise in areas that will be studied as part of the
planning process. The committees will provide guidance to MIG and City project management
team on the consultant’s project deliverables and topics being addressed as part of the planning
process. The CAC and TAC will continue to meet throughout the plan’s development.
The March 2nd event will provide an opportunity for any interested persons to join the
discussion on defining Downtown’s constraints and opportunities and ideas for a plan of action
to improve the area.
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Next Steps:
Phase II: Assessment & Design
o Following the March 2nd event, MIG will move into Phase II of the project, Assessment
and Design, which is expected to last through August 2017. During this phase, MIG will
develop concepts for the various components of the Vision and Action Plan in
conjunction with community input. Components include land use, urban design,
economic development, space and facility programming, wayfinding, opportunity site
analysis, bicycles/pedestrians, parks/open space, and transportation. The CAC and TAC
will meet during this phase.
o In April, Council’s Committee of the Whole will be briefed on the project’s progress.
o In May early June, the Planning Commission and City Council will be provided a progress
report on findings thus far as well as an opportunity to provide initial input on plan
concepts.
o An interactive Community Design Workshop will be held in mid‐June to allow the entire
community an opportunity to participate in placemaking exercises to consider the look,
feel and operation of strategic places in the project areas.
o Utilizing the results of the interactive workshop and other information collected as part
of the Discovery and Assessment & Design phases, MIG will develop a recommended
alternative for various plan components that will include several visualizations of
implementation options. The results will be reviewed and discussed by the CAC and TAC
in advance of being presented to a joint working session of the Planning Commission
and City Council in August.
Phase III: Plan
o In September, MIG will hold a Recommended Alternative Workshop to allow members
of the public to view the visualizations and provide feedback via in‐person and online
surveys. Results of the surveys will be used to refine and revise the recommended
alternative.
o Following the workshop, MIG will complete drafting of the several elements that will
make up the Vision and Action Plan, which include:
Vision and Goals
Organizational Strategy
Wayfinding Plan
Public Facility and Business Strategy
Urban Design and Land Use
Placemaking
Multimodal Transportation and Parking
Infrastructure
Priority Projects
Phasing/Implementation
o The CAC and TAC will meet to review and discuss the draft Plan in October/November.
Following this meeting, MIG will refine the draft Plan for final review by the Planning
Commission and City Council.
o The draft Plan is expected to be presented to the Planning Commission in November,
followed by final review and adoption by the City Council in November and/or
December.
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
-Q 0 0 4 CD 0 -
I
-
‘0)—
a
C
,
C
,CD
(1
,
0 0)a
.
CD 8
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
S
T
3
R
e
q
i
o
n
a
t
H
i
q
h
’
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
S
y
s
t
e
m
P
l
a
n
E
.
0
2
a
S
e
g
m
e
n
t
B
RE
N
T
O
N
.
SO
U
T
H
RE
N
T
O
N
PA
R
K
AN
D
RI
D
E
PA
R
K
I
N
G
GA
R
A
G
E
&
TR
A
N
S
I
T
CE
N
T
E
R
1.
4
0
5
IN
T
E
N
S
I
V
E
CA
P
I
T
A
L
PL
A
N
5
7
2
;
5
HO
R
i
Z
O
N
T
A
L
SC
A
L
E
SO
U
N
D
T
M
N
S
n
DW
G
N
O
.
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
SH
E
E
T
1
O
F
_
_
I
R
E
V
.
N
O
.
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Couplet Conversion Project
Enhancing Downtown Renton as a
Destination
City Council Planning Workshop/Retreat
February 9, 2017
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
Project Vision
“…to reclaim our downtown as an
economically healthy, people-friendly
place, enhanced by the movement of
pedestrians, bikes, cars, and in support of a
diversity of businesses and places to live…”
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
Couplet Conversion Goals
Improve traffic operations and circulation
Provide multiple circulation routes
Reduce thru traffic volumes
Reduce vehicle speeds
Enhance pedestrian experience
Reduce accidents
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
Enhance Pedestrian Experience
Pedestrian facilities and enhancements
Raised concrete intersections
Wayfinding
Streetscape standards
Landscaping
Decorative lighting
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
Enhance Pedestrian Experience
Open space enhancements
Piazza, Parklets, Public Art
Potential to create a distinct character for
each corridor
Example: Street Festival on South 3rd Street
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
Considerations Impacting Conversion
Need to secure outside grant money to fund
the conversion
Constrained right-of-way due to existing
buildings
Maintaining access to all businesses during
construction
Street projects must be closely coordinated
with utility and private development projects
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
South 2nd Street – East of Williams Ave South
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
South 2nd Street – East of Williams Ave South
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
Schedule
Main Street Construction Completed end of 2017
Wells Ave & Williams Ave
Design - April 2017 - May 2018
Right-of-Way - Sept. 2017 – May 2018
*Construction – June 2018 – Dec. 2019
South 2nd and 3rd Street
Design – 2019-2020
Right-of-Way - 2019-2020
Construction – 2021-2022
*Will require Advance Construction Obligation Authority
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
a
)
CityFixer
The Many Benefits of Making One-Way
Streets Two-Way
Safer traffic, for one thing.
Eric Jaffe
Jul 20, 2015
Howard Ignatius / Flickr
From a traffic engineering perspective, one -way streets are all about speed. Without the
danger of oncoming traffic, one -way streets can feel like an invitation to hit the gas. But
swift traffic flow isn’t the only factor by which progressive cities judge their streets, and as
safety and livability become more important, a number of metros have found the case for
converting one -way streets into two-way streets a compelling one.
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Count Louisville among the believers. In 2011, the city converted two one -way streets (Brook
and 1st) in the Old Louisville part of town. Though originally designed as two -way streets,
Brook and 1st became one -way after World War II, in keeping with the car -first engineering
of the time. In championing the change, local official David James cited the need for calmer
streets and economic development .
A pair of planning scholars has evaluated just how well the safety and economic claims held
up following the street conversions. I n a word: very. William Riggs of California Polytechnic
State University and John Gilderbloom of the University of Louisville report that compared
with nearby, parallel streets that remained one -way (2nd and 3rd), Brook and 1st
experienced fewer collisions , less crime, and higher property valuations.
Let’s take a closer look at some of the key findings, via the Journal of Planning Education and
Research.
Traffic safety
Riggs and Gilderbloom tracked traffic collisions on Bro ok, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd for five years
leading up to the conversion, and two years after. In the first year following the change, both
Brook and 1st had big drops in collisions per month, while those on 2nd and 3rd increased.
At the two-year mark, the per-month averages on Brook and 1st were down 36 and 60
percent, respectively; meanwhile those on 2nd were up a lot (23 percent) and those on 3rd
were only down slightly (7 percent).
What makes the finding even more impressive is that traffic safety improved on Brook and
1st even though traffic volume increased on these streets—13 and 40 percent, respectively.
Over the same period, traffic volume on 2nd and 3rd dropped. In apparent real -world
confirmation of theoretical traffic models, drivers seemed to accept th e slower speeds in
exchange for more direct access to their destination; here’s Riggs and Gilderbloom:
It is also one of our more surprising findings since traffic engineers typically claim that two -
ways reduce maximum capacity of a road, making it ineffic ient use of tax payer money and
resources…
Crime
On criminal measures of safety, the conv erted Brook and 1st performed as good or better
than 2nd and 3rd streets, too. After the change, the number of total crimes per month
declined on both Brook (15 percent) and 1st (30 percent). Crime on 3rd also fell (16 percent),
but crime on 2nd increased (16 percent) and crime across the Louisville metro increased 5
percent during this period.
Riggs and Gilderbloom found a particularly impressive dip in two specific crimes. Auto thefts
fell on Brook (33 percent) and 1st (23 percent), even as they rose on t he comparison streets.
Robberies also fell on Brook (33 percent) and 1st (50 percent)—a greater decline than on
2nd and 3rd (13 and 10 percent, respectively). The researchers don’t have a terribly
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
compelling theory for the change, but suspect that slower g etaway speeds could play some
role. It’s also possible the traffic increases mean there are just more proverbial eyes on the
streets.
Property values
On property values, the same improvement story held true. Ex amining property sales before
and after the conversion, Riggs and Gilderbloom report that houses on Brook and 1st both
appreciated, with an average increase of 11.6 and 2.8 percent, respectively. Those on 2nd
and 3rd, meanwhile, depreciated roughly .4 perc ent over the same period. The latter cases
are representative of the larger Louisville real estate market, which declined slightly during
this time.
Again, the source of the improvement here isn’t entirely clear, but the researchers suspect
that people sim ply prefer to live on a street with slower traffic, less crime, and better
mobility.
No panacea, but lots of promise
The researchers recognize some limitations in their analysis. The process of neighborhood
improvement is a very complex one with lots of va riables. The statistics used here can’t quite
show that the street conversion itself caused the changes, though the inclusion of very
reasonable control streets does lend more support to that idea. And these conversions
aren’t cheap: in this case, $250,000 for the pair of 1.25-mile segments.
But as more evidence emerges about the safety and economic value of one -way street
conversions, those cost may start to seem well worth the greater good; Riggs and
Gilderbloom conclude:
Though there is no panacea for im proving neighborhoods, our case shows a clear example of
road diets and traffic calming as ways to change the character of a neighborhood and that
one-way to two -way street conversions can assist in redeveloping a community.
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
The Return of the Two-Way Street
Why the double-yellow stripe is making a comeback in downtowns.
BY: Alan Ehrenhalt | December 2009
Over the past couple of decades, Vancouver, Washington, has spent millions of dollars trying to revitalize
its downtown, and especially the area around Main Street that used to be the primary commercial center.
Just how much the city has spent isn't easy to determine. But it's been an ambitious program. Vancouver
has totally refurbished a downtown park, subsidized condos and apartment buildings overlooking it and
built a new downtown Hilton hotel.
Some of these investments have been successful, but they did next to nothing for Main Street itself.
Through most of this decade, the street remained about as dreary as ever. Then, a year ago, the city
council tried a new strategy. Rather than wait for the $14 million more in state and federal money it was
planning to spend on projects on and around Main Street, it opted for something much simpler. It painted
yellow lines in the middle of the road, took down some signs and put up others, and installed some new
traffic lights. In other words, it took a one-way street and opened it up to two-way traffic.
The merchants on Main Street had high hopes for this change. But none of them were prepared for what
actually happened following the changeover on November 16, 2008. In the midst of a severe recession,
Main Street in Vancouver seemed to come back to life almost overnight.
Within a few weeks, the entire business community was celebrating. "We have twice as many people
going by as they did before," one of the employees at an antique store told a local reporter. The chairman
of the Vancouver Downtown Association, Lee Coulthard, sounded more excited than almost anyone else.
"It's like, wow," he exclaimed, "why did it take us so long to figure this out?"
A year later, the success of the project is even more apparent. Twice as many cars drive down Main
Street every day, without traffic jams or serious congestion. The merchants are still happy. "One-way
streets should not be allowed in prime downtown retail areas," says Rebecca Ocken, executive director of
Vancouver's Downtown Association. "We've proven that."
The debate over one-way versus two-way streets has been going on for more than half a century now in
American cities, and it is far from resolved even yet. But the evidence seems to suggest that the two-way
side is winning. A growing number of cities, including big ones such as Minneapolis, Louisville and
Oklahoma City, have converted the traffic flow of major streets to two-way or laid out plans to do so.
There has been virtually no movement in the other direction.
Minneapolis opened its First Street and Hennepin Street commercial areas to two-way traffic on October
11, hoping to pump some life into a stagnant corridor. It's too early to draw any firm conclusions, but the
early responses were mixed. First Street is home to several nightclubs, and some of them complained
that bringing in two-way traffic made it difficult for bands with large trucks to park. "The city has royally
screwed us," one club manager declared. The city basically shrugged those complaints off. Its planners
claimed the clubowners were making self-interested arguments that ignored the common benefits of a
healthier street life.
Before World War II, one-way commercial streets were pretty rare in the United States. People frequented
downtowns in which buses and streetcars negotiated two-way traffic, and they got off to shop at the
stores that lined both sides of the street. Those who drove could park right along the sidewalk.
After the war, a couple of things happened. Civil defense planners, taking seriously the threat of nuclear
attack, worried that residents trying to escape would create gridlock on the crowded two-way streets,
imprisoning themselves in smoldering cities and causing many more casualties. The arterial streets were
Page 1 of 3
05/16/2012http://www.governing.com/templates/gov_print_article?id=87920652
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
the only escape routes they had. Making them one-way, on an alternating basis, would speed things up
and save lives. Or so it was thought.
But atomic bombs were only one factor that made civic leaders and transportation planners partial to one-
way streets in the postwar years. They were worried about congestion, period. Some thought that the
frustrations of moving through downtown the old-fashioned way were driving people to do their shopping
in the suburbs. More mobility might mean more customers. Others, in those pre-Interstate days, cared
mainly about the satisfaction of the suburbanites themselves. These people were using the arterial roads
to commute in and out of the city, and there was little dispute that one-way streets could get them back
and forth more quickly.
By the 1970s, though, there were new urban realities. Large portions of the Interstate Highway System
were built, so nobody would have to flee the Soviets on gridlocked city streets. More important, downtown
retail customers were shopping at suburban malls no matter what the local chamber of commerce did to
try and stop them. Downtown had begun its long, familiar decline. The one-way streets fashioned in the
1950s and 1960s were still pretty good at whisking people out of central cities, but far fewer area
residents wanted to enter the cities in the first place. Many downtown one-way streets became miniature
speedways that served largely to frighten anyone who had the eccentric idea of strolling down the
sidewalk.
Anyone who travels a lot to the center of big cities has had an experience like this: You arrive at night,
and start looking for your hotel. You find it, but you can't drive to the entrance because the street is one-
way the other way. Finally you come to a street that goes the way you want, but once you get close again,
the signs won't allow you to make the turn you need to make. You can waste 20 minutes this way. And as
you keep driving, you notice that the streets are empty anyway. Any reason that might have existed for
turning them into single-purpose speedways simply did not apply anymore.
Meanwhile, local governments were slowly learning that the old two-way streets, whatever the occasional
frustration, had real advantages in fostering urban life. Traffic moved at a more modest pace, and there
was usually a row of cars parked by the curb to serve as a buffer between pedestrians and moving
vehicles. If you have trouble perceiving the difference, try asking yourself this question: How many
successful sidewalk cafés have you ever encountered on a four-lane, one-way street with cars rushing by
at 50 miles per hour? My guess is, very few indeed.
So over the past 10 years, dozens of cities have reconfigured one-way streets into two-way streets as a
means of bringing their downtowns to life. The political leadership and the local business community
usually join forces in favor of doing this. There are always arguments against it. Some of them are worth
stopping to consider.
Among the critics are traffic engineers and academics who were taught some fixed principles of
transportation in school decades ago and have never bothered to reconsider them. Joseph Dumas, a
professor at the University of Tennessee, argued a few years ago that "the primary purpose of roads is to
move traffic efficiently and safely, not to encourage or discourage business or rebuild parts of town . . . .
Streets are tools for traffic engineering."
If you agree that streets serve no other purpose than to move automobiles, you are unlikely to see much
problem with making them one-way. On the other hand, if you think that streets possess the capacity to
enhance the quality of urban life, you will probably consider the Dumas Doctrine to be nonsense. That is
the way more and more cities are coming to feel.
There are other arguments. It's sometimes said that more accidents occur on two-way streets than one-
way streets. The research that supports this claim is decades old, and to my knowledge, has not been
replicated. Even if you accept this argument, though, you might want to consider that, at slower speeds,
the accidents on two-way streets are much more likely to be fender-benders at left-turn intersections, not
harrowing high-speed crashes involving cars and pedestrians.
Finally, there are complaints from fire departments that it takes them longer to reach the scene of trouble
when they have to thread their way around oncoming traffic, rather than taking a straight shot down a one
-way speedway. I can't refute this, and in any case, I don't like arguing with fire departments. But I have to
Page 2 of 3
05/16/2012http://www.governing.com/templates/gov_print_article?id=87920652
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
wonder how many people have died in burning buildings in recent years because a fire truck wasn't
allowed to use a one-way street.
I wouldn't argue that two-way streets are any sort of panacea for urban revival, Vancouver's experience
notwithstanding. And I understand that they are not always practical. Some streets simply are too narrow
to have traffic moving in both directions; others have to be designated one-way because their purpose is
to feed traffic onto expressways.
What I would say is this: When it comes to designing or retrofitting streets, the burden of proof shouldn't
fall on those who want to use them the old-fashioned way. It should be on those who think the speedway
ideology of the 1950s serves much of a purpose half a century later.
This article was printed from: http://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-
infrastructure/The-Return-of-the.html
Page 3 of 3
05/16/2012http://www.governing.com/templates/gov_print_article?id=87920652
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
Enlivening Downtown Renton with Art
The Owl is coming, to Downtown Renton!
Enlivening parking lots …with daisies …and parking spots with people.
A tribute to Renton’s horse racing past with the Williams Avenue “Muybridge”
Eliminating blank walls temporarily and permanently
AGENDA ITEM #2. a)
SUNSET AREA COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION & TRANSFORMATION PLAN UPDATE
Background:
With the support of the King County Housing Authority, the City, Renton Housing Authority (RHA),
Neighborhood House, Renton School District, and numerous other partners, the Renton team created
and refined the Sunset Area Transformation Plan in 2014-2016. The plan includes substantial new
affordable and market-rate housing, critical community and economic development initiatives for Sunset
Area residents and businesses, and education and supportive services for neighborhood residents.
In 2015 and 2016, the Renton team applied to HUD for a $27 to $30 million Choice Neighborhoods
Implementation grant for the Sunset Area Transformation Plan. The CNI funds would help improve
existing housing quality, create neighborhood improvements, and provide wrap-around community
services. Renton’s Sunset Area Transformation Plan CNI application was a finalist in 2015, but
unfortunately the plan did not receive a CNI grant in 2015 or 2016.
The City, RHA, and other partners are working to implement some elements of the Sunset Area
Transformation Plan with other available resources at this time. The Renton team may apply again for a
CNI grant in the future, if available and applicable. In the meantime, the City and our partners are
pursuing alternative public and private funds to implement additional elements of the Sunset Area
Transformation Plan in the future.
Current Work:
The following information is a summary of the Housing Strategy, Neighborhood Strategy, and People
Strategy projects and initiatives currently in process. Other elements of the plan will be implemented as
additional funds are secured.
1. Housing Strategy (Current Projects & Initiatives in Process)
• City construction of Sunset Lane realignment and utility improvements (2016-2017)
• City and RHA demolition of the nine remaining vacant Sunset Terrace buildings (planned for
early-2017)
• City disposition of Sunset Court Park to RHA (planned for March 2017)
• RHA construction of Sunset Court Apartments, a 50-unit affordable housing project (2017-
2018)
• Colpitts Development Co. construction of Sunset Terrace Apartments, a 108-unit market rate
project (proposed for 2017-2018)
2. Neighborhood Strategy (Current Projects & Initiatives in Process)
• Complete short plat and secure City Council approval for surplus property transaction for
former Renton Highlands Library for the Sunset Multi Service & Career Development Center
(early-2017)
• City construction of the first phase of the Sunset Neighborhood Park (2017)
• RHA acquisition & rehabilitation of former Renton Highlands Library for Sunset Multi Service
and Career Development Center (2017-2018)
i. RHA acquisition planned for Spring 2017
ii. Neighborhood House-led capital campaign for renovation funds
• Affordable homeownership development in the Sunset Area
i. The City is working with RHA and the Homestead Community Land Trust to pursue
development of sustainable affordable homeownership units
ii. JP Morgan Chase Foundation will award a $500K grant for the project to the
Homestead Community Land Trust at 2/6 Renton City Council meeting
AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
• Complete the WWII Duplex Improvement Pilot Project, a demonstration weatherization and
exterior façade improvement project with collaboration between the King County Housing
Authority, City, RHA, & Rebuilding Together Seattle (2017)
• City Planning staff working on a citywide “Safe & Healthy Housing” (rental registration and
inspection) initiative for consideration by the Renton City Council (early-2017)
3. People Strategy (Current Projects & Initiatives in Process)
• Funded by a $90,000 grant from The Boeing Company, Neighborhood House and Renton
Technical College are implementing a Renton healthcare career development initiative and a
Sunset Area education and employment community needs assessment (2017)
• The Renton team is exploring funding options for baseline staff and operating expenses to
operate the new Sunset Multi Service and Career Development Center at the former Renton
Highlands Library (2017)
• The Renton team is working to expand the “Sunset Children’s Zone” to better align with the
Renton School District’s West Hill Now initiative and prepare an application to The Ballmer
Group for a one-year planning grant for the “Renton Innovation Zone” education and
supportive services initiative (early-2017).
Next Steps:
• We have a plan and 27 partners who are prepared to implement the Sunset Area Transformation
Plan IF we can secure additional funds. Given the momentum that we have created in the last two
years, we have a time-limited opportunity to work with our partners to use the plan to leverage
other funding to help transform the Sunset Area.
• The Renton Team is working to creatively explore potential funding resources to implement more
elements of the plan, including:
o King County Best Starts for Kids funding;
o Potentially including affordable housing in the City’s Quality of Life levy;
o The EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program and/or new market tax credits;
o Potential social impact bonds; and
o Corporate and/or philanthropic support, especially for the Neighborhood & People strategies
• The Regional Administrator for the local HUD Region X office in Seattle recently assigned a local HUD
staff person to assist RHA and the City with our Sunset Area initiatives
• The 24-member Sunset Area Transformation Resource Council, created in early- 2016 to help refine
and implement the Sunset Area Transformation Plan, will be meeting quarterly in 2017 to help
secure additional resources and implement the plan
For more information regarding the Sunset Area Transformation Plan, see www.SunsetRenton.com
AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
SUNSET AREA COMPLETED PROJECTS (2011-2016)
Meadow Crest Early Learning center Kirkland Avenue Townhomes
Harrington Avenue NE Green Connection &
Water Main Replacement
Highlands to The Landing Pedestrian Connection
Glennwood Townhomes
Renton Highlands Library
Meadow Crest Accessible Playground
Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility
AGENDA ITEM #2. b)
Sunset Area Funding Goal
COMMITTED FUNDING
City of Renton $26,850,720
Renton Housing Authority $5,261,360
Renton School District $30,870,000
Federal $3,253,935
State $14,292,234
King County $4,765,000
King County Library Sys-$1,392,400
Other $2,836,056
TOTAL $89,521,705
SUNSET AREA FUNDING
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
2
.
b
)
PARK AVENUE NORTH EXTENSION UPDATE
Background:
This project has been in the city’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as an unfunded
development project since about 2008. The project will extend Park Avenue North of Logan Avenue to
provide access to Southport, Puget Sound Energy (PSE) property and The Boeing Company. As part of
the 2017-2022 TIP update, $250,000 was programmed for beginning an alternative route analysis and a
preliminary design for the new extension. A planning level total cost estimate for the project could be as
high as $10 million and will need significant funding from the private stakeholders to design, purchase
right-of-way and construct. Depending on the final alignment of the new street there may be a
possibility of getting either state or federal funding for the project.
Current Work:
The consultant selection process for the alternative route analysis and preliminary design is underway
and a consultant for the project will be under contract by March 2017. City Staff have already had
several meetings with the stakeholders including SECO Development, PSE and The Boeing Company.
They have all agreed to be actively involved in the project. The scope of work with also include
incorporation of a new transit hub within the proximity of the project and therefore also include Metro
as a stakeholder as well. We anticipate that the alternative analysis and coming to agreement with all
the stakeholder on a preferred preliminary design will take about 6 months.
Next Steps:
Continue with stakeholder engagement.
Select preferred alternative alignment and cross section.
Seek private funding and explore state and federal grant options.
Look into alternative cross sections at the sound end of Park Avenue from North 1st Street to North 6th
Street. (See separate scope of work)
AGENDA ITEM #2. c)
PARK AVENUE EXTENSION PROJECT
PAR(cm
AL1URIAT
APRIL ai.
AGENDA ITEM #2. c)
MAKERS architecture and urban design Page 1
Park Avenue Planning DRAFT SOW 2017-01-27 (2) - 2/3/17
City of Renton Park Avenue N Street Concept Plan
Proposed Scope of Work
Draft for review: 2017-01-27
1. Start-up. Meet with City staff, receive background information, plan public outreach
measures, conduct (same day) field investigation,
2. Prepare base maps.
Base mapping Work Elements/Deliverables:
• Most up-to-date aerial imagery (Nearmap 2015-2016), put into AutoCAD
• GIS data (download 2016 data from City website), put into AutoCAD
Assumptions:
• Topographic surveying will not be completed.
• GIS data will be used on an as is basis; it will not be checked for accuracy or
completeness.
3. Develop preliminary street design alternatives.
a. Prepare alternative plans and sections for typical street sections and specific
intersections, especially Bronson Way N and N 1st St. Hold in-house workshop with
Makers. Provide transit and utilities information for the in-house workshop. At workshop
sketch three alternatives based on information from kickoff meeting and research.
Refine the sketch lay-outs developed at the meeting.
Work Elements/Deliverables:
• Three (3) roll plots – one for each alternative showing project plan view and
associated intersection layouts over aerial imagery
• Three (3) typical sections – one for each alternative showing proposed lane,
sidewalk, and landscape widths.
Assumptions:
• Typical sections will be developed in AutoCAD and will not be photo shopped.
b. Explore the physical needs/requirements (e.g: travel lanes, stops, etc.) of bus and future
rail transit. This step to be accomplished in preparation of 3a.
Work Elements/Deliverables:
• Qualitative analysis of bus and future rail requirements submitted to Makers in
the form of an email.
Assumptions:
• Design of bus stops or street car lanes will not be completed.
c. Identify civil, drainage and utility implications at a schematic level.
Work Elements/Deliverables:
• One (1) roll plot showing existing utilities based on GIS data.
• Qualitative analysis of civil, drainage and utility implications in the form of an
email.
AGENDA ITEM #2. c)
MAKERS architecture and urban design Page 2
Park Avenue Planning DRAFT SOW 2017-01-27 (2) - 2/3/17
Assumptions:
• Utility coordination including contacting utilities present in the corridor will not
take place.
• Alternative plans (Task 3a) will not be modified to accommodate utility
implications.
d. Develop streetscape character options.
Work Elements/Deliverables:
• Plan and elevation/section illustrations for alternative street landscaping and
streetscape features.
• Alternatives for street furniture and lighting.
e. Examine the relationship of possible ROW improvements and adjacent properties and
uses to ensure that access, design and site use issues are addressed.
Elements/Deliverables:
• One (1) roll plot showing existing right-of-way lines based on GIS data and
access points based on GIS data and aerial imagery.
• Recommendations for addressing the compatibility between ROW improvements
and properties such as recommendations/proposals for setback requirements
and driveway access points.
Assumptions:
• Proposed right-of-way limits will not be identified.
f. Review and address traffic implications.
Work Elements/Deliverables:
• Qualitative analysis of how proposed improvements (3 alternatives – Task 3a)
would affect the corridor submitted to Makers in the form of an email.
Assumptions:
• No traffic demand modeling and no traffic operational analysis
• City will provide most recent traffic studies and models for the corridor
Product:
• Up to three street section configurations with sketch level plans of key intersections.
• Sketches of streetscape options
4. Review alternatives with Inter-departmental Team (IDT).
5. Refine and reconfigure alternatives as directed by IDT.
Work Elements/Deliverables:
• Three (3) roll plots – one for each alternative showing project plan view and
associated intersection layouts over aerial imagery
• Three (3) typical sections – one for each alternative showing proposed lane,
sidewalk, and landscape widths.
• Respond to comments from meeting with IDT. Responses will be in the form of an
email summarizing changes made to alternative plans and sections.
Assumptions:
• Typical sections will be developed in AutoCAD and will not be photo shopped.
• Plans and sections will be based on those developed in Task 3a.
AGENDA ITEM #2. c)
MAKERS architecture and urban design Page 3
Park Avenue Planning DRAFT SOW 2017-01-27 (2) - 2/3/17
6. Conduct public work session or open house to evaluate alternatives. (City will outreach to
North Renton Neighborhood Group.) Compile results of session.
7. Present to City Center Street Advisory Board.
8. Review Results of outreach with IDT and identify preferred concept.
9. Based on IDT direction, refine the preferred alternative into a Street Concept Plan.
a. Prepare refined street sections and intersection layouts
Work Elements/Deliverables:
• One (1) roll plot – based on preferred concept.
• One (1) typical section – based on preferred concept, showing proposed lane,
sidewalk, and landscape widths.
• Urban design/streetscape recommendations
b. Optional task not included in budget: Prepare planning level estimates of the range of
probable construction costs
Work Elements/Deliverables:
• Planning level opinion of cost for preferred concept.
c. Identify construction considerations such as traffic maintenance/construction
sequencing, utility improvements, etc.
Work Elements/Deliverables:
• Qualitative analysis of engineering elements that have a critical impact on
proposed improvements such as traffic control, construction sequencing, and
impacts to signals. Analysis submitted to Makers in the form of an email.
Assumptions:
• This task is intended as a “fatal flaw” check only and will not include design of
engineering elements evaluated.
d. Prepare streetscape recommendations. (Makers)
10. Illustrate proposed improvements with up to 2 renderings. (Makers)
Note: the renderings might be most useful to support Tasks 3 or 6.
Work Elements/Deliverables:
• 2 Three dimensional renderings illustrating the proposed streetscape character
Project Product:
Illustrated street concept plan in an attractive format suitable for Council and public
discussion containing:
• Street plan and sections with details for key intersections and conditions.
• Planning level recommendations for addressing engineering issues such as utility
upgrades and traffic management during construction.
• Planning level estimates of the range of probable construction costs
• Streetscape recommendations with example layouts and a recommended palette of
streetscape elements including lights, pavements, furniture, and landscaping. The
AGENDA ITEM #2. c)
MAKERS architecture and urban design Page 4
Park Avenue Planning DRAFT SOW 2017-01-27 (2) - 2/3/17
streetscape recommendations will be consistent with the current Downtown
Streetscape Standards, to the extent appropriate.
• Up to 2 streetscape renderings. (E.g.: One looking down Park Avenue and one
looking at the Bronson intersection.)
11. OPTIONAL TASK – Traffic Analysis - Evaluate existing and 2040 PM peak-hour traffic
volumes using Synchro Version 8.0.
a. Perform the Synchro analysis for the PM peak periods for existing peak hour
periods, and for the PM 2040 peak hour periods by completing the following:
Work Elements:
o Create the PM Synchro model and incorporate current channelization, current
signal timing and new turning movement count data.
o Build the base alternative model in Synchro showing existing roadway
configuration based on existing channelization.
o Model the traffic operations of the three (3) alternatives determined in Task 3
for PM peak periods for existing peak hour periods, and for the PM 2040 peak
hour periods for the Park Avenue corridor between Bronson Way N and N 6th
Street, specifically, the intersections of Park Avenue and:
Bronson Way N & N 1st Street (signalized)
N 3rd Street (signalized)
N 4th Street (signalized)
N 6th Street (signalized)
b. Summarize the results of the analysis in a Traffic Analysis Technical Memorandum.
This memorandum will include the following:
Work Elements:
o Comparison of the performance metrics of the existing conditions to the
proposed alternatives.
o Proposed channelization for the corridor based on existing and future (2040)
PM Peak Hour traffic condition analysis
o Recommended turn pocket lengths based on existing and future (2040) PM
Peak Hour traffic condition analysis
o Existing and future (2040) condition traffic analysis in the Park Avenue corridor
between Bronson Way N and N 6th Street.
Assumptions:
• City will provide existing and projected 2040 traffic counts
Deliverables:
• Draft Traffic Analysis Technical Memorandum (in Word and PDF format)
• Final Traffic Analysis Technical Memorandum (in PDF format)
AGENDA ITEM #2. c)
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Background:
Like communities throughout the Puget Sound region, Renton continues to see rising home prices,
higher rents and diminishing options for subsidized housing. The booming economy, combined with a
shortage of units, continues to pressure prices upward making home ownership unattainable for many
and threatens basic shelter for some in our community. While in years past this issue may have mostly
affected those on the lowest rungs of the economic ladder, affordable housing in Renton today is a
problem for working individuals, families and retirees alike.
Previous City Actions:
• In 1988 Renton voters adopted a $5.5 million Renton Senior Housing Bond and in 1989 the
Council issued $5.5 million in bonds with a twenty-year maturity. The proceeds were used to
build the 104-unit Houser Terrace affordable senior housing project for the Renton Housing
Authority in 1993/94. The levy expired in 2008.
• To provide resources to help respond to the need for more affordable housing for low- and
moderate income households and/or special needs populations in Renton, the Renton City
Council adopted an ordinance in 2008 to create the Housing Opportunity Fund and allocated a
one-time $200,000 for the fund. Proceeds have supported the Renton Housing Authority’s
Glennwood Townhomes and Kirkland Avenue Townhomes in the Sunset Area, the Habitat for
Humanity La Fortuna project in the Benson community, and, subject to Council approval, the
remaining $25,000 will go toward the Renton Housing Authority’s Sunset Court Apartments
project in the Sunset Area.
• In 2003, Council adopted a Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption provision for market
rate and affordable housing. This incentive originally applied to three targeted areas,
Downtown, Sunset and South Lake Washington. After the successful completion of the
Sanctuary, Reserve and Bristol (II) apartments, the incentive was allowed to expire in the South
Lake Washington area but has been renewed for the other two targeted areas.
• Parking reductions have been put in place in the CD zone downtown to reduce development
costs for commercial projects, including market-rate and/or affordable housing projects.
• Certain fee waivers have been instituted for eligible owner-occupied units constructed
Downtown and in the Sunset area, as well as eligible rental occupied multifamily housing in
Sunset.
• After several Renton apartment complexes opted to no longer honor Section 8 vouchers for low-
income residents, Council adopted a limited emergency Source of Income Discrimination
ordinance to help protect tenants in November 2016. The ordinance will expire on August 1,
2017, unless otherwise amended and/or extended.
• Accessory Dwelling Units: Popularly called “mother-in-law units,” accessory dwelling units
(ADUs) are small residential structures detached from a single-family home. The relatively small
size of ADUs often makes them more affordable than many homes – even at market rates.
• Source of Income Discrimination – In a competitive housing market, Section 8 voucher holders
and people whose primary income comes from public assistance often face discrimination in the
private market, making it difficult for them to access housing.
Potential New Steps:
• Land Use Tools/Incentives
AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
o Accessory Dwelling Units – Consider lowering the fee structure in order to encourage
more ADUs.
o Affordable Development on Surplus Public Lands – potential for preference and/or
below market rate transaction
o Fee Waivers and Exemptions – fee waivers could be extended to new affordable housing
projects citywide
o Inclusionary Zoning – A percentage of new development be required to be affordable?
o Linkage Fees – A surcharge for all new commercial and residential permits in the city,
which would establish a fund for affordable housing projects.
• Preservation Strategies
o City or Regional Acquisition Funds –to acquire or landbank property for affordable
housing development
o Code Compliance Loans –would help property owners with low-income residents to
make improvements without increasing rents and displacing tenants
o Right of First Refusal and Right to Purchase Laws – establishes rules to retain existing
residential properties if affordable housing projects are seen as being at risk from new
development
o Preservation Property Tax Exemption – A preservation property tax exemption
incentivizes multifamily property owners to maintain the health and affordability of
housing. Owners must agree to keep their rental units affordable for a specified period
of time in exchange for receiving a property tax exemption (which could free up capital
for rehabilitation).
• Tenant Protections –
o Just Cause Eviction Ordinance – A Just Cause Eviction Ordinance (JCEO) protects tenants
from being evicted from their rental home without reasonable justification. However,
locally enforced JCEOs clearly enumerate the grounds on which landlords can evict
tenants. Any evictions outside those specified by the ordinance are considered illegal
once the JCEO is in effect.
o Notice of Rent Increase – There is no restriction on how much a landlord can increase
the rent. Cities may choose to extend notice requirements to allow tenants more time
to plan for rent increases and seek alternative housing options.
o Proactive Rental Inspection Program – Healthy Housing rental registration and
inspection program
o Tenant Relocation Assistance – Jurisdictions are able to implement an additional
monetary relocation/rental assistance to protect tenants forced to move because of
demolition or substantial rehabilitation.
• Funding Affordable Housing
o HB2263: State Sales Tax to Support Affordable Housing & Services – Provides the
opportunity for local governments to obtain funding to house their most vulnerable
residents by implementing a one tenth of 1% sales tax.
o Housing Levies
The expanded King County Homeless and Veterans Levy is being advanced
A King County housing levy (separate from the Seattle Housing Levy) is being
advanced
o Other Local Funding Options
Allocate additional funds to the City’s Housing Opportunity Fund to help
construct more affordable rental housing
AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
Include affordable housing as part of the Quality of Life initiative and/or develop
a separate affordable housing levy for Renton voters
Next Steps:
• Regional Collaboration
• Participate in the Housing Development Consortium of Seattle/King County
• Participate in the South King Housing and Homelessness Partnership
• Work with other South King County jurisdictions to create and fund a shared affordable
housing development consortium or coalition, like ARCH on the Eastside of King County
• Consider creating an affordable housing Task Force to evaluate and recommend viable
affordable housing options.
AGENDA ITEM #4. a)
SAFE AND HEALTHY HOUSING
1 See Exhibit A for Program details / 2 See Exhibit B for focus group comments / 3See Exhibit C for comparison of programs /
4 See Exhibit D for partial list of current resources
Background:
A “Safe and Healthy Housing Program” in Renton1 would address ongoing issues of 1) unhealthy
conditions of rental housing units, hundreds of which were originally built to be temporary; 2) code
compliance regulations that are complaint-based rather than proactive, and therefore largely ineffectual
in ensuring a healthy interior environment; 3) recalcitrant landlords who do not respond to tenant
complaints; 4) tenants who fear reprisals in the form of rent increase or eviction2; 5) destabilization of
neighborhoods due to concentrations of housing in poor condition; 6) higher than necessary energy
costs for tenants, 7) increased social and medical needs and therefore higher costs for the City and
community; and 8) lack of accessible ownership contact information, which hinders the work of
emergency responders.
Several cities in Washington3 have adopted programs in an attempt to rectify these common situations.
As with provision of clean water and protection from fire, flooding, and wastewater, there is growing
belief that it is a reasonable exercise of police powers to ensure residents of a community have safe and
healthy housing. The State of Washington has adopted RCW 59.18.125, “Inspections by local
municipalities,” a supplement to the Landlord Tenant Act (Title 59 RCW), that regulates such programs.
Based on recommendations from the Seattle-King County Department of Public Health, the basic
standards for a healthy environment are: moisture free, adequately ventilated, contaminant free, free of
pests, clean, well-maintained, free of injury hazards, and thermally controlled. Basic safety standards
also include safe and secure access and presence of functioning smoke and carbon monoxide detectors.
Current Work:
The Proposed Safe & Healthy Housing Program would require 1) landlords to obtain business licenses; 2)
registration of rental properties; 3) inspection of a limited number of representative units; and 4)
issuance of Certificates of Occupancy when units pass inspection. Other features include self-
certification by landlords following the initial inspection and an appeal process. An education program
would provide resource information to both landlords and renters.4
All property owners who rent residential dwelling units will be required to register all rental units, with a
wide variety of exceptions. Exceptions include:
• Living units not rented to others;
• Structures built within twenty years of inspection year;
• Single room rental within a residence that is also occupied by the property owner;
• Residences occupied by family members of the property owner (affidavit required);
• Accommodations for transient guests for which Lodging Tax is applicable (hotels, motels, inns,
Airbnbs, etc.);
• Housing units in hospitals, hospice and community-care facilities, retirement or nursing homes,
and extended care facilities, i.e. living units subject to regulation by state licensing
requirements;
• Rental units that a government agency or authority owns, operates or manages, or that are
specifically exempted from municipal regulation by state or federal law or administrative
regulation (exemption applies until such ownership is discontinued); and
• Emergency or temporary shelters and transitional housing.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton – Project Summary
Page 2 of 2
Inspections must be by either a City Code Compliance Officer or a certified private inspector. Inspections
can be no more frequent than every four years. Only one in four units may be inspected on properties
having up to 20 units. No more than 20 percent of units (up to a maximum of 50 units) can be inspected
on properties with 21 or more units. Confirmed code violations on the property, however, would allow
all units to be inspected.
Inspections and issuance of Certificates of Occupancy would be phased-in based on either City of
Renton zip codes or age of structure. If based on zip code, the schedule would be as follows:
Zip Code Year Inspection Required
98056 2018
98057/98178 2019
98058/98059 2020
98055/98031 2021
If based on age of structure, the schedule would be:
Year Built Year Inspection Required
1954 and older 2018
1955 - 1974 2019
1975 - 1994 2020
1995 - 20 yrs prior to inspection yr 2021
Proposed fees are based on those other jurisdictions that have similar programs in place. The proposed
fee schedule is as follows:
Business License fee $150/year
Registration fee 1 – 4 dwelling unit(s) $12/each/year
5 – 24 dwelling units $10/each/year
25 or more dwelling units $8/each/year
Communal residence $20/each/year
Inspection by City fee Initial inspection $50/each
Reinspection by City fee First reinspection* $90/each
Second reinspection $125/each
Third reinspection $200/each
Inspection by Contractor Administration Fee to City $40/each
Appeal fee Administrative Appeal $250 / each
* Includes missed inspection appointments or inspections cancelled within 24 hours of the
scheduled appointment
Next Steps:
Council provide direction on which options are preferred, balancing the scale of the program with the
desired objective to improve the health standards of rental housing in Renton. A pilot program, based
on either zip codes or age of buildings, may be on option and a means to identify the best practices for
full implementation. The existing permit tracking system, Energov, to record licensing, registration, fee
payments, scheduling inspections, and issuance of Certificates of Compliance can be used to implement
the tracking of the program.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing
Issue Paper
Exhibit A
I. The Problem
As health care costs continue to escalate, people interested in reducing the need for health
care services are working to improve the health of whole communities. The World Health
Organization has redefined health “as a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-
being – not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.”
Renton’s health infrastructure, its water and waste services, its fire and life safety programs, its
environmental stewardship, all contribute to the overall good health of the community.
Adoption of “Complete Streets” requirements and walkable community design standards
encourage physical exercise and make the pedestrian environment safer. The myriad
Community Services facilities and programs provide opportunities for active participation and
social interaction by all sectors of the population. The City’s Human Services Division provides
resources and support for the community’s social well-being.
One measure of the health of a community is the condition of the physical environment within
which its residents reside. Substandard housing conditions can cause or exacerbate health
problems, especially in children, seniors, and people afflicted with chronic health conditions.
When compared with owner-occupied housing, rental housing is more likely to be in
substandard condition. Low income people, people of color, children, and older adults are more
likely to live in substandard rental homes. The poor condition of rental housing may result in
potential long-term harm to the health of these community members. Unhealthy living
environments can not only negatively impact the health of residents, but also neighborhoods
and the wider community.
Reticent landlords may not adequately maintain their rental properties or respond to tenant
reports of maintenance and repair needs (see Appendix A). The Washington State Landlord
Tenant Act (Act) outlines a process for requesting repairs. This, however, is also a complaint-
based system and, as such, introduces an element of uncertainty on the part of the tenant. The
process is complicated and may be difficult to understand and navigate. There is also the
possibility of retaliation by a landlord, even though the Act prohibits this. As a last recourse,
tenants may contact the City of Renton Code Compliance Division and lodge a complaint.
II. Condition of Housing
The City of Renton has a significantly lower percentage of owner-occupied housing (49.2
percent) than King County (57.5 percent). Renters comprise 45.63 percent of the total housing
in Renton (there was a 3.57 percent “other” vacant rate in 2015) compared with 42.5 percent
renters in King County.
About 9 percent of the residences in Renton were built before 1949. Hundreds were built in
1941-43 to be temporary residences and maintaining them presents many challenges. Most of
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 2 of 20
these are clustered in the Highlands of Renton. A survey of conditions in the Sunset Area of the
Highlands indicated approximately 61 percent of these units are in poor condition. Although
this survey did not distinguish between rental and owner-occupied units, the percentage of
rentals in the Sunset Area is about 62 percent.
III. The Solution
To address these concerns, a growing number of cities are adopting “Proactive Rental
Inspection (PRI) Programs.” The difference between a complaint-based program and a PRI
program is the latter has mandatory periodic scheduled inspections. The other components of
PRI Programs include licensing of landlords and/or agents, registration of rental units, and
occupancy based on compliance. The enforcement of the PRI is the same as with the complaint-
based system and has the same civil penalties.
Tenants have the right of security against “unreasonable searches,” granted by the Fourth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The responsibility of the City, under laws that grant it
authority to protect public health, safety, and welfare, has the right to enter residential units to
verify that they meet minimum standards for safety and good health. Tenants, however, must
consent to the inspection.
SAFE AND HEALTHY HOUSING IN RENTON is a PRI program. This Residential Rental Registration
and Inspection Program institutes tactics to ensure rental housing is maintained to uniform
standards. PRI programs, such as Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton, are authorized and
regulated by the State of Washington, RCW 59.18.125.
The primary focus of the Program is on habitability with an emphasis on elements of living that
are considered essential, such as heat and standard plumbing.
Beyond that, the near term goals and expectations of the Program are:
• Improve living conditions in residential rental units so that they meet accepted
standards,
• Provide information to the community on the relationship between healthy housing and
long-term health and on the cost effectiveness of routine housing maintenance and
timely repairs,
• Improve the quality of housing stock in Renton, and
• Reduce complaint-initiated code enforcement work,
The key long term goals and expectations of this new program include:
• Reduce likelihood of life-long health issues, especially in children,
• Reduce the cost of health care for families, businesses, and social service agencies,
• Stabilize neighborhoods by maintaining property values,
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 3 of 20
• Maintain a sustainable proactive code compliance program, and
• Obtain data to be used to increase affordable housing.
IV. Consistency with Washington State Landlord Tenant Act
The foundation of the Safe and Healthy Housing Program (Program) is the Washington State
Landlord Tenant Act (RCW 59.18.060, “Landlord – Duties”), which states:
The landlord will, at all times during the tenancy, keep the premises fit for human habitation
and shall in particular:
(1) Maintain the premises to substantially comply with any applicable code, statute,
ordinance, or regulation governing their maintenance or operation, which the legislative
body enacting the applicable code, statue, ordinance or regulation could enforce as to
the premises rented if such condition endangers or impairs the health or safety of the
tenant.
V. Advantages to Landlords
The Safe and Healthy Housing Program (SHH) ensures landlords/agents are aware of poor
conditions before they become more serious. Periodic code enforcement encourages
preventative maintenance, rather than deferred maintenance, which can often be more
expensive.
Landlords have argued that the SHH will increase their costs, but standards will be set so that
consideration will be made regarding the codes that were in place when the structures were
built. Older buildings, for example, will not be expected to meet higher standards that were
adopted later, with the exception of conditions that threaten life safety, i.e. installation of
smoke and carbon monoxide alarms. Costs should be what would be required to meet the
requirements of the Landlord Tenant Act.
The example of Tukwila indicates that landlords appreciate a ‘level playing field’ in that
property owners who keep their properties well maintained are competing in the market with
similar properties, not properties where no on-going investment is being made.
Tenants may be unnecessarily afraid, uninformed, or otherwise incapable of notifying landlords
when issues related to the landlords’ responsibility arise. Landlords may not be able to rely on
their tenants to know that maintenance or repairs are required. The SHH can bridge that gap.
Landlords who are not physically near their properties and who rely on agents to keep them
informed and the units maintained will have a means of ‘overseeing’ the work of their agents.
The value of their property and that of their neighbors should increase over time as individual
units are improved to meet standards.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 4 of 20
VI. Advantages to Tenants
Concerns about living conditions were raised by attendees at a series of focus group meetings
held in the Sunset Area of Renton in 2016 (see Appendix B). Loss of tenancy is a very real fear of
many people, whether they are homeowners or renters. Although state law prohibits
retaliation against tenants by landlords, it is often considered safer to live with conditions that
should be corrected rather than risk being displaced from one’s home. It also requires
knowledge of the system and resources to exert one’s rights.
Some people may not realize they have a right to safe and healthy housing. Many are unaware
of the potential long-term health issues that may come with unhealthy living environments.
The City has, with the SHH, the opportunity to provide information that might otherwise not
reach the most vulnerable of its population.
Public outreach and education will also need to be used to ensure tenants that inspectors will
not address issues related to contraband items, illegal activity, or immigration status.
VII. Advantages to the City of Renton
The existing Energov permit tracking system can be utilized to store data related to property
ownership and owner contact information, agent contact information, location and
characteristics of rental units, inspection schedules and results, Certificates of Compliance
issued, renewal dates, fees paid, and appeals filed.
Renton Fire and Life Safety has had trouble contacting property owners and agents during
emergency situations that have arisen at rentals. They need an accessible centralized data bank
that provides contact information.
The inventory of rental units will result in reliable information about the amount of rental units
available in Renton. This data can be used by the City of Renton for its land capacity analysis
and affordable housing planning.
The Safe and Healthy Housing Program implements the goals and policies of the Housing and
Human Services element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan in the following ways:
Goal HHS-A: Adopt best available housing practices and implement innovative techniques
to advance the provision of affordable, fair, healthy, and safe housing for renters,
homeowners, and the homeless.
Goal HHS-C: Increase the stability of neighborhoods by fostering long-term
homeownership, property maintenance, and investments in existing housing.
Policy HHS-8: Utilize the City’s authority to rehabilitate housing to prevent neighborhood
blight or eliminate unsound structures.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 5 of 20
Policy HHS-9: Encourage expansion of programs that result in home repair, weatherization,
and other energy-efficient improvements to owner-occupied and rental housing, and
promote additional funding for these programs at the state and federal level.
Goal HHS-G: Make land use decisions that provide increased options for healthy living in the
Renton community and, specifically, on the neighborhood level.
The City of Tukwila adopted a similar program and has had time to evaluate the effects and
impacts. They have reported that the labor of initiating the program has been reduced as the
condition of housing has increased and they have become more efficient.
Complaint-based code compliance will continue in Renton, but should become used less
frequently over time.
VIII. Advantages to the Renton Community
The SHH will improve living conditions in the City. The SHH should, over time, result in reducing
the concentrations of blighted properties that currently exist in some neighborhoods. This will
stabilize neighborhoods, increase the value of property, and preserve the tax base.
As residents, particularly tenants, become more knowledgeable about their rights and
responsibilities, they tend to feel empowered and will be more likely to become engaged in
maintaining a safer, healthier community.
IX. Potential Negative Consequences
Although there is no evidence that PRI programs result in loss of affordable housing, this is a
possibility as landlords feel they should be compensated for investing in housing maintenance
and repairs.
Landlords who try to increase rents as compensation for routine maintenance, may find that
the market prevails and renters may no longer be interested in renting a particular unit at the
higher rent. Landlords may be forced to accept a lower rent and lower profit margin than they
want.
Inspections may result in discovery of housing that is unfit for habitation due to extremely
dangerous or hazardous conditions. This could cause residents to be displaced temporarily until
repairs have been made or permanently if conditions are so extreme so as to be rendered
unable to be cost effectively repaired.
Inspections will be limited to items on the SHH checklist. They may, however, reveal other code
violations or unhealthy conditions such as overcrowding or hoarding. It is recommended that if
these situations arise, they be handled on a case-by-case basis.
Displacement can affect mental and physical health in a negative manner and should be
avoided to the greatest extent possible. If cases arise that appear displacement is a possibility,
social and legal services, community groups, and the City should collaborate to provide
assistance. In some instances, relocation assistance may be sought from the landlord.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 6 of 20
X. Program Exemptions
The Safe and Healthy Housing Program business license, unit registration, and inspection
requirements do not apply to all residential living spaces in the City of Renton. The following
are exemptions to the SHH:
• Living units not rented to others (units that are not for rent are exempt);
• Single room rental within a residence that is also occupied by the property owner (the
assumption is that if the owner lives in the unit it will be adequately maintained);
• Residences occupied by family members of the property owner (an affidavit renewed on
the same schedule as inspections will be required);
• Accommodations for transient guests for which Lodging Tax is applicable such as hotels,
motels, inns, Airbnbs, etc. (this type of housing is otherwise regulated);
• Living units in hospitals, hospice and community-care facilities, retirement or nursing
homes, and extended care facilities (these living units are subject to regulation by state
licensing requirements);
• Rental units that a government agency or authority owns, operates or manages, or that
are specifically exempted from municipal regulation by state or federal law or
administrative regulation (this exemption applies until such status is discontinued); and
• Emergency or temporary shelters and transitional housing (these units are intended for
short-term stay and are generally not equipped in the manner of a permanent
residence).
XI. Inspection Exemptions
Owners of residential units not listed above in Program Exemptions must have business licenses
and their rental units must be registered. Of these units, however, the following are exempt
from the mandatory, periodic inspections of the SHH:
• Rental units built within twenty years of registration (these units will be presumed to
meet the adopted standards);
• Rental units that pass the initial inspection and have not had a change in ownership or
valid code violation on the property since that inspection are exempt from the next
inspection; and
A change of ownership requires reregistration of all units, but not a new inspection (the unit
would remain on the existing inspection cycle for its zone).
XII. Process
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 7 of 20
The purpose, scope of authority, definitions, procedures, corrections, violations, appeals,
remedies, and penalties for the Safe and Healthy Housing Program shall be as in RMC 1-3-2,
“Code Enforcement and Penalties.”
XIII. Program
The Program consists of several components:
• Business licensing for property owners who provide residential rentals
• Residential Rental Registration
• Health and Safety Inspections
• Certification of Compliance
• Appeal Procedures
XIV. Administration of Program
The Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton Program will be primarily administered by the
Community and Economic Development Department, although other City departments will be
responsible for aspects of the program.
CED will oversee the public outreach, community engagement, and information distribution.
Information on the City website and online forms will be the responsibility of CED. CED will
oversee the registration and inspection programs, collect fees, and issue Certificates of
Inspection and of Occupancy.
The Business License Division of the Finance Department will issue business licenses to property
owners wishing to rent residential units in the City of Renton. The IT Division will monitor the
use of the Energov tracking system. The Utility Billing Division will assist with sending
information and identifying properties that have rental units.
The Office of the City Clerk will oversee the appeal process.
XV. Business License
Every business operating in, or conducting business within the City of Renton limits, is required
to annually register and obtain a general business license. Upon adoption of this Program,
property owners who provide residential rental units within the City of Renton must obtain a
general business license. All requirements for business licenses, as per Renton Municipal Code
5-5-3, shall apply.
Prior to adoption of this program the requirement for businesses licenses had not been
enforced for residential rental businesses. A change of policy is required to enforce this existing
regulation.
The business license is non-transferable upon sale of residential rental property.
XVI. Registration
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 8 of 20
All property owners who rent residential dwelling units not exempted from the program will be
required to register all rental units, with the following exceptions:
• Living units not rented to others;
• Single room rental within a residence that is also occupied by the property owner;
• Residences occupied by family members of the property owner (affidavit required);
• Accommodations for transient guests for which Lodging Tax is applicable (hotels,
motels, inns, Airbnbs, etc.);
• Housing units in hospitals, hospice and community-care facilities, retirement or nursing
homes, and extended care facilities, i.e. living units subject to regulation by state
licensing requirements;
• Rental units that a government agency or authority owns, operates or manages, or that
are specifically exempted from municipal regulation by state or federal law or
administrative regulation (exemption applies until such ownership is discontinued); and
• Emergency or temporary shelters and transitional housing.
Change of ownership requires reregistration, but not reinspection, of all units.
The registration requirement is applicable to residential rental units regardless of the land use
zone within which they are located.
Registration information must be updated annually when fees are due. Information required
includes:
• Current contact information, including during emergencies, for property owner;
• Current contact information, including during emergencies, for agent, manager, and/or
applicant if different from property owner;
• Primary contact for Safe and Healthy Housing Program communication;
• Verification that contact information has been provided to tenant to report need for
repairs, etc.;
• Address and tax assessor number of all property where rental unit or units is/are
located;
• Number of applicable dwelling units;
• Type of rental unit (i.e. single family, apartment);
• Number of bedrooms in each rental unit;
• Number of occupants allowed per unit;
• Inspection preference (City inspection, Contractor inspection, Undecided); and
• Declaration of compliance with Renton Municipal Code requirements.
XVII. Record and Data Storage and Program Monitoring
The City of Renton permit tracking system, Energov, will be used to record residential rental
registration information. As the program is further implemented, it will store relevant data
including date of registration, fee payments, inspector assignment, date and result of
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 9 of 20
inspection, date of issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, appeals and other related actions, and
renewal date.
XVIII. Identification of Residential Rental Properties and Registration of Property Owners
Citywide notification of the requirement to obtain a business license and register residential
rental units will be done by several methods; distribution of notices with utility bills, publication
in the Renton Reporter and Seattle Times, multiple social media outlets (closed circuit television
announcements, City Facebook page and website, etc.). It is anticipated some, although
certainly not all, property owners will contact the City to meet the new requirements.
Simultaneously with “voluntary” registrations, identification of property owners not occupying
residential units will take place through several avenues. These will include utility billing records
and information available from the King County Tax Assessor’s Office.
XIX. Fees
It is intended that the Safe and Healthy Housing Program be revenue generating only to extent
that it is ultimately fiscally self-sustaining. While this may require adjustments to the fee
schedule in the future, at the present time the following are proposed fees:
Business License fee $150/year
Registration fee 1 – 4 dwelling unit(s) $12/each/year
5 – 24 dwelling units $10/each/year
25 or more dwelling units $8/each/year
Communal residence $20/each/year
Inspection by City fee Initial inspection $50/each
Reinspection by City fee
First reinspection*
$90/each
Second reinspection $125/each
Third reinspection $200/each
Inspection by Contractor Administration Fee to City $40/each
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 10 of 20
Appeal fee Administrative Appeal $250 / each
* Includes missed inspection appointments or inspections cancelled within 24 hours of
the scheduled appointment
XX. Inspections and Reinspections
Rental units may only be inspected to the extent that is needed to verify compliance with
minimum standards for safety and health in accordance with RMC 4-5-130.
The inspection element of the program will be phased in over a four-year period. The phasing
may be geographically-based with “zones” created according to zip codes, as follows:
Zone Zip Code Year Initial Inspection Required
A 98056 2017
B 98057/98178 2018
C 98058/98059 2019
D 98055/98031 2020
Alternatively, rental units may be inspected based on year of construction, as follows:
Year Built Year Inspection Required
1954 and older 2018
1955 - 1974 2019
1975 - 1994 2020
1995 - 20 years prior to inspection year 2021
Inspections will occur on a rotating schedule so that units within a given zone that are subject
to inspections are reinspected every four years, unless exempted (see below).
The criteria for inspections shall be as follows:
• For properties having 1 to 20 units, no more than 4 units shall be required to be initially
inspected and reinspected, as long as the inspected units do not have conditions that
endanger or impair the health and safety of a tenant.
• For properties having 21 or more units, no more than twenty percent of the units on the
rental property, rounded up to the next whole number, to a maximum of fifty units, may
be selected by the City to be initially inspected and reinspected, as long as the inspected
units do not have conditions that endanger or impair the health and safety of a tenant.
• If a property owner is required to provide a Certificate of Compliance (see Section XII)
for a representative sample of units on the property and a selected unit fails the
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 11 of 20
inspection, the City may require up to one hundred percent of the units on the property
to provide a Certificate of Compliance.
• Following the initial inspection and issuance of Certificate of Compliance for all units,
inspections shall be required no more than every 4 years, with the following exceptions:
o Any unit or building with an issued code violation may be inspected within the 4
year timeframe; and
o Those units or buildings for which there has been receipt of a verified complaint
based on a health or safety issue may be inspected within the 4 year timeframe.
• Four-year reinspections shall be based on zones, with each zone subject to inspection
once every four years.
• A change of ownership requires reregistration of all units, but not a new inspection (the
unit would remain on the existing inspection cycle for its zone).
The following shall be exempted from inspections as noted herein:
• Rental units built within five years of registration (these units will be presumed to meet
the adopted standards);
• Rental units that pass the initial inspection and have not had a change in ownership or
valid code violation on the property since that inspection are exempt from the next
inspection; and
The following are landlord notification and tenant compliance requirements:
• The landlord shall provide written notification to the tenant of a unit to be inspected in
accordance with RCW 59.18.150(6).
• The written notice must indicate the date and approximate time of the inspection and
the name of the inspector.
• A copy of the notice must be provided to the inspector prior to the inspection.
• If a portion of the total rental units on the property are to be inspected, the landlord
shall send notification of the pending inspection to tenants of all units on the property.
o The notice must advise tenants that some units will be inspected and tenants
whose units require maintenance or repairs must send a request for such to the
landlord in accordance with RCW 59.18.070.
o The notice must advise tenants that if the landlord fails to respond to the
request for maintenance or repairs the tenant may contact the City prior to the
date of the pending inspection.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 12 of 20
o A copy of the notice shall be provided to the inspector prior to the inspection.
• The tenant has the right and should be advised to see the inspector’s identification
before allowing the inspector to enter the unit.
• The tenant must allow access to the rental unit to be inspected in accordance with RCW
59.18.150(8).
XXI. Inspectors
For residential rental units without previous documented code violations, property owners shall
have the option of having rental units inspected by either a City Inspector or a private
inspection contractor. If units have had previous documented code compliance violations or
life-safety damage (i.e. building fires) inspections must be by a City Inspector.
All inspectors must be certified. Certification may be as an architect, home inspector, or
building inspector.
If an inspection results in a finding of possible damage from wood destroying organisms, a
certified structural pest inspector must provide an assessment prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Compliance.
Private inspection contractors must be selected from a list provided by the City of Renton.
XXII. Minimum Standards
Implementation of a Safe and Healthy Housing Program in Renton requires revisions to Title IV,
Chapter 5 of the Renton Municipal Code, “Building and Fire Prevention Standards.” The
residential rental housing standards proposed to be adopted are based on recommends by the
National Center for Healthy Housing (National Healthy Housing Standard, American Public
Health Association, 2011). These standards are proposed to be incorporated into RMC 4-5-130,
“International Property Maintenance Code,” as previously adopted with amendments,
additions, and exceptions as noted below.
4-5-130 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODESTANDARDS:
A. INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE ADOPTED:
The 2015 Edition of the International Property Maintenance Code is adopted as amended,
added to, or excepted in this title, and shall be applicable within the City, except Chapter 1,
Scope and Administration, and Sections 303, 307, 308, and 507, which are not adopted. The
Construction Administrative Code, as set forth in RMC 4-5-060, shall be used in place of IPMC
Chapter 1, Scope and Administration. (Ord. 5710, 4-14-2014; Ord. 5810, 7-11-2016)
B. AMENDMENTS TO INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE:
The following amendments to the Code are hereby adopted:
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 13 of 20
1. Section 301.2 is amended to read as follows:
ResponsibilityResponsibilities: The owner of the premises shall maintain the interior and
exterior of structures and exterior surrounding property in compliance with these
requirements, except as otherwise provided for in this code. A person shall not occupy as
owner-occupant or permit another person to rent or otherwise occupy premises which are not
in a sanitary and safe condition and which do not comply with the requirements of this section.
The occupant shall properly use and operate the dwelling unit and owner-supplied fixtures and
facilities controlled by the occupant in order to maintain a safe and healthy environment within
the dwelling unit, and report unsafe or unhealthy conditions, including malfunctioning
appliances, leaks, and other problems requiring repair, to the owner in a timely manner.
301.2.1 The owner shall ensure the collection of trash and recyclables and provide and
maintain trash containers, bulk storage containers, recycling containers, and areas
where the containers are stored.
301.2.2 The owner shall maintain the building and premises to keep pests from entering
the building and dwelling units, inspect and monitor for pests, and eliminate pest
infestation in accordance with integrated pest management methods.
301.2.3 The owner shall provide occupants with at least 48 hours written notice of the
planned use of a chemical agent such as a pesticide or herbicide, the date and location
of application, and a copy of the warning label.
301.2.4 The owner shall investigate occupant reports of unsafe or unhealthy conditions,
respond in writing, and make needed repairs in a timely manner.
301.2.5 The occupant shall place trash and recyclables in the appropriate containers.
301.2.6 The occupant shall work with the owner to ensure pest-free conditions in
accordance with integrated pest management.
301.2.7 If the occupant’s action leads to pooling of water or another excessive moisture
problem inside the dwelling unit, including mold and mildew caused by conditions under
the control of the occupant, the occupant shall clean up and dry out the area in a timely
manner.
2. Subsection 301.3, Vacant buildings and land, is deleted in its entirety and replaced by the
following:
301.3 Vacant buildings: All vacant buildings and premises thereof must comply with this Code.
Vacant buildings shall be maintained in a clean, safe, secure and sanitary condition provided
herein so as not to cause a blighting problem, negatively impact the surrounding neighborhood,
or otherwise adversely affect the public health, safety or quality of life.
301.3.1 Appearance: All vacant buildings must appear to be occupied, or appear able to
be occupied with little or no repairs.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 14 of 20
301.3.2 Security: All vacant buildings must be secured against outside entry at all times.
Security shall be by the normal building amenities such as windows and doors having
adequate strength to resist intrusion. All doors and windows must remain locked. There
shall be at least one operable door into every building and into each housing unit.
Exterior walls and roofs must remain intact without holes.
301.3.2.1 Architectural (cosmetic) structural panels: Architectural structural
panels may be used to secure windows, doors and other openings provided they
are cut to fit the opening and match the characteristics of the building.
Architectural panels may be of exterior grade finished plywood or Medium
Density Overlaid plywood (MDO) that is painted to match the building exterior or
covered with a reflective material such as plexiPlexi-glass.
Exception: Untreated plywood or similar structural panels may be used to secure
windows, doors and other openings for a maximum period of thirty (30) days.
301.3.2.2 Security fences: Temporary construction fencing may be used for a
maximum period of thirty (30) days as a method to secure a building from entry.
301.3.3 Weather protection: The exterior roofing and siding shall be maintained as
required in International Property Maintenance Code Ssection 304.
301.3.4 Fire Safety:
301.3.4.1 Fire protection systems: All fire suppression and alarms systems,
including carbon monoxide detectors, shall be maintained in a working condition
and inspected as required by the Fire DepartmentDistrict. (Ord. 5806, 6-20-2016)
301.3.4.2 Flammable liquids: No vacant building or premises or portion thereof
shall be used for the storage of flammable liquids or other materials that
constitute a safety or fire hazard.
301.3.4.3 Combustible materials: All debris, combustible materials, litter, and
garbage shall be removed from vacant buildings, their accessory buildings and
adjoining yard areas. The building and premises shall be maintained free from
such items.
301.3.4.4 Fire inspections: Periodic Fire Department inspections may be required
at intervals set forth by the Fire Chief. (Ord. 5806, 6-20-2016)
301.3.5 Plumbing fixtures: Plumbing fixtures connected to an approved water system,
an approved sewage system, or an approved natural gas utility system shall be installed
in accordance with applicable codes and be maintained in sound condition and good
repair or removed and the service terminated in the manner prescribed by applicable
codes.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 15 of 20
301.3.5.1 Freeze protection: The building’s water systems shall be protected
from freezing.
301.3.6 Electrical: Electrical service lines, wiring, outlets or fixtures not installed or
maintained in accordance with applicable codes shall be repaired, removed or the
electrical services terminated to the building in accordance with applicable codes.
301.3.7 Heating: Heating facilities or heating equipment in vacant buildings shall be
removed, rendered inoperable, or maintained in accordance with applicable codes.
301.3.8 Interior floors: If a hole in a floor presents a hazard, the hole shall be covered
and secured with three-quarter inch (3/4") plywood, or a material of equivalent
strength, cut to overlap the hole on all sides by at least six inches (6").
301.3.9 Termination of utilities: The code official may, by written notice to the owner
and to the appropriate water, electricity or gas utility, request that water, electricity, or
gas service to a vacant building be terminated or disconnected.
301.3.9.1 Restoration of service: If water, electricity or gas service has been
terminated or disconnected pursuant to section 301.3.9, no one except the
utility may take any action to restore the service, including an owner or other
private party requesting restoration of service until written notification is given
by the code official that service may be restored.
301.3.10 Notice to person responsible: The code official may inspect the building and
premises whenever the code official has reason to believe that a building is vacant,
subject to a duly issued court warrant, if there is a present danger, or under the terms of
the City’s community caretaking function. If the code official determines that a vacant
building violates any provision of this section, the code official shall notify in writing the
owner of the building or real property upon which the building is located, or other
person responsible, of the violations and required corrections and shall be given a time
frame to comply.
301.3.10.1 Alternate requirements: The requirements and time frames of this
section may be modified under an approved Plan of Action. Within thirty (30)
days of notification that a building or real property upon which the building is
located is in violation of this section, an owner may submit a written Plan of
Action for the code official to review and approve if found acceptable. A Plan of
Action may allow:
1) Extended use of non-architectural panels.
2) Extended use of temporary security fencing.
3) Extended time before the demolition of a building is required.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 16 of 20
4) For substandard conditions to exist for a specific period of time, provided
the building is secured in an approved manner. When considering a Plan of
Action, the building official shall take into consideration the magnitude of the
violation and the impact to the neighborhood.
301.3.11 Enforcement: Violations of this section shall be enforced according to the
provisions and procedures of RMC 1-3-2 and subject to the monetary penalties
contained therein.
301.3.11.1 Abatement: A building or structure accessory thereto that remains
vacant and open to entry after the required compliance date is found and
declared to be a public nuisance. The code official is hereby authorized to
summarily abate the violation by closing the building to unauthorized entry. The
costs of abatement shall be a lien against the real property and may be collected
from the owner in the manner provided by law.
301.3.11.2 Unsafe buildings and equipment: Any vacant building or equipment
therein declared unsafe is subject to the provisions of RMC 4-5-060 and the
demolition provisions of RMC 4-5-060. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012)
3. Section 302.4 is amended to read as follows:
302.4 Weeds: All premises and exterior property shall be maintained free from weeds or plant
growth in excess of twelve inches in height on development property or twenty-four inches
(24") in height on vacant land. All noxious weeds shall be prohibited. “Noxious weeds” shall be
defined as those plants included on a list of noxious plants as adopted by the county, state, or
federal government. Weeds shall be defined as all grasses, annual plants and vegetation, other
than trees or shrubs; provided, however, this term shall not include cultivated flowers and
gardens.
Upon failure of the owner or agent having charge of a property to cut and destroy weeds after
service of a notice of violation, they shall be subject to the provisions of RMC 1-3-2, Civil
Enforcement of Code.
4. Section 304 Exterior Structure is amended as follows:
304.20 Solid Waste: Every dwelling unit shall have adequate facilities for temporary
storage of trash and recyclable materials.
5. Section 305 Interior Structure is amended as follows:
305.1 General: The interior of a structure and equipment therein shall be maintained in
good repair, structurally sound and in a sanitary condition. Every owner of a structure
containing residential rental units shall maintain, in a clean and sanitary condition, the
shared public areas of the structure and exterior property. Occupants shall keep that
part of the structure that they occupy or control in a clean and sanitary condition.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 17 of 20
305.1.2 Every plumbing fixture, pipe, chimney, flue, and every other piece of
equipment or utility shall be installed and maintained in conformance with
applicable statutes, ordinances, and regulations.
305.7 Kitchen: Every dwelling unit shall have a kitchen equipped with the following:
305.7.1 Kitchen sink in good working condition, properly connected to heated and
unheated water supplies and waste pipes. Any provided components of the sink shall be
in good working condition and properly connected.
305.7.2 A range for cooking food. The range shall be properly installed with all necessary
connections for safe and efficient operation and shall be maintained in good working
condition.
305.7.3 A refrigerator with a freezer. The refrigerator shall be in good working
condition, of sufficient size to store occupants’ food that requires refrigeration, and
capable of maintaining a temperature less than 41 degrees F, but more than 32 degrees
F. The freezer section shall be capable of maintaining a temperature below 0 degrees F.
305.7.4 A kitchen floor in good condition with a sealed, water-resistant, nonabsorbent,
and cleanable surface.
305.8 Bathroom: Every dwelling unit shall have a private bathroom equipped with the
following:
305.8.1 A toilet in good working condition that is sealed to the waste pipe and affixed to
the floor and properly connected to both the dwelling’s water supply and a waste pipe
leading to an approved sewage system or private waste disposal system.
305.8.2 A sink in good working condition, with a stable connection to the wall or secure
attachment to the floor that is properly connected to the heated and unheated potable
water supply and a sealed trap leading to a waste pipe.
305.8.3 A bathtub or shower in good working condition that is properly connected to
the heated and unheated potable water supply and a waste pipe.
305.8.4 Cleanable nonabsorbent water-resistant material on floor surfaces.
305.9 Safety and Personal Security: The following are required for safety and personal security:
305.9.1 Every dwelling unit shall have at least two means of egress, without having to
pass through another dwelling unit.
305.9.2 Windows and doors shall have locks on the interior side.
305.9.3 Alarms and Detectors:
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 18 of 20
305.9.3.1 Smoke alarm shall be mounted on the ceiling outside each sleeping
area and on each level of the building with the exception of crawl spaces and
uninhabitable attics.
305.9.3.2 A carbon monoxide alarm shall be provided outside each sleeping area
and on every floor.
305.9.3.3 Battery-operated alarms and the battery backup for hardwired smoke
alarms shall be powered with long-lasting batteries.
305.9.3.4 All alarm systems shall be functioning.
305.9.3.5 Alternative visual notification system shall be provided for hearing-
impaired occupants.
305.9.4 Each dwelling unit shall have at least one 10-pound, Class ABC-rated fire
extinguisher in good working condition, readily accessible, in or near the kitchen.
305.10 Electrical System: Every dwelling unit shall have electric service, outlets, and fixtures
that are grounded and installed properly, maintained in good and safe working condition, and
connected to a source of electric power. Temporary wiring or extension cords shall not be used
as permanent wiring.
305.11 Heating System: Every dwelling unit shall have a properly installed heating system in
good and safe working condition that is capable of safely and adequately heating all habitable
rooms.
305.12 Ventilation: Natural or mechanical ventilation, or a combination of the two, shall deliver
fresh air to every habitable room and bathroom and be capable of removing moisture-laden air
and other contaminants generated during cooking, bathing, and showering.
305.13 Air Sealing: Openings into dwellings and dwelling units shall be sealed to limit
uncontrolled air movement.
305.14 Interior Moisture Prevention and Control: Surfaces and surface coverings, such as but
not limited to carpet, wood, cellulose insulation, and paper, paint, and other wall coverings,
including paper-faced gypsum board, shall have no signs of visible mold growth or chronic or
persistent excessive dampness or moisture.
4. Section 308 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with a new Section 308 Residential
Outdoor Storage, which shall read as follows:
308 Residential Outdoor Storage:
308.1 Purpose: The purpose of this section is to define and regulate the outdoor storage of
materials on residential property while maintaining the character and use intended for single
family residential neighborhoods. For purposes of this section, residentially zoned property is
any property zoned RC, R1, R4, R6, or R8.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 19 of 20
308.2 Allowed residential outdoor storage: For RC and R1 zoned properties, a maximum of 400
square feet of area may be used for outdoor storage. For R4, R6, and R8 zoned properties, a
maximum of two hundred (200) square feet of area may be used for outdoor storage.
308.3 Prohibited areas for outdoor storage: Outdoor storage is prohibited on residentially
zoned property in the following areas:
Front yards
Side yards
Slopes greater than 15%
Designated open spaces or restricted areas
Critical areas, including wetland, streams and associated buffer areas
308.4 Emergency access: Outdoor storage areas shall not prevent emergency access to the
residential structure or any other building.
308.5 Business related storage: Materials stored outdoors on residentially zoned properties
shall not be owned by or used in any business or industry including a home occupation
business.
308.6 Height limitations: Materials stored outdoors on residentially zoned properties shall be
neatly stacked and not exceed a height of six feet (6'). Tarps may not be utilized for screening
outdoor storage.
308.7 Firewood: Firewood must be split, neatly stacked, and intended for use on the premises
on which it is stored. Tarps may be used to protect firewood.
308.8 Membrane structures: Membrane structures are considered outdoor storage, and
subject to the location restrictions in section 308.3. Such structures shall not exceed two
hundred (200) square feet in area. Membrane structures shall be immediately removed or
repaired in the event of disrepair or in the event of damage caused by weather, fire, collision,
accident or other forms of damage. Tarps and makeshift covers are prohibited for this use.
308.9 Prohibited materials: Shipping containers and other similar storage units do not qualify as
accessory buildings on residentially zoned properties, and are prohibited. Hazardous materials
are also prohibited for outdoor storage on residentially zoned properties. (Ord. 5710, 4-14-
2014)
C. COPY ON FILE:
At least one (1) copy of the adopted edition of the International Property Maintenance Code
shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk. (Ord. 5549, 8-9-2010)
XXIII. Certificate of Compliance
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Safe and Healthy Housing in Renton
Page 20 of 20
A Certificate of Compliance is a prerequisite for occupancy. The Certificate demonstrates the
inspected unit has met or exceeded the minimum standards adopted into the Renton Municipal
Code (RMC 4-5-130). Other units on the same property will be issued Certificates of Compliance
in accordance with adopted inspection criteria (See IX, above).
If, at the time of the next inspection cycle, the ownership of the property has not changed nor
has there been a valid code violation on the property, the Certificate of Compliance can be
extended to the following inspection cycle.
For new construction, the Occupancy Permit will serve as the Certificate of Compliance for five
years following issuance of the Occupancy Permit.
A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued if:
• If scheduling difficulties have resulted in the previous Certificate expiring before the
inspection can be completed (as long as conditions that threaten life safety have not
been found at the unit); and
• An occupied unit has failed the inspection and the owner needs additional time to make
repairs (as long as there are no unresolved conditions that threaten life safety at the
unit).
XXIV. Failure to Comply
The penalty for noncompliance with the Safe and Healthy Housing Program shall be in
accordance with RMC 1-3-2. The City may notify the landlord that until the unit has successfully
passed an inspection and a Certificate of Compliance has been issued, it is unlawful to rent or
allow a tenant to occupy the unit.
XXV. Appeal Process
If a landlord does not agree with the findings of an inspection an appeal may be filed with the
City Clerk in accordance with RMC 1-3-2.
XXVI. Annual Assessment
In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the SHH, an annual assessment will be prepared for
presentation to the City Council
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Exhibit B
Focus Group Comments Related to Housing and Neighborhood
Group: Public and Subsidized Housing Residents Focus
Date: April 13, 2016
Place: Renton Housing Authority Office
• I love this area, but the things going on at the vacant homes are making me want to move out.
• The housing is run down and raggly and needs to be torn down.
• Everything needs to be updated so that it’s more welcoming and so people want to stay there – if it
looks run down, no one wants to be a part of that.
• Too many people living in one house – 3 bedroom and nine people sometimes.
Group: Elderly Affinity Focus
Date: April 14, 2016
Place: Hillcrest Community Building
• Clean up the duplexes.
• Revitalize some of the houses – paint them, clean up the yards.
• Incentivize landlords to do more to improve and revitalize the properties.
• Some of the private housing is pretty run-down and junk needs to be cleaned up.
• Some of the housing is owned by companies outside of the United States – maintenance is not good
– absentee landlords are a problem.
Group: Hispanic Focus
Date: April 14, 2016
Place: Highlands Elementary School
• I have friends in apartments close to this school. They pay a lot and the conditions are horrible. The
landlord won’t change the windows or the carpet, but the rent goes up and up.
• The housing is bad quality – bad carpet, bad smells, the owner won’t change anything.
• When it’s cold there is so much mold. My kids are allergic and everything in my house is wet, sticky
and wet, even the carpet. I have to clean the walls and windows every week to get rid of mold. The
owner says he won’t change the carpet until we live here 5 years.
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Appendix B: Focus Group Comments
Page 2 of 2
• I want help to find a place without mold and also energy efficient. I don’t want to pay so much in
utility bills. I should be able to have a place where I don’t have to sacrifice what I can provide for my
kids just to pay the rent.
• I am worried about abandoned houses. They attract homeless people and gang kids. Also the police
have detected this but they can’t be there 24 hours a day.
Group: Families with Children Affinity Focus
Date: April 18, 2016
Place: Highlands Elementary School
• It’s mostly the duplexes – nobody is taking care of them.
• Many of the ones that ae not maintained may be rentals.
• Most of the homes in the neighborhood are deplorable
o No one is doing anything to their front yards
o Moss growing on roof
o Doesn’t feel safe
o Nobody is putting any care into homes
o It gives you a depressed feeling
o There are some eyesores
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Docket #118 Health Housing
Exhibit C Comparison of Programs
Jurisdictions Administration
Business license
or registration
program?
License / registration Fees Frequency of
inspections Inspectors / Inspections Licensing / registration requirements Notes
Auburn
(2013)
Advisory Board
on Rental
Housing
Rental Housing
Business License
Application fee: 1-4 du $53/yr; 5-24 du $106;
$25+ du $212/yr; Communal residence
$150/yr (no pro rata)
annual
City only; for applicable health,
building, fire, housing or life-
safety code violations or other
serious violations
Provide annually # bedrooms & #
occupants; signed statement of
understanding of responsibilities to provide
safe living environment; bldg has permits;
garb & recyc managed; off street parking
provided; noise & nuisances monitored &
controlled; annual inspections; under 18
subject to curfew regs.
Program closely tied to crime &
nuisance prevention strategies
Bellingham
(2015)
Planning &
Community Dev
Dept
Rental
Registration &
Safety Inspection
Program
1 - 20 du $10/ea unit 21 or more du $8/ea
unit (property, not portfolio based)Once every 3 years
City or qualified private; City fee
of $100 and if private inspection,
$41 admin fee to City
Exempt from program if owner lives on
property; Health and safety, incl structural
integrity, weather exposure, plumbing &
sanitation, heat, water, and wastewater,
ventilation, defective or hazardous
electrical wire and/or service, safe &
functional exits, smoke & carbon monoxide
detectors. Mold exempt unless a symptom
of weather intrusion, plumbing leaks, or
lack of ventilation. Lead paint & asbestos
only if being disturbed.
15,000 rental units; registered
units listed on city website
Kent
(2013)
Dept of Public
Safety - Code
Enforcement
Division
Business license
required for all
rental properties.
2 - 10 units or spaces =$101; 11 - 50 = $301;
51+ = $601; fee waived for STAR members;
code violation in preceding yr = $1,000 fee
STAR program
emphasis is on crime
prevention. City has
funded a study of a
mandatory inspection
program.
No inspections, but landlord
must ensure 3rd party
background checks, maintain
property in accordance with city
and state codes.
Safe Tenants and Rentals (STAR) Program
purpose is to ensure provision of safe
rentals, avoid rentals of units to those who
engage in criminal conduct, improve quality
of rental housing in the city, and protect
public health, safety, and welfare. The STAR
is voluntary.
Penalty for not obtaining a
license is $100/day for first 10
days and up to $400/day in
excess of 10 days.
Mount
Vernon
(2011)
Building &
Inspection
Department and
Fire Department
Mandatory
Rental Dwelling
Inspection
Program
Application filing fee for Cert of Occupancy,
initial inspection, and one subsequent
inspection and for each renewal and renewal
inspection is $50 for one unit; 2-10 units:
$38/unit; 11-20 units: $35/unit, 21+ units:
$30/unit. $25 for each inspection past 2.
Once every 3 years or
more often if
requested
Inspections by Building and
Inspection Dept and Fire Dept
when when applying for Cert. of
Occupancy or when necessary;
Certificate of Occupancy (Occupancy
Permit) required; every property owner
must assign an agent whose contact info is
provided to the city.
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
4
.
b
)
Docket #118 Health Housing
Exhibit C Comparison of Programs
Jurisdictions Administration
Business license
or registration
program?
License / registration Fees Frequency of
inspections Inspectors / Inspections Licensing / registration requirements Notes
Mountlake
Terrace
(2012)
Community &
Economic Dev
Dept
Residential
Rental Business
License and
Certificate of
Compliance
Inspection
Program
Annual license: $40, plus $1.50 fee per unit;
Certificate of Compliance: $15; Initial
inspection: $0; 1st reinspection: $90; 2nd:
$125; 3rd+: $200; Residential Housing
Inspectors' (RHI) registration: $110; RHI
annual renewal: $60; RHA exam (admin by
City): $210.
Certification of
Compliance
(inspection) valid for
3 years and 90 days,
if violation for unit,
new inspection
required and CofC
only valid for 2 years
for those units.
City or private inspector
contracted by City & registered
w/City
Many listed exemptions;
Pasco
(1997)
Code
Enforcement
Rental Dwelling
License and
Certificate of
Habitability
Jan 1 - Jun 30: $30 for 1st unit + $3 for ea
add'l unit; Jul1 - Dec 31: 1/2 license fee
Certificate of
Habitability req once
every 2 years.
City (no charge); inspectors cert
by HUD for grant-req
inspections; cert private
inspectors approved by City
Certificate of Inspection prior to issuance of
license. All rental units must comply with
Uniform Housing Code and do not present
conditions that endager or impair the
health or safety of the tenant (list).
Prosser
(2012)
City
Administrator
Business Rental
License and
Certification of
Inspection
$30 for 1st du & $5 for ea addl du Inspection required
every 5 years
City Code Enforcement or
building official; HUD certified;
private inspectors, approved by
City; WA licensed structural eng
or arch. $35 for ea du inspected.
If participation in voluntary crime-free
rental housing program is required,
applicant for business license must provide
certification of participation from Chief of
Police.
Revenue generated dedicated to
prevention of criminal activity
related to rental housing, admin
costs, inspection costs, auditing,
and collection.
Seattle
(2014)
Dept of
Construction and
Inspections
Rental
Registration and
Inspection
Ordinance (RRIO)
Base fee +1 unit=$175; $2 ea add' unit; fees
good for 5 yrs
All 148,000 non-
exempt rental units
inspected every 10
years.
Qualified rental housing
inspector or City inspector. Units
w/prior enforcement action
inspected early in program.
All properties with rental housing units
shall be registered; for condos and coops,
the property requred to be registered shall
be the individual unit being rented and not
the entire building; an owner with multiple
units in a condo or coop may have a single
registraton for all the units in the building.
Vacation rentals (max 3 mons
single tenant); commercial
lodging, state-licensed facilities
(adult homes), and public
housing authority and gov
owned units are exempt from
registeration. Registration prog
separate from complaint-based
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
4
.
b
)
Docket #118 Health Housing
Exhibit C Comparison of Programs
Jurisdictions Administration
Business license
or registration
program?
License / registration Fees Frequency of
inspections Inspectors / Inspections Licensing / registration requirements Notes
Sunnyside
(2010)Police Dept
Residential
Rental Housing
License
$100 for 1st unit and $50 ea add'l unit to max
of $750. Fee subj to waiver if owner
participates in the Crime-free Rental Housing
Program.
None required N/A
Participation in Crime-free rental housing
program is mandatory for any
owner/licensee receiving 2 or more notices
of instances of criminal activity on the
premises of one or more residentail du for
which a license is held. Provide address of
ea unit; manager & owners' names and
contact info.
Revenue from licensing fees
dedicated to prevention of
criminal activiaty related to
rental housing, admin costs,
auditing, and collection.
Toppenish
(2010)
City Clerk and
Code
Enforcement
Officer
Business License
for Residential
Rental Units
One or two units=$40; 3 and up $15 each
All units, once every 3
years, exempt if unit
has a cert of
occupancy w/in 4 yrs
and no code
violations
Code enforcement officer,
building inspector, HUD cert
inspector; ASHI cert inspector;
private inspector cert by NAHRO
ir AACE, WA licensed structural
eng, WA licensed arch. Min 48
hours notice for inspection
Certification required that ea occupied
residential rental unit will be kept fit for
human habitation and will be maintained in
full complince with all applicable
ordinances of the city.
Tukwila
(2011)
Department of
Community
Development -
Code Official
Residential
Rental Business
License and
Inspection
Program
1 - 4 units = $60 / year; 5+ units = $175 / year
Each unit inspected
every 4 years; city
organized by zones,
ea zone has 1,000
units +/-; one zone
inspected per year.
Subsequently
extended to every 8
yrs if prop is
participating in the
Crime-Free Multi-
housing Program.
City inspector ($50/ unit) or non-
City inspector (pre-approved by
city)
Issuance of a residential rental business
license dependent on completed inspection
Certificate signed by inspector. Upon
receipt of inspection Certificate, Certificate
of Compliance issued by code official.
Rental Inspection Deficiency
Point System: code violations
rated on a 1-25 scale. Units that
fail inspection by 25 points or
more are considered unfit for
occupancy. Inspection fee paid
for ea inspection, incl after
failures. Cannot have more than
3 verified complaints in any 6-
month period.
Renton
(PROPOSED)
Community and
Economic
Development -
Code Compliance
Division
Business license
for property
owner and
registration of
rental units
Business license fee = $150/year;
Rental registration fees = 1-4 du $12/ea/yr, 5-
24 du $10/ea/yr, 25+ $8/ea/yr, communal
residences $20/ea/yr
Once every 4 years City Code Compliance Officers or
private contractors
All property owners must have a business
license and each rental unit must be
registered
Self- certification available after
first inspection, if no code
violations related to condition of
rentals.
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
4
.
b
)
Exhibit D
Financial Assistance, Home Assessment Programs, and Other Support for
Property Owners and Tenants
Puget Sound Energy
PSE does home energy assessments makes energy saving recommendations. They may provide up to 20
high efficiency light bulbs, two high performance showerheads, and four faucet aerators. Cash rebates
for energy-improving upgrades in residential units, including insulation and window replacement.
Seattle City Light
In portions of King County, rebates similar to PSE combined with loans for certain repairs. “Community
Power Works,” offers rebates for insulation installations, air sealing, and window replacements.
King County Property Tax Abatement
This abatement eliminates property tax on the improved portion of a property’s value for major
additions and remodels. These abatements do not cover what is considered more routine maintenance,
such as roof repairs, new paint, or window replacement. This program may be useful for complete
renovations.
Federal Tax Credits
Tax credits are available for certain weatherization-related residential improvements. Tax credits are
available for a portion of the cost to install energy-efficient windows, doors, roofs, and heating systems.
Catholic Community Services of Western Washington
A Volunteer Chore Services program provides free minor home repair assistance for low-income elderly
or disabled residents. CCSWW refers larger repair projects to Rebuilding Together.
Rebuilding Together Seattle
This organization, which serves the Greater Seattle Area from Everett to Burien, rehabilitates homes for
low-income residents. In 2016, they initiated their first project in Renton, working with three
homeowners, who were referred to them by the City’s Housing Repair Program.
City of Renton
The City of Renton Housing Repair Assistance Program offers free minor health and safety home repairs
to eligible City residents who are homeowners. The City program works with King County Housing
Repair, Rebuilding Together, Habitat for Humanity, and King County Weatherization on larger repairs.
King County
The King County Department of Community and Human Services offers several Housing Repair Programs
for homeowners who live in King County outside of the Seattle city limits.
One is the King County Weatherization Program, which is run through King County Housing Authority.
KCHA's Weatherization Program helps low-income renters and homeowners reduce their energy costs
and improve the indoor air quality of their homes. Common repairs include:
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Appendix C
Page 2 of 2
• Ventilation improvements
• Insulation installs
• Furnace repairs
• Air sealing to prevent drafts
Habitat for Humanity
Habitat for Humanity completes and warranties repairs on homes for zero profit and keeps the costs of
the repair projects low by utilizing volunteer labor and donated materials whenever possible. In cases
where contract labor is necessary, Habitat acts as a general contractor and facilitates quality work with
trusted companies. To qualify, one must own and live in an insured home within one of the Habitat
service areas (part of Renton is served by La Fortuna).
Master Builders Care Foundation
The Master Builders have an annual program called “Rampathon,” in which volunteers use donated
materials to install ADA compliant ramp access for older adults and residents with disabilities.
American Lung Association
The ALA offers assistance to people to do their own home assessments. A volunteer may assist, or a
home assessment can be done without a volunteer by using an abbreviated “Do it Yourself” form that
provides guidance for making one’s home a healthier place to live.
Tenants’ Rights
Tenants’ Union of Washington State advocates for the rights of renters to have healthy homes. Solid
Ground has a good website for tenants. https://www.solid-ground.org/get-help/housing/for-tenants/
The Housing Justice Project (HJP) is a homelessness prevention program providing accessible volunteer-
based legal services for low-income tenants facing eviction in King County.
https://www.kcba.org/pbs/HJP
Landlord Assistance
Information that assists property owners to be better landlords is available from several special interest
associations representing the interests of property owners, including condominium owners.
Financial Assistance for property owners in King county may be available through the Landlord Liaison
Project. http://www.landlordliaisonproject.org/about/
AGENDA ITEM #4. b)
Human Services Information
Homelessness and Vulnerable Populations
1.The City’s current funding level of service for the homeless
Homelessness prevention $61,000
Other (shelter, housing)$112,000
Cold weather shelter $5,000
Total:$178,000 or roughly 30% of total funding of $586,037
2.Partnership with REACH and the Renton Clothing Bank
Center of Hope –Women and children day shelter (REACH only)
Temporary use of 300 Rainier Ave. bldg. (old Chamber)
Warm-up breakfast Mon.–Fri.
Dinner/meal program –Fri.-Sun.
Both entities actively searching for a permanent location
Challenges for permanent location:
o Funds for Capital and ongoing operating costs difficult to acquire.
o Location is critical, not in center of neighborhoods,need to be along bus
lines.
o Shelters should include hygiene center, medical and mental health services.
3.City staff collaborating with partners –Valley Medical, RTC,and funded agencies to provide a
“Resource Fair for Homelessness”(late summer/early fall)
4.City staff –member of South King County Homeless Action Committee
5.Youth Homelessness:
Homeless youth are 12 to 25 years of age. They are disproportionately lesbian, gay, bisexual or
queer (27%) or youth of color (53%). There is an opportunity for prevention an d early
intervention. 22% come from foster care, 38% are enrolled in school, and 49 %have encountered
criminal justice.
City funds Auburn Youth Resources and Friends of Youth for homeless outreach.And
RAYS works with gang interventions, and the community diversion board
Path Net Drop-Out Intervention is a Systems Integration initiative to re-engage out-of-
school court-involved youth with the most appropriate education and training
AGENDA ITEM #4. c)
programs to reach educational goals. The program provides one-stop youth
assessment and placement at the Renton Youth Source Center, and serves 100 out-of-
school youth per year.
Potential options:
o Declare community center, neighborhood center,or senior center a ‘Safe
Place’–places where homeless youth can go to get help and be directed to
resources.
Training recreation staff for signs of youth “at risk” so they can be referred to
appropriate services (Both Auburn Youth Services and Friends of Youth offered to
provide training)
6.Vulnerable population/seniors –City utility discount and rebate program
Reduced Utility Rates:The City of Renton offers reduced rates for water, wastewater,
surface water and garbage for low-income senior citizens (61 and over), and low-
income disabled citizens.The current yearly income limit is $35,000.00 per year.296
residents get either a 50% or 75% subsidy on their water, city wastewater,and storm
drainage and garbage bill. The total amount of the utilities that was subsidized in 2016
was $96,626.35
Tax Rebate is automatically issued to approve reduced rate customers and is also
available for citizens that meet these reduced rate qualifications but do not receive a
utility bill from the City.Rebate has been $60 per household.Tax Rebates for 2016
were sent to 289 customers for a total of $37,342.00 or $129.21 per customer
•Suggestions for improving access
Utility discount and utility rebate program not actively marketed to Renton residents .
23.9% out of 38,840 Renton households had an income less than $35,000 –12.2% of
the population is 65 or older.It is not known how many reside in a separately metered
single family dwelling to be eligible –as many older apartments only have one meter
per building.
Income can’t exceed $35,000 per year for a single individual.Unsure how that income
level is determined.Most programs use HUD’s income guidelines of 80/50/30% of
median income.
AGENDA ITEM #4. c)
Currently the utility discount and Housing Repair Program each have a s eparate
application process and income verification.Both programs serve low income older
adults/disabled,we are discussing how to integrate these processes/share information.
Provide one location on new city website, where low income residents can find all
information on programs/discounts that the City offers
7.Additional services for seniors –23.7% of the Renton population is 55 and older
Transportation/access –We have the Hyde Shuttle which is door to door service within
the Renton city limits for people over 55 and those with disabilities.Additional van
needed?
Has 187 unduplicated riders
8.City to host 2nd Annual “Senior Resource Expo”-Focus on area services, safety and reaching out
to our multi-cultural communities.
Opportunities?:
RHA –looking at more senior housing, and is dealing with aging in place.
Housing Repair –waiting list for larger repairs.
Improve awareness of Community Living Connections, information and
accessibility.
Neighborhood House is the local sponsor for Community Living
Connections. It provides an advocate that will give information,
consultation, and service options.Currently the position is located at
Golden Pines Senior Housing (Renton Housing Authority building).
Explore options to provide this service at the Renton Senior Activity
Center.
9.Additional City focus:
Encampment removals on City-owned property-staff provides information on available
services. Typically this population is defined as 'Chronic Homeless’ who refuse services.
Sobering Center -(9 –month trial program) funded by King County /Medic One.
AGENDA ITEM #4. c)
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
Background:
• Many of Renton’s land use zones had been in place in their current form, or with slight
modifications, since the Growth Management Act (GMA) Comprehensive Plan was initially adopted
by the City in 1994.
• Since the adoption of GMA, the State has put significant limitations on the authority of cities to tax
residential development.
o Residential growth no longer pays in taxes the cost it requires for facilities and services.
• When the Growth Management Act was adopted, there was an expectation that the State would
provide additional funding for infrastructure to ensure adequate facilities were in place at the time
of development. This has not occurred.
• The City has accepted responsibility for planning for 14,050 new household and 28,755 new jobs by
2035 as identified in the King County household and employment growth targets (attached).
• According to Buildable Lands analysis (attached), which evaluates the number of households and
jobs the City can accommodate based on current zoning, the City has the capacity to accommodate
15,351 new households.
2014-2015 Work:
• The City adopted several amendments to the development regulations that will have an impact on
the look and feel of density, in single family residential zones in particular. In some cases, the
amendments may reduce the number of lots a parcel will be subdivided into. These items are:
o Tree retention. Trees that are retained as part of a subdivision that are not located on a
residential lot are required to be placed in tracts. This is a new requirement. It may reduce
the number of lots that can be developed because tracts are not a buildable area.
o Minimum lot sizes and setbacks. In the R-4 zone, minimum lot size was increased from
8,000 to 9,000 square feet. Additionally, the side setback was increased from 5 feet to a
combined 20 feet, with not less than 7½ feet on either side. In the R-8 zone, the minimum
lot size was standardized to 5,000 square feet. Previously, subdivisions of parcels larger
than 1 acre were allowed 4,500 square foot minimum lot sizes. Additionally, in the R-8 zone
the front setback increased from 15 feet to 20 feet and the side setback increased from 5
feet to a combined 15 feet with not less than 5 feet on either side. In these two zones,
these standards, in particular the increased minimum lot size in R-4, may reduce the number
of lots that can be developed in a subdivision (see attached).
• Berk and Associates completed a suitability analysis of Land Use and zoning and made
recommendations regarding “Right Size” zoning options. This analysis identified density
mismatches; in particular, areas that are zoned R-8, but are built out at approximately R-6 or
lower (attached).
• Adopted interim zoning in the R-8 zone and for South Renton.
• A new single-family residential zone was created, R-6. This zone improved the range of options
available for zoning (previously zoning went from R-4 to R-8, a doubling of density). It also
serves as a transition between the lower density residential zones and the smaller lot
development that is associated with R-8 development. Many areas (portions of Kennydale,
Highlands, and Cascade neighborhood) that are largely built out with R-6 zone lot sizes (7,000
square feet) were rezoned from R-8 to R-6.
• In response to community desire to preserve single-family character, rezoned much of South
Renton from RMT (Residential Multi-Family Traditional) – 35 dwelling units per acre, RMU
(Residential Multi-Family Urban) – 75 dwelling units per acre, and/or CD (Center Downtown) –
100 dwelling units per acre to R-14.
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
• Also, adopted a moratorium on multi-family development in the RMF (Residential Multi-Family)
– 20 dwelling units per acre and CA (Commercial Arterial)- 60 dwelling units per acre zones.
• Rezoned RMF zoned areas without existing multi-family development or with predominant
multi-family development in the area to lower density zones (R-8 or R-10). Rezoned several
areas from CA to lower density zones and restricted maximum density in East Plateau and
Kennydale to 30 dwelling units per acre. Multi-family residential development is no longer
allowed in the CA zone in Benson and Talbot.
• With these changes, high density multi-family has been focused into areas where: 1) adequate
planning and infrastructure exist or have been planned for and 2) where it will leverage
redevelopment of existing antiquated housing or commercial buildings.
• Amended CO (Commercial Office) zone to allow multi-family development when it is in close
proximity to significant transportation infrastructure (for example, in the Longacres area near
the Sounder station). This creates an opportunity to create Transit Oriented Developments
where significant employment areas also have housing.
• Bonus density criteria were amended to only allow density bonuses for providing affordable
housing.
Next Steps:
• Coordinate with King County to evaluate the Buildable Lands available in Renton.
• Participate in Countywide assessment and designation of Housing and Employment Growth
Targets.
• Continue to monitor land availability data.
• As Community Plans are developed review zoning and land uses in the Plan area with the
community.
• Continue to plan and construct Capital Facilities and Transportation infrastructure in areas
where density is planned.
• Continue to coordinate with and represent Renton on the King County Growth Management
Policy Board, the Puget Sound Regional Council, and the Sound Cities Association.
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
July 23, 2014 King County Buildable Lands Report 2014 Page 13
Exhibit 2. King County Growth Targets (2006 -2031) Compared to 2007 Capacity
Regional Geography
City / Subarea Housing Target PAA Housing
Target
Housing
Capacity
+/-
?
Employment
Target
PAA Emp.
Target
Employment
Capacity
+/-
?
Net New Units Net New Units Net New Units Net New Jobs Net New Jobs Net New Jobs
2006-2031 2006-2031 2006, from BLR 2006-2031 2006-2031 2006, from BLR
Metropolitan Cities
Bellevue 17,000 290 13,670 X 53,000 49,100 -
Seattle 86,000 128,900 146,700 254,900
Total 103,000 142,570 199,700 304,000
Core Cities
Auburn 9,620 9,190 -19,350 - 17,760 -
Bothell 3,000 810 2,860 -4,800 200 6,040
Burien 4,440 3,170 X 4,960 3,260 X
Federal Way 8,100 2,390 5,670 X 12,300 290 8,860 X
Kent 9,270 90 9,080 -13,280 210 12,540 -
Kirkland 8,570 - 6,380 X 20,850 - 12,600 X
Redmond 10,200 640 8,990 X 23,000 25,075
Renton 14,835 3,895 16,250 29,000 470 29,550
SeaTac 5,800 5,240 -25,300 17,730 X
Tukwila 4,800 50 3,490 X 15,500 2,050 16,200
Total 78,635 70,320 168,340 149,615
Larger Cities
Des Moines 3,000 3,300 5,000 3,950 X
Issaquah 5,750 290 6,900 20,000 19,100 -
Kenmore 3,500 5,020 3,000 3,050
Maple Valley 1,800 1,060 2,380 2,000 3,770
Mercer Island 2,000 1,760 X 1,000 820 X
Sammamish 4,000 350 3,740 -1,800 - X
Shoreline 5,000 6,890 5,000 3,490 X
Woodinville 3,000 2,140 X 5,000 3,770 X
Total 28,050 32,130 42,800 37,950
Small Cities
Algona 190 320 210 580
Beaux Arts 3 5 3 - ?
Black Diamond 1,900 4,270 1,050 4,700
Carnation 330 800 370 1,570
Clyde Hill 10 25 - -
Covington 1,470 3,300 1,320 3,330
Duvall 1,140 2,650 840 1,600
Enumclaw 1,425 3,250 735 1,790
Hunts Point 1 1 - -
Lake Forest Park 475 675 210 380
Medina 19 40 - -
Milton 50 90 420 160 2,470
Newcastle 1,200 1,500 735 870
Normandy Park 120 275 65 170
North Bend 665 1,600 1,050 7,760
Pacific 285 135 560 370 350 -
Skykomish 10 35 - -
Snoqualmie 1,615 3,480 1,050 900 X
Yarrow Point 14 35 - -
Total 10,922 23,241 8,168 26,470
Urban Unincorporated
Total 12,470 20,190 9,060 9,200
King County UGA Total 233,077 288,451 428,068 527,235
Key: Sufficient capacity
Slight shortfall -
Substantial shortfall X
The base year for these Targets is 2006. As cities annex territory, PAA targets
shift into Targets column.
Adjustments to Burien, Kent & Kirkland targets have been made to account for
2010 and 2011 annexations.
King County Growth Targets Committee, Growth Management Planning Council, August
2009. Adjusted June2011
capacity in 2007 BLR
meets target
less than 10% short
of target
more than 10% short
of target
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
July 23 , 2014 King County Buildable Lands Report 2 014 Page 72
1. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Residential Development Activity: 2001-2005 Housing Unit Update, 2006 to 2012
Single Multi-Total
Family*family Hous'g Units
Plats Recorded 2006 Base Year 14,373 12,726 27,099
0 - 3 du/acre 4.4 0.7 0.7 0.0 3.0 4 1.3
3 - 5 du/acre 165.7 23.9 23.7 14.0 104.1 542 5.2 2006-12 Change 1,515 1,584 3,099
5 - 7 du/acre
7 - 9 du/acre 220.9 19.1 25.7 13.6 162.7 1,095 6.7 =2012 Units (old bdry)15,888 14,310 30,198
> 9 du/acre 116.2 9.9 15.7 24.8 65.8 523 8.0
Plats Total 507.3 53.6 65.8 52.4 335.6 2,164 6.4 Plus anxtn, adjustmt 6,300 3,870 10,170
Single-Family Permits Issued = 2012 Adj. H.Units 22,188 18,180 40,368
0 - 3 du/acre 8.8 4 0.5 * single family includes mobile homes
3 - 5 du/acre 89.4 478 5.3
5 - 7 du/acre
7 - 9 du/acre 189.3 1,225 6.5
> 9 du/acre 72.0 666 9.3
SF Pmts Total n/a n/a n/a n/a 359.5 2,373 6.6 Housing Growth Target (2006-2031)14,000
Housing Units: 2006-2012
Multifamily Permits Issued Net New SF Units Permitted -1,516
< 9 du/acre Net New MF Units Permitted -1,583
9 - 13 du/acre 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 4 10.3 Net New Units, Annex Area -30
13 - 19 du/acre 32.5 11.3 0.5 0.4 20.4 262 12.8 Net New Units (2006-2012)-3,129
19 - 31 du/acre 61.9 33.1 7.4 1.0 20.4 220 10.8 835
31 - 48 du/acre Net Adjustment to Target -2,294
48 + du/acre 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.2 7.7 578 74.7
Other zones 7.5 0.0 1.3 0.3 5.8 193 Net Adjustment to Target (2,294)
MF Pmts Total 110.2 44.4 9.2 1.8 54.8 1,257 22.9 Remaining Target (2012-2031)11,706
Not Applicable
Public
Purpose
(acres)
Plus Annexat'n Area Target
CITY OF RENTON
# Lots
or Units
Net
Area
(acres)
Net
Density
(units/ac)
Zoned Density
(max. du/acre)
Gross
Area
(acres)
Critical
Areas
(acres)
ROWs
(acres)
Growth Target Update, 2006 to 2012
From 2006 to 2012, the City of Renton issued permits for more than 3,000 new housing units, adding 11% to the city's housing stock.
These new units were equally divided between single family and multifamily.
-In 2007, Renton annexed the Benson Hill area wtih an additional housing units, and there were other annexations as well.
After adjusting for annexations and new construction, Renton's remaining 2012 -2031 housing target is to plan for 11,700 addit ional
housing units by 2031.
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
5
.
a
)
July 23 , 2014 King County Buildable Lands Report 2 014 Page 73
2. RESIDENTIAL LAND SUPPLY AND CAPACITY CITY OF RENTON
Residential Land Supply and Dwelling Unit Capacity (2012)
Residential Capacity Gross acres Critical Areas
ROW & Public
Purpose
Discount
Market Factor Net Available
Acres
Assumed
Density Net Capacity
Vacant Subtotal 489.76 201.64 46.32 10%217.62 1.33 / 8.44 1,229
Redev Subtotal 1,602.57 308.60 267.80 15%872.25 1.33 / 8.44 3,736
Total 2,092.33 510.24 1,089.87 4,965
Vacant Subtotal 11.38 9.74 0.04 10%1.44 19.0 / 84.0 43
Redev Subtotal 85.94 20.36 1.66 15%54.33 19.0 / 84.0 1,408
Total 97.32 30.10 55.77 1,451
Neighborhood Total 2,189.65 540.34 1,145.64 6,416
Vacant Subtotal 52.36 8.69 0.04 10%40.21 53.1 / 116.0 1,306
Redev Subtotal 170.58 14.87 0.00 15%132.35 44.5 / 116.0 5,177
Total 222.94 23.56 172.56 8,935
All Housing
Vacant Total 553.50 220.07 46.40 10%259.27 2,578
Redev Total 1,859.09 343.83 269.46 15%1,058.93 10,321
Total 2,412.59 563.90 1,318.20 15,351
Note: pipeline development is embedded in mixed-use numbers above
Capacity (2012) vs Housing Growth Target (2012-2031)
4,965
745
1,451
93
6,483
1,614
Other adjustments 0
Total Capacity (units)15,351
Remaining Housing Target (2012-2031)11,706
Surplus/Deficit Capacity 3,645
Single Family
Multifamily in Mixed-Use Zones
Multifamily
Mi
x
e
d
U
s
e
Ci
t
y
T
o
t
a
l
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
Mixed-Use Zones - Renton CBD +
Mixed-Use Capacity in Pipeline
Capacity (units)
Single-Family Zones
Single-Family Capacity in Pipeline
Multifamily Zones
Multifamily Capacity in Pipeline
Residential capacity in Renton
exceeds the City's target by
3,600 housing units. More
than half the capacity is in the
downtown & other mixed-use
areas.
4,965
1,451
8,935
Single Family
Multifamily
Mixed Use
Housing Capacity
(in housing units)
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
5
.
a
)
July 23 , 2014 King County Buildable Lands Report 2 014 Page 74
3. COMMERCIAL-INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT CITY OF RENTON
Non-Residential Land Supply (Acres)Employment Update, 2006 to 2012
Comm'l Indust.Total
Jobs Jobs*Employment
Vacant / Redev.2006 Base Year 29,716 22,773 52,490
Commercial 258.5 63.6 0.0 0.0 194.9 10%/15%168.5
Mixed-Use 196.1 20.9 1.4 0.0 175.0 10%/15%150.4 2006-12 Change 5,462 336 5,798
Industrial 235.8 79.9 0.0 1.8 154.1 10%/15%133.9
Non-Res Land Total 690.3 164.4 1.4 1.8 524.0 452.9 = 2012 Jobs 35,178 23,109 58,287
Employment Capacity (2012)Adjustments 0
Net Land Assumed Existing Floor Area Sq. ft. per Job = 2012 Adj. Jobs 35,178 23,109 58,287
(mil.sq.ft.)FAR Floor (s.f.)Capac (million sq.ft.)Employee Capacity * industrial = manufacturing, construction, wholesale, transp.
Neighborhoods
Commercial 7.34 0.15/0.38 0.69 0.82 250/400 2,473 Growth Target Update, 2006 to 2012
Industrial 5.83 0.17/0.37 0.26 1.06 700 1,516
Neighborhood Total 3,989 Jobs Growth Target (2006-2031)28,700
Jobs Change: 2006-2012
Mixed-Use / Urban Center Plus Annexat'n Area Target 300
Mixed Use Vacant 0.88 0.31/1.86 0.40 250/400 1,493 Less Job Gain in 2006 bdy.-5697
Mixed Use Redev'able 1.84 1.18/1.86 0.91 2.16 250/400 8,172 Less Job Gain, Anxtn Area -100
Net Adjustment to Target -5,497
Mixed-Use Total 2.71 0.31/1.86 0.91 2.56 250/400 9,665
Net Adjustment to Target (5,497)
City Total Remaining Target (2012-2031)23,203
Commercial 7.34 0.15/0.38 0.69 0.82 250/400 2,473 2012 Job Capacity [from table to left]26,090
Mixed-Use 2.71 0.31/1.86 0.91 2.56 250/400 9,664 Adjustment to capacity 0
Industrial 5.83 0.17/0.37 0.26 1.06 700 1,516 Final 2012 Job Capacity 26,090
Jobs in Pipeline 12,437 Surplus/Deficit Capacity 2,887
City Total 15.89 1.86 4.45 26,090
Zoned Density
(max. du/acre)
Gross
Area
(acres)
Critical
Areas
(acres)
ROWs
(acres)
Public
Purpose
(acres)
Net
Area
(acres)
Market
Factor
Net-net
Area
(acres)
From 2006 to 20012, the City of Renton gained jobs, in the face of job losses at nearby cities. In 2007, Renton annexed the Benson Hill area
with about 3,000 jobs and capacity for more. As of 2012, Renton has capacity for more than 26,000 additional jobs, a surplus over its target of
about 23,200 jobs. Nearly half of that capacity is in projects already in the pipeline, including redevelopment of the Longa cres site for office
development.
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
5
.
a
)
RC R-1 R-4 R-6 R-8 R-10 R-14
8,000 sq. ft.None None
75 ft.None None
100 ft.40 ft.30 ft.
None none
50 ft.40 ft.
200 ft.85 ft.80 ft.65 ft.None None
300 ft.200 ft.100 ft.80 ft.70 ft.60 ft.
Alley Loaded
Garages: 10 ft. 15 ft.
10 ft., except
garages/carport is 20 ft.
Alley Loaded Garages: 15
ft.
25 ft.12 ft.12 ft.
30 ft.15 ft.10 ft.
5 ft.Detached Units: 4 ft.Detached Units: 4 ft.
Combined 20 ft
with not less
than 7.5 feet on
either side
Attached Units: 4 ft. for
unattached side(s), 0 ft.
for the attached side(s)
Attached Units: 4 ft. for
unattached side(s), 0 ft.
for the attached side(s)
Minimum
Lot Area 10 acres 1 acre
Minimum
Lot Width 150 ft 60 ft.50 ft.
Minimum
Lot Width
(corner lots)
175 ft.85 ft.80 ft.70 ft.60 ft.
70 ft.
Combined 15 ft,
with not less
than 5 feet on
either side.
5 ft.
Minimum
Lot Depth 90 ft.
Front
Setback 30 ft.30 ft.30 ft.Front Loaded Garages: 10
ft., 15 ft. except
garages/carport is 20 ft.
Alley Loaded Garages: 15
ft.
Front Loaded Garages: 20
ft.
Front Loaded
Garages: 15 ft.,
except garage is 20
ft.
Rear
Setback 35 ft.25 ft.25 ft.20 ft.
Side Setback 25 ft.15 ft.
Docket #104 Development Regulations Amendments
4,500 sq. ft. (1+ acre
parcels)
5,000 sq. ft. (less
than 1 acre parcels)
7,000 sq. ft.9,000 sq. ft. Detached: 4,000 sq. ft.
Attached: no minimum
Detached: 3,000 sq. ft.
Attached: no minimum
25 ft.
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
5
.
a
)
RC R-1 R-4 R-6 R-8 R-10 R-14
Minimum
Lot Area 10 acres 1 acre
4,500 sq. ft. (1+ acre
parcels)
5,000 sq. ft. (less
than 1 acre parcels)
7,000 sq. ft.
20 ft.
30 ft.
Residential: 30 ft.
Commercial: 20 ft.
None None
10%
15%
Allowable
Lot Size for
One Parcel
(within a
Short Plat Less
than One
Acre)
n/a n/a 8,000 sq. ft.6,250 sq. ft.4,500 sq. ft.n/a n/a
Maximum
Impervious
Surface Area
55%
Lots 5 acres or more:
20%.
Lots 10,000 sq ft to 5
acres: 55%. For ea.
addi’tl 10,000 sq ft,,
decrease 1.75% to min
20% for 5 acre lot.
Lots 10,000 sq ft or less:
55%
50%
10 ft., except
garage/carport shall be 15
ft.
Maximum
Height 30 ft.30 ft.30 ft.30 ft.30 ft.30 ft.
Side Setback
(along a
Street)
30 ft.20 ft.25 ft.
Maximum
Building
Coverage
(including
Primary and
Accessory)
20%40%
15 ft.
10 ft., except
garage/carport shall be
15 ft.
85%
80%
5,000+ sq. ft. lots:
35% or 2,500 sq. ft.,
whichever is greater
Less than 5,000 sq.
ft.:
50%
65%
75%
65%
5,000+ sq. ft.
lots: 35% or
2,500 sq. ft.,
whichever is
greater
Less than 5,000
sq. ft.: 50%
Detached Units: 75%
Attached Units: 65%
70%
30%
25%
55%
Lots 5+ acres: 2%. Addtl
5% for agri. Buildings
Lots 10,000 sq ft to 5
acres: 15%.
Lots 1 acre+, additional
5% for agri. building.
Lots 10,000 sq ft or less:
35%
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
5
.
a
)
A
G
E
N
D
A
I
T
E
M
#
5
.
a
)
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
an
d
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Zo
n
i
n
g
De
n
s
i
t
y
Ta
b
l
e
MA
X
.
DE
N
S
I
T
Y
(D
U
/
NE
T
AC
R
E
)
DE
N
S
I
T
Y
BO
N
U
S
MA
X
.
DE
N
S
I
T
Y
(D
U
/
NE
T
AC
R
E
)
DE
N
S
I
T
Y
BO
N
U
S
RC
1 / 10
ac
r
e
s
N
/
A
RC
1 / 10
ac
r
e
s
N
/
A
V
e
t
e
r
i
n
a
r
y
of
f
i
c
e
s
/
c
l
i
n
i
c
s
R ‐1
1
N
/
A
R ‐1
1
N
/
A
R ‐4
4
N
/
A
R ‐4
4
N
/
A
R ‐6
6
N
/
A
R ‐8
8
N
/
A
R ‐8
8
N
/
A
R ‐10
10
N
/
A
R ‐10
10
N
/
A
R ‐14
14
4
R ‐14
14
4
RM
‐F
20
5
RM
‐F
20
5
RM
‐T
35
N
/
A
RM
‐U
75
2
5
RM
H
10
N
/
A
RM
H
10
N
/
A
IL
N/
A
N
/
A
IL
N/
A
N
/
A
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
sa
l
e
s
/ re
n
t
a
l
/ wa
s
h
/
fu
e
l
i
n
g st
a
t
i
o
n
IM
N/
A
N
/
A
IM
N/
A
N
/
A
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
sa
l
e
s
/ re
n
t
a
l
/ wa
s
h
/
fu
e
l
i
n
g st
a
t
i
o
n
s
/ re
p ai
r
Ai
r
p
o
r
t
,
mu
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
IH
N/
A
N
/
A
IH
N/
A
N
/
A
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
sa
l
e
s
/ re
n
t
a
l
/ wa
s
h
/
fu
e
l
i
n
g
st
a
t
i
o
n
s
/ re
p
a
i
r
/ im
p
o
u
n
d
Fu
e
l
de
a
l
e
r
s
Ai
r
p
l
a
n
e
sa
l
e
s
/
r
e
p
a
i
r
CN
4 DU
pe
r
st
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
N
/
A
CN
4 DU
pe
r
st
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
N
/
A
lo
w
‐in
t
e
s
i
t
y
Re
t
a
i
l
sa
l
e
s
lo
w
‐in
t
e
n
s
i
t
y
re
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
s
CV
80
N
/
A
CV
80
N
/
A
CA
60
N
/
A
CA
60
N
/
A
Ma
r
i
j
u
a
n
a
re
t
a
i
l
CD
10
0
5
0
w/
CU
P
CD
10
0
5
0
w/
CU
P
mo
v
i
e
th
e
a
t
e
r
s
CO
N/
A
N
/
A
CO
N/
A
N
/
A
R
e
t
a
i
l
sa
l
e
s
(i
n
EA
V
)
Ja
i
l
s
,
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
mu
n
i
c
i
p al
CO
R
50
2
5
CO
R
50
2
5
UC
‐N1
85
N
/
A
ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
i
n
g
,
li
g ht
UC
‐N2
So
u
t
h
of
N.
8t
h
:
1
5
0
No
r
t
h
of
N.
8t
h
:
25
0
N/
A
At
t
a
c
h
e
d
dw
e
l
l
i
n
g
s
(m
i
x
e
d
us
e
)
Re
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
s
(m
i
x
e
d
us
e
)
Of
f
i
c
e
s
,
ge
n
e
r
a
l
/ me
d
i
c
a
l
(m
i
x
e
d
us
e
)
Ai
r
p
l
a
n
e
ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
i
n
g
Of
f
i
c
e
s
,
ge
n
e
r
a
l
/ me
d
i
c
a
l
ho
t
e
l
/
m
o
t
e
l
ho
t
e
l
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
fu
e
l
i
n
g
st
a
t
i
o
n
s
mo
v
i
e
th
e
a
t
e
r
s
(m
i
x
e
d
us
e
)
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
Z
O
N
I
N
G
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
T
I
O
N
S
UC
‐N
85
1
5
0
ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
i
n
g
/
as
s
e
m
b
l
y
/
pa
c
k
a
g
i
n
g
At
t
a
c
h
e
d
dw
e
l
l
i
n
g
s
At
t
a
c
h
e
d
dw
e
l
l
i
n
g
s
Re
t
a
i
l
sa
l
e
s
Re
t
a
i
l
sa
l
e
s
(m
i
x
e
d
us
e
)
Re
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
s
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
,
in
d
o
o
r
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
,
in
d
o
o
r
(m
i
x
e
d
us
e
)
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
Z
O
N
I
N
G
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
T
I
O
N
S
I
N
D
U
S
T
R
I
A
L
Ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
ho
m
e
s
Gr
o
u
p
ho
m
e
s
II
fo
r
6 or
le
s
s
At
t
a
c
h
e
d
dw
e
l
l
i
n
g
s
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
Zo
n
e
s
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
Zo
n
e
s
La
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
i
e
s
Sc
h
o
o
l
s
(t
r
a
d
e
or
vo
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
)
Wa
r
e
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
/ st
o
r
a
g
e
b
i
g
bo
x
re
t
a
i
l
1.
Of
f
i
c
e
s
,
ge
n
e
r
a
l
/ me
d
i
c
a
l
;
2.
re
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
s
;
Pe
r
m
i
t
t
e
d
on
l
y
on
th
e
gr
o
u
n
d
‐fl
o
o
r
le
v
e
l
as
pa
r
t
of
a re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
pr
o
j
e
c
t
on
RM
‐U zo
n
e
d
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
fr
o
n
t
i
n
g
on
So
u
t
h
7t
h
St
r
e
e
t
De
t
a
c
h
e
d
dw
e
l
l
i
n
g
Ad
u
l
t
Fa
m
i
l
y
Ho
m
e
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
2/2/2015
1
R‐1
Lot Size: 1 acre
Fronts: 30’
Rears: 35’
Note: This house is set back 190’, which
far exceeds required 30’ minimum.
Located here
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
2/2/2015
2
Lot Size:
~9,600 sq.ft.
Fronts:
25’‐30’
Rears:
25’‐30’
R‐4
Lots #056 and #047 have larger
rear and side setbacks respectively.
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
2/2/2015
3
R‐6
Lot Size: 7,000 sq.ft.
Fronts: 25’
Rears: *50’
Sides: 7‐9’
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
2/2/2015
4
Lot Size: ~5,000 sq.ft.
Fronts: *10’ (normally 20’)
Rears: *16’ (normally 20’)
Sides: 5’ one side and *zero
lot line on other
R‐8
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
2/2/2015
5
R‐10
Lot Size: ~4,000 sq.ft.
Fronts: 20’ | Rears: *30’
Sides: 4’
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
2/2/2015
6
R‐14 Lot Size: ~3,000 sq.ft.
Fronts: 15’
Rears: 20’
Sides: 4’
“Alley loaded” garages reduce the appearance of bulk from the front
façade, and make the sidewalk more pedestrian friendly.
AGENDA ITEM #5. a)
DR
A
F
T
R EN
T
O
N
’S
P OL
I
C
Y
A GE
N
D
A
P OL
I
C
Y
A GE
N
D
A
Ci
t
y
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
s
,
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
,
an
d
le
a
d
e
r
s
h
i
p
in
th
e
re
g
i
o
n
co
v
e
r
s
a wi
d
e
sp
e
c
t
r
u
m
of
is
s
u
e
s
an
d
fo
r
u
m
s
.
Ci
t
y
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
wo
r
k
ef
f
o
r
t
s
in
c
l
u
d
e
:
•
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
le
a
d
e
r
s
h
i
p
in
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
an
d
mu
l
t
i
‐ju
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
an
d
wo
r
k
ef
f
o
r
t
s
•
Pa
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
s
am
o
n
g
ju
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
fo
r
th
e
ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
de
l
i
v
e
r
y
of
se
r
v
i
c
e
s
•
Co
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
on
is
s
u
e
s
of
mu
t
u
a
l
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
Th
e
Ci
t
y
is
we
l
l
se
r
v
e
d
by
wo
r
k
i
n
g
to
g
e
t
h
e
r
wi
t
h
ot
h
e
r
ju
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
s
,
as
ma
n
y
Ci
t
y
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
s
ex
t
e
n
d
be
y
o
n
d
ci
t
y
bo
u
n
d
a
r
i
e
s
.
Ci
t
y
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
s
ma
y
be
ad
v
a
n
c
e
d
st
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
a
l
l
y
in
th
e
re
g
i
o
n
.
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
co
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Ci
t
y
in
v
o
l
v
e
m
e
n
t
in
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
af
f
a
i
r
s
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
to
ad
d
r
e
s
s
Ci
t
y
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
s
an
d
in
f
l
u
e
n
c
e
th
e
fu
t
u
r
e
of
th
e
re
g
i
o
n
.
Co
u
n
c
i
l
,
Ma
y
o
r
,
an
d
st
a
f
f
ad
v
o
c
a
c
y
at
th
e
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
le
v
e
l
ar
e
al
l
ne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
fo
r
th
e
Ci
t
y
to
be
su
c
c
e
s
s
f
u
l
in
ad
v
a
n
c
i
n
g
Ci
t
y
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
s
an
d
sh
a
p
i
n
g
th
e
fu
t
u
r
e
of
th
e
re
g
i
o
n
.
P RI
N
C
I
P
L
E
S
A DV
A
N
C
I
N
G
C ITY I NTERESTS
Th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
pr
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
ar
e
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
to
be
su
c
c
e
s
s
f
u
l
in
th
e
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
ag
e
n
d
a
an
d
wi
l
l
gu
i
d
e
ci
t
y
wo
r
k
ef
f
o
r
t
s
:
•
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
co
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
•
Sp
e
a
k
i
n
g
wi
t
h
on
e
vo
i
c
e
•
Fl
e
x
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
•
Di
s
c
r
e
t
i
o
n
to
ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
e
Ci
t
y
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
s
in
th
e
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
ar
e
n
a
ar
e
ca
t
e
g
o
r
i
z
e
d
in
th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
br
o
a
d
ar
e
a
s
:
•
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
•
Gr
o
w
t
h
•
Pu
b
l
i
c
Sa
f
e
t
y
•
En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
•
In
c
l
u
s
i
o
n
an
d
We
l
l
b
e
i
n
g
Co
u
n
c
i
l
ad
o
p
t
e
d
po
l
i
c
i
e
s
,
In
t
e
r
e
s
t
St
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
s
,
an
d
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
wi
l
l
gu
i
d
e
an
d
di
r
e
c
t
th
e
Ci
t
y
in
it
s
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
wo
r
k
ef
f
o
r
t
s
.
Ci
t
y
el
e
c
t
e
d
of
f
i
c
i
a
l
s
serving on
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
an
d
mu
l
t
i
‐jurisdictional
co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
wi
l
l
be briefed by staff as
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
pr
i
o
r
to meetings.
Ci
t
y
el
e
c
t
e
d
of
f
i
c
i
a
l
s
serving on
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
an
d
mu
l
t
i
‐jurisdictional
co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
ha
v
e
agreed to provide
re
g
u
l
a
r
up
d
a
t
e
s
at Council meetings.
Co
u
n
c
i
l
wi
l
l
be
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
opportunities
to
we
i
g
h
in
on
a timely basis on
em
e
r
g
i
n
g
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
issues and the
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
solutions to address
th
e
s
e
is
s
u
e
s
.
Im
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
activities will be
re
p
o
r
t
e
d
to
Co
u
n
c
i
l
via briefings,
re
p
o
r
t
s
,
em
a
i
l
s
,
and verbal updates
fr
o
m
th
e
Ma
y
o
r
and staff.
Re
n
t
o
n
’
s
Po
l
i
c
y
Ag
e
n
d
a
is
ma
n
a
g
e
d
an
d
ca
r
r
i
e
d
ou
t
at
th
e
Co
u
n
t
y
,
Re
g
i
o
n
,
an
d
St
a
t
e
le
v
e
l
s
wi
t
h
th
e
ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
,
bo
a
r
d
s
,
co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
s
,
an
d
bo
d
i
e
s
th
a
t
ca
n
in
f
l
u
e
n
c
e
or
de
c
i
d
e
th
e
s
e
pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
.
AGENDA ITEM #5. b)
DR
A
F
T
T RA
N
S
P
O
R
T
A
T
I
O
N
C OU
N
C
I
L
D IR
E
C
T
I
O
N
P OL
I
C
Y
S UM
M
A
R
Y
Th
i
s
is
a sa
m
p
l
e
te
x
t
.
In
s
e
r
t
contents
of
th
i
s
st
e
p
here.
20
1
7
A CTIONS
R EN
T
O
N
I
N
T
H
E
R EG
I
O
N
De
v
e
l
o
p
a sy
s
t
e
m
th
a
t
st
i
m
u
l
a
t
e
s
,
su
p
p
o
r
t
s
,
an
d
en
h
a
n
c
e
s
th
e
sa
f
e
,
ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
,
an
d
re
l
i
a
b
l
e
mo
v
e
m
e
n
t
of
pe
o
p
l
e
,
ve
h
i
c
l
e
s
,
an
d
go
o
d
s
.
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
th
a
t
pr
o
m
o
t
e
vi
b
r
a
n
t
co
m
m
e
r
c
e
,
cl
e
a
n
ai
r
an
d
wa
t
e
r
,
an
d
he
a
l
t
h
an
d
re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
.
Ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
,
pr
e
s
e
r
v
e
,
an
d
ex
t
e
n
d
th
e
li
f
e
an
d
ut
i
l
i
t
y
of
tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
in
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
s
Es
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
a st
a
b
l
e
,
lo
n
g
‐te
r
m
fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
fo
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
fo
r
co
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s
l
y
im
p
r
o
v
i
n
g
th
e
qu
a
l
i
t
y
,
ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
,
an
d
ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
of
th
e
tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
sy
s
t
e
m
.
Ex
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
of
Ra
p
i
d
Ri
d
e
Sy
s
t
e
m
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
of
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
to
Gr
a
d
y
Wa
y
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Me
c
h
a
n
i
s
m
s
fo
r
In
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
I ‐40
5
/
S
R
16
7
Di
r
e
c
t
Co
n
n
e
c
t
o
r
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
I ‐40
5
Wi
d
e
n
i
n
g
&
Ex
p
r
e
s
s
To
l
l
La
n
e
s
Lo
c
a
l
an
d
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
an
d
In
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
Re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
’
s
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
ag
e
n
d
a
wi
t
h
Co
u
n
c
i
l
re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
on
:
•
So
u
t
h
Co
u
n
t
y
Ar
e
a
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Bo
a
r
d
•
Ea
s
t
s
i
d
e
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Pa
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
•
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
•
I ‐40
5
Ex
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
Bo
a
r
d
•
PS
R
C
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Po
l
i
c
y
Bo
a
r
d
•
So
u
n
d
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Bo
a
r
d
•
Ea
s
t
s
i
d
e
Ra
i
l
Co
r
r
i
d
o
r
Ad
v
i
s
o
r
y
Co
u
n
c
i
l
Ad
v
o
c
a
t
e
Le
g
i
s
l
a
t
u
r
e
to use money saved on
I ‐40
5
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
wi
t
h
i
n
I ‐405 service corridor.
Ad
v
o
c
a
t
e
So
u
n
d
Transit early action on
se
c
u
r
i
n
g
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
and relocating downtown
tr
a
n
s
i
t
se
r
v
i
c
e
to
Rainier/Grady site.
Ad
v
o
c
a
t
e
So
u
n
d
Transit optimal design
fe
a
t
u
r
e
s
an
d
ti
m
e
l
y
project delivery for bus
ra
p
i
d
tr
a
n
s
i
t
se
r
v
i
c
e
along I ‐405, and in ‐line
st
a
t
i
o
n
at
NE
44
th .
Ad
v
o
c
a
t
e
WS
D
O
T
optimal design features and
ti
m
e
l
y
de
l
i
v
e
r
y
of the I ‐405 Renton to Bellevue
pr
o
j
e
c
t
.
Ad
v
o
c
a
t
e
Ki
n
g
Co
u
n
t
y
optimal design features
an
d
ti
m
e
l
y
pr
o
j
e
c
t
delivery of the Eastside Rail
Co
r
r
i
d
o
r
bi
k
e
/
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
trail.
Ac
t
i
v
e
l
y
se
e
k
gr
a
n
t
s
to leverage city funding.
Ad
o
p
t
e
d
P
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
&
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
Co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
Pl
a
n
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
Pl
a
n
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Pl
a
n
Tr
a
i
l
s
an
d
Bi
c
y
c
l
e
Ma
s
t
e
r
Pl
a
n
Bu
d
g
e
t
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Le
g
i
s
l
a
t
i
v
e
Ag
e
n
d
a
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
wi
t
h
Ki
n
g
Co
u
n
t
y
AGENDA ITEM #5. b)
DR
A
F
T
G RO
W
T
H
C OU
N
C
I
L
D IR
E
C
T
I
O
N
P OL
I
C
Y
S UM
M
A
R
Y
Th
i
s
is
a sa
m
p
l
e
te
x
t
.
In
s
e
r
t
contents
of
th
i
s
st
e
p
here.
20
1
7
A CTIONS
R EN
T
O
N
I
N
T
H
E
R EG
I
O
N
Ut
i
l
i
z
e
mu
l
t
i
p
l
e
st
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
to
ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
e
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
gr
o
w
t
h
:
Ne
w
si
n
g
l
e
fa
m
i
l
y
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
on
la
r
g
e
tr
a
c
t
s
of
la
n
d
ou
t
s
i
d
e
Ci
t
y
Ce
n
t
e
r
Ne
w
mu
l
t
i
‐fa
m
i
l
y
an
d
mi
x
e
d
‐
us
e
in
Ci
t
y
Ce
n
t
e
r
an
d
ot
h
e
r
hi
g
h
de
n
s
i
t
y
ar
e
a
s
In
f
i
l
l
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
on
va
c
a
n
t
or
un
d
e
r
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
d
la
n
d
in
es
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
an
d
mu
l
t
i
‐fa
m
i
l
y
ar
e
a
s
Gr
o
w
t
h
fo
c
u
s
e
d
in
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
Gr
o
w
t
h
Ce
n
t
e
r
– Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
,
La
n
d
i
n
g
,
So
u
t
h
p
o
r
t
.
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
gr
o
w
t
h
wi
l
l
be
hi
g
h
qu
a
l
i
t
y
wi
t
h
la
n
d
ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
l
y
ut
i
l
i
z
e
d
an
d
na
t
u
r
a
l
fe
a
t
u
r
e
s
an
d
bu
i
l
t
am
e
n
i
t
i
e
s
in
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
.
Gr
o
w
t
h
pa
y
s
pr
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
a
l
co
s
t
s
as
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
wi
t
h
gr
o
w
t
h
.
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
e
n
em
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
ba
s
e
an
d
ec
o
n
o
m
i
c
gr
o
w
t
h
by
ac
h
i
e
v
i
n
g
a mi
x
of
in
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
,
hi
g
h
te
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
,
of
f
i
c
e
,
an
d
co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
ac
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
.
Gr
o
w
t
h
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Ac
t
Co
u
n
t
y
w
i
d
e
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
Po
l
i
c
i
e
s
PS
R
C
20
3
5
Gr
o
w
t
h
Ta
r
g
e
t
s
:
• 14
,
0
5
0
Ne
w
Dw
e
l
l
i
n
g
Un
i
t
s
• 28
,
7
5
5
Ne
w
Jo
b
s
Gr
o
w
t
h
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
u
n
c
i
l
Af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
’
s
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
ag
e
n
d
a
wi
t
h
Co
u
n
c
i
l
re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
on
:
•
Gr
o
w
t
h
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
u
n
c
i
l
•
Gr
o
w
t
h
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Po
l
i
c
y
Bo
a
r
d
•
So
u
n
d
Ci
t
i
e
s
As
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
•
Ec
o
n
o
m
i
c
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Co
u
n
c
i
l
Lo
b
b
y
th
e
Le
g
i
s
l
a
t
u
r
e
to more fully fund
in
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
in
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
s
needed to support
pl
a
n
n
e
d
gr
o
w
t
h
wi
t
h
i
n
urban areas.
Lo
b
b
y
tr
a
n
s
i
t
ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
to provide greater access to
tr
a
n
s
i
t
in
Re
n
t
o
n
.
Pu
r
s
u
e
al
l
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
at the Federal, State, and
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
le
v
e
l
s
fo
r
grant funding for infrastructure
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
to
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
in State and Regional forums
re
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
ch
a
n
g
e
s
in
stormwater regulations and
pu
r
s
u
e
fu
n
d
i
n
g
an
d
cost effective means to meet
ne
w
re
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
to
se
e
k
an
Interlocal Agreement with King
Co
u
n
t
y
to
mo
r
e
cl
o
s
e
l
y
align new development in the
Co
u
n
t
y
wi
t
h
Ci
t
y
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
.
If
no
In
t
e
r
l
o
c
a
l
is
ad
o
p
t
e
d
,
consider actions such as
ad
j
u
s
t
i
n
g
th
e
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
Annexation Areas accordingly.
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
to
pu
r
s
u
e
enhancing and diversifying
Re
n
t
o
n
’
s
em
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
base.
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
to
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
in PSRC’s boards related to
ec
o
n
o
m
i
c
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,
transportation and growth
to
en
s
u
r
e
Re
n
t
o
n
’
s
interests are furthered.
Ad
o
p
t
e
d
P
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
&
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
Co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
Pl
a
n
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
Pl
a
n
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
d
e
Pa
r
k
s
,
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
,
an
d
Na
t
u
r
a
l
Ar
e
a
s
Pl
a
n
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
Im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Pl
a
n
Le
g
i
s
l
a
t
i
v
e
Ag
e
n
d
a
Bu
d
g
e
t
i
n
g
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
Co
u
n
t
y
w
i
d
e
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
Po
l
i
c
i
e
s
Gr
o
w
i
n
g
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
Co
m
p
a
c
t
AGENDA ITEM #5. b)
DR
A
F
T
P UB
L
I
C
S AF
E
T
Y
C OU
N
C
I
L
D IR
E
C
T
I
O
N
P OL
I
C
Y
S UM
M
A
R
Y
Th
i
s
is
a sa
m
p
l
e
te
x
t
.
In
s
e
r
t
contents
of
th
i
s
st
e
p
here.
20
1
7
A CTIONS
R EN
T
O
N
I
N
T
H
E
R EG
I
O
N
Pr
o
m
o
t
e
sa
f
e
t
y
,
he
a
l
t
h
,
an
d
se
c
u
r
i
t
y
th
r
o
u
g
h
ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
se
r
v
i
c
e
de
l
i
v
e
r
y
.
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
su
c
c
e
s
s
f
u
l
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
th
r
o
u
g
h
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
in
v
o
l
v
e
m
e
n
t
.
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
fo
r
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
to
be
be
t
t
e
r
pr
e
p
a
r
e
d
fo
r
em
e
r
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
.
Pu
b
l
i
c
Sa
f
e
t
y
Em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
Pr
e
p
a
r
e
d
n
e
s
s
/
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
/
Re
c
o
v
e
r
y
Va
l
l
e
y
C
o
m
An
i
m
a
l
Se
r
v
i
c
e
SC
O
R
E
Co
u
r
t
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
’
s
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
ag
e
n
d
a
wi
t
h
Co
u
n
c
i
l
re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
on
:
•
Em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Ad
v
i
s
o
r
y
Co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
•
Do
m
e
s
t
i
c
Vi
o
l
e
n
c
e
In
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
Bo
a
r
d
Se
e
k
$2
.
4
mi
l
l
i
o
n
from Legislature to address
ba
c
k
l
o
g
at
th
e
Ba
s
i
c
Law Enforcement Academy.
Ad
o
p
t
th
e
re
v
i
s
e
d
Comprehensive Emergency
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pl
a
n
Ad
o
p
t
th
e
re
v
i
s
e
d
Disaster Recovery Plan and
tr
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
to
th
e
Disaster Recovery Framework
Ad
o
p
t
e
d
P
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
&
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
Co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
Pl
a
n
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
Pl
a
n
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
Fi
r
e
Au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
Fr
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
& Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
Co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
Em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pl
a
n
Di
s
a
s
t
e
r
Re
c
o
v
e
r
y
Fr
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
AGENDA ITEM #5. b)
DR
A
F
T
E NV
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
C OU
N
C
I
L
D IR
E
C
T
I
O
N
P OL
I
C
Y
S UM
M
A
R
Y
Th
i
s
is
a sa
m
p
l
e
te
x
t
.
In
s
e
r
t
contents
of
th
i
s
st
e
p
here.
20
1
7
A CTIONS
R EN
T
O
N
I
N
T
H
E
R EG
I
O
N
Mi
n
i
m
i
z
e
ad
v
e
r
s
e
im
p
a
c
t
s
to
na
t
u
r
a
l
sy
s
t
e
m
s
.
Ad
d
r
e
s
s
im
p
a
c
t
s
of
pa
s
t
pr
a
c
t
i
c
e
wh
e
r
e
fe
a
s
i
b
l
e
,
th
r
o
u
g
h
le
a
d
e
r
s
h
i
p
,
po
l
i
c
y
,
re
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
,
an
d
re
g
i
o
n
a
l
co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
.
Re
d
u
c
e
co
s
t
s
th
r
o
u
g
h
en
e
r
g
y
‐sa
v
i
n
g
an
d
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
.
Pr
o
t
e
c
t
an
d
re
s
t
o
r
e
aq
u
a
t
i
c
ec
o
s
y
s
t
e
m
he
a
l
t
h
an
d
sa
l
m
o
n
ha
b
i
t
a
t
.
En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
Pr
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
Sa
l
m
o
n
an
d
WR
I
A
8
Ac
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
Aq
u
i
f
e
r
Pr
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
St
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
an
d
Lo
w
Im
p
a
c
t
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
So
l
i
d
Wa
s
t
e
,
Co
m
p
o
s
t
i
n
g
,
an
d
Re
c
y
c
l
i
n
g
.
Re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
’
s
po
l
i
c
y
ag
e
n
d
a
wi
t
h
Co
u
n
c
i
l
re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
on
:
•
WR
I
A
8 (S
a
l
m
o
n
Co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Po
l
i
c
y
Bo
a
r
d
•
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
Wa
t
e
r
Qu
a
l
i
t
y
Co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
•
Ki
n
g
Co
u
n
t
y
Fl
o
o
d
Co
n
t
r
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
•
So
l
i
d
Wa
s
t
e
Ad
v
i
s
o
r
y
Bo
a
r
d
Ad
v
o
c
a
t
e
th
a
t
th
e
King County Solid Waste
Tr
a
n
s
f
e
r
St
a
t
i
o
n
pl
a
n
promotes equitable service,
co
s
t
s
,
an
d
im
p
a
c
t
s
throughout the King County
so
l
i
d
wa
s
t
e
se
r
v
i
c
e
area.
Ad
o
p
t
e
d
P
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
&
A g re
e
m
e
n
t
s
Co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
Pl
a
n
Pa
r
k
s
,
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
,
an
d
Na
t
u
r
a
l
Ar
e
a
s
Pl
a
n
Mu
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
Co
d
e
Cl
e
a
n
Ec
o
n
o
m
y
St
r
a
t
e
g
y
Ur
b
a
n
an
d
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Fo
r
e
s
t
r
y
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Pl
a
n
So
l
i
d
Wa
s
t
e
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
Ki
n
g
Co
u
n
t
y
Ci
t
i
e
s
Cl
i
m
a
t
e
Co
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
In
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
Ar
e
a
(W
R
I
A
)
8 In
t
e
r
l
o
c
a
l
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
WI
R
A
9 In
t
e
r
l
o
c
a
l
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
Pu
g
e
t
So
u
n
d
Sa
l
m
o
n
Re
c
o
v
e
r
y
Pl
a
n
AGENDA ITEM #5. b)
DR
A
F
T
I NC
L
U
S
I
O
N
& W EL
L
B
E
I
N
G
C OU
N
C
I
L
D IR
E
C
T
I
O
N
P OL
I
C
Y
S UM
M
A
R
Y
Th
i
s
is
a sa
m
p
l
e
te
x
t
.
In
s
e
r
t
contents
of
th
i
s
st
e
p
here.
20
1
7
A CTIONS
R EN
T
O
N
I
N
T
H
E
R EG
I
O
N
Re
n
t
o
n
is
an
in
c
l
u
s
i
v
e
ci
t
y
wi
t
h
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
fo
r
al
l
.
Im
p
r
o
v
e
ac
c
e
s
s
to
se
r
v
i
c
e
s
an
d
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
.
Bu
i
l
d
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
wi
t
h
AL
L
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
th
a
t
re
f
l
e
c
t
Re
n
t
o
n
’
s
di
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
.
Pr
o
m
o
t
e
un
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
an
d
ap
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
of
ou
r
di
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
.
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
vo
l
u
n
t
e
e
r
i
s
m
,
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
,
an
d
ci
v
i
c
en
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
.
Pa
r
t
n
e
r
wi
t
h
th
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
to
he
l
p
pr
o
v
i
d
e
se
r
v
i
c
e
s
an
d
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
so
al
l
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
ha
v
e
fo
o
d
,
cl
o
t
h
i
n
g
,
an
d
sh
e
l
t
e
r
,
an
d
ha
v
e
th
e
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
to
li
v
e
a he
a
l
t
h
y
,
ac
t
i
v
e
,
sa
f
e
,
an
d
su
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e
li
f
e
s
t
y
l
e
.
Hu
m
a
n
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Me
n
t
a
l
He
a
l
t
h
an
d
Dr
u
g
De
p
e
n
d
e
n
c
y
Af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
n
e
s
s
Wa
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
St
a
t
e
Cr
i
m
i
n
a
l
Ju
s
t
i
c
e
Tr
a
i
n
i
n
g
Ce
n
t
e
r
Re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
’
s
po
l
i
c
y
ag
e
n
d
a
wi
t
h
re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
on
:
Ki
n
g
Co
u
n
t
y
Po
l
i
c
e
Ch
i
e
f
s
’
co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
to
im
p
r
o
v
e
re
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
s
wi
t
h
di
v
e
r
s
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
Co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
to
En
d
Ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
n
e
s
s
Pa
r
t
n
e
r
wi
t
h
Ki
n
g
County to establish and
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
in
a re
g
i
o
n
a
l
forum on equity and
in
c
l
u
s
i
o
n
to
fi
n
d
co
m
m
o
n
areas of focus, take
co
l
l
e
c
t
i
v
e
ac
t
i
o
n
to
address them, and to
ad
v
o
c
a
t
e
fo
r
th
e
most vulnerable populations.
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
in
v
o
l
v
e
m
e
n
t
with the King County
Po
l
i
c
e
Ch
i
e
f
s
’
As
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
to further bias ‐free
po
l
i
c
i
n
g
an
d
to
bu
i
l
d
relationships with
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
th
a
t
lead toward mutual respect
an
d
tr
u
s
t
.
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
in South King County
Wo
r
k
f
o
r
c
e
Co
l
l
e
c
t
i
v
e
to identify shared emerging
wo
r
k
f
o
r
c
e
is
s
u
e
s
and find solutions.
Ad
o
p
t
e
d
P
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
&
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
Co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
Pl
a
n
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
Pl
a
n
Hu
m
a
n
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pl
a
n
Bu
d
g
e
t
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
AGENDA ITEM #5. b)